• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The economics of Minimum wage in the age of automation

Automation is going to replace jobs at an ever increasing pace regardless of how high or low minimum wage is.



So...what was the point of this thread again?
 
KevinKohler said:
Automation is going to replace jobs at an ever increasing pace regardless of how high or low minimum wage is.

So...what was the point of this thread again?
Click to expand...

Correcting for laissez-fare Capitalism's laziness regarding ensuring a Standard of full employment of resources in the market for labor in any at-will employment State through existing infrastructure.
 
danielpalos said:
Correcting for laissez-fare Capitalism's laziness regarding ensuring a Standard of full employment of resources in the market for labor in any at-will employment State through existing infrastructure.
Click to expand...

Not bad. One sentence, concise, accurate, and informative.

Well done, sir. Well done. I would have needed at least two.
 
danielpalos said:
Correcting for laissez-fare Capitalism's laziness regarding ensuring a Standard of full employment of resources in the market for labor in any at-will employment State through existing infrastructure.
Click to expand...

Capitalism is "lazy"?
Capitalism is charged with ensuring full employment?

Funny stuff. You do realize the eras of capitalism employed more people than any other system in human history, and continues to be the top system both in terms of overall prosperity, raising people out of poverty, creating a middle class, and otherwise providing a lifestyle so luxurious that people can sit on a computer over a digital infrastructure and bitch about how an abstract "system" can somehow be lazy?

Oh the people you find on the internet.
 
Mach said:
Capitalism is "lazy"?
Capitalism is charged with ensuring full employment?

Funny stuff. You do realize the eras of capitalism employed more people than any other system in human history, and continues to be the top system both in terms of overall prosperity, raising people out of poverty, creating a middle class, and otherwise providing a lifestyle so luxurious that people can sit on a computer over a digital infrastructure and bitch about how an abstract "system" can somehow be lazy?

Oh the people you find on the internet.
Click to expand...

No; the funny part is that Socialism does provide for social Powers that may correct for any given "market failure" or inefficiency rate in our market for labor.
 
danielpalos said:
No; the funny part is that Socialism does provide for social Powers that may correct for any given "market failure" or inefficiency rate in our market for labor.
Click to expand...

Sure it corrects market failures by taking the economy into the ****ter and resulting in putting social and economic liberties back into the stone age. Real progress there. Of course, that's why we don't have real evidence that it's so grand, because it's not.

I'm not sure if you are aware but this fantasy of "market failure" is 100% provided for via social power in our nation.
It starts with something like this: Step One: Get off the couch.

The social "power" is all in your control. But yet you feign victimization and want to funnel money from those off the couch, to those on the couch (socially sharing the wealth yes)

Let me guess. Young and not really motivated to work. Just because you don't' like our solution for that "problem" doesn't mean the system is the failure.
 
Low wages are bad for the economy. Since unions are practically non existent in the US, the next best thing is for the federal government to raise the minimum wage. We need more money flowing through the system. It will also beef up social security. Everyone benefits in the long run.
 
Mach said:
Sure it corrects market failures by taking the economy into the ****ter and resulting in putting social and economic liberties back into the stone age. Real progress there. Of course, that's why we don't have real evidence that it's so grand, because it's not.

I'm not sure if you are aware but this fantasy of "market failure" is 100% provided for via social power in our nation.
It starts with something like this: Step One: Get off the couch.

The social "power" is all in your control. But yet you feign victimization and want to funnel money from those off the couch, to those on the couch (socially sharing the wealth yes)

Let me guess. Young and not really motivated to work. Just because you don't' like our solution for that "problem" doesn't mean the system is the failure.
Click to expand...

don't you believe in the laws of demand and supply?
 
danielpalos said:
Not at all; simple poverty when due to lack of income that would otherwise be obtained in a more efficient market for labor is all that needs to be solved for; in other words, a natural rate of unemployment under Capitalism in any at-will employment State.
Click to expand...

You do understand your qualified your comment? You went from the general phrase of "simple poverty" to "simple poverty when due to lack of income."
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
That is certainly true but if the cost of the machines is economically worthwhile then it will happen. Look at the number of self check out registers, each is replacing at least one worker. If a machine costs $50,000 and replaced 2 x $7.50/hour workers then it pays for itself in just wages in less than 2 years. If you factor in benefits, training and people not showing up it pays for itself even quicker. Automation is the number one reason why a lot of jobs disappeared, not sending them off shore.
Click to expand...

At the same time, it provides well paying jobs for those who design, build, program and maintain those robots.

Things are going to get worse for the lower intelligence and ability folks. We will indeed require welfare (or let them starve).
 
specklebang said:
At the same time, it provides well paying jobs for those who design, build, program and maintain those robots.

Things are going to get worse for the lower intelligence and ability folks. We will indeed require welfare (or let them starve).
Click to expand...

Hunger is a great motivator.

We should most certainly take care of those that can't take care of themselves. We should do a better job of determining those who truly need help versus those who just give up to easy or scam the system. They are the ones that generate the most opposition to the programs by taking resources from those who truly needed it and causing those who pay the bill to pay more to get less results. You won't find a lot of opposition to helping a blind person who is no so smart and has no transportation. You will find it for the 40 year old who claims disability due to a back injury but does gymnastics on the weekend.
 
jmotivator said:
Funny that you never entertained the simple solution of the obsolete fry cook acquiring an actual skill....
Click to expand...

Yeah. Because everybody can learn to do everything and there are millions of great jobs waiting for qualified applicants.

Oh wait...
 
Papa bull said:
And machines won't spit on your hamburger or forget to wash it's hands after wiping it's ass.
Click to expand...

Nope. Just industrial lubricant residues and the hope the guy who cleans it washed HIS hands and ACTUALLY cleaned it.
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
Actually they affect EVERY product sold, since without checking out how do you pay for them? :)

Self checkout machines are in most large grocery stores, hardware stores and big box stores, except electronics stores. They aren't there because they cost the company MORE. Cashiers in supermarkets are one of the better paying hourly jobs. When that hourly rate gets to high they WILL be replaced so there is a ceiling to the pay for that job, just like there is for just about every job. You push past it at your own risk.
Click to expand...

I think you have the cause and effect relationship backwards.

Businesses will automate the second they can profitably do so. They don't want to pay what they're paying NOW.

Somewhere, there's a guy in a basement trying to figure out how to make a machine to do YOUR job.
 
What if...? said:
Yeah. Because everybody can learn to do everything and there are millions of great jobs waiting for qualified applicants.

Oh wait...
Click to expand...

So you're assuming that the fry cook can't learn anything new?

Here we have a classic example of the soft bigotry of low expectations.
 
Gipper said:
People still have to fix, program, etc. the robots and machines. Jobs won't be lost. They'll just need to switch skill sets. Bummer for the GED crowd. They have to learn stuff.
Click to expand...

Yeah. There was a harvester for every farm hand to operate or work on. Not. They moved to manufacturing. Where does manufacturing move to? Do you really believe everybody can be a content creator or design engineer?
 
I'm a fan of capitalism with caveats, but I fear there will come a point where automation will break the theoretical link between productivity and wages. Once that happens, capitalism as we now practice it will not be adequate to the needs of the population. As we innovate automation, we'll also need to innovate social and economic order.
 
What if...? said:
Yeah. There was a harvester for every farm hand to operate or work on. Not. They moved to manufacturing. Where does manufacturing move to? Do you really believe everybody can be a content creator or design engineer?
Click to expand...

Nope. Someone can be "that asshole who brings me my coffee in the morning and gets berated for my own personal amusement for 7.50 an hour".

Every king needs a jester.
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
Hunger is a great motivator.

We should most certainly take care of those that can't take care of themselves. We should do a better job of determining those who truly need help versus those who just give up to easy or scam the system. They are the ones that generate the most opposition to the programs by taking resources from those who truly needed it and causing those who pay the bill to pay more to get less results. You won't find a lot of opposition to helping a blind person who is no so smart and has no transportation. You will find it for the 40 year old who claims disability due to a back injury but does gymnastics on the weekend.
Click to expand...

Hunger is an immensely powerful motivator. The concern is what, exactly, it motivates people to do.

Also, couldn't "gymnastics" be a part of a recovery program? Does it automatically preclude existing injury? I'm usually wary to judge from afar. It requires too much presumption.
 
Anomalism said:
Jobs will not be created in the same number that they are lost. There won't be a need for billions of programmers and repairers, especially when the robots are doing that too. The need for human labor will go down more and more, and it will definitely be an issue in centuries to come.
Click to expand...

I would say decades, not centuries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom