Fast-Food CEO invests in machines because screw the employees

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

When will these idiots realize that the people they're screwing over are their own customers?

The CEO of Carl's Jr., Andy Puzder, has been inspired by the 100-percent automated restaurant, Eatsa, as he looks for ways to deal with rising minimum wages. "With government driving up the cost of labor, it's driving down the number of jobs," he says.
...
Puzder doesn't believe in [the progressive idea of] raising the minimum wage. "Does it really help if Sally makes $3 more an hour if Suzie has no job? If you're making labor more expensive, and automation less expensive -- this is not rocket science," says Puzder.

(more at the link)

https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/16/03/17/2220225/fast-food-ceo-invests-in-machines-because-regulation-makes-them-cheaper-than-employees

ETA: By the way, Carl's Jr. and Hardee's are the same company. Depending on where you live you can happily boycott one or the other over this bullshit.

[djean111]

1. Hey, those employees who lose their jobs can just get one of the multitude of new jobs the TPP and

TPIP will bring here!

Oh, wait. That's not going to happen, is it?

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

5. They'll have to move to SE Asia if they want those minimum wage jobs.

95 cents an hour sounds awesome.

[highprincipleswork]

55. As I recall, under the first Clinton oligarchy they were called "good-paying jobs of the future."

[Odin2005]

68. The jobs we Millennials were told were would have if we just...

...studied hard and went to college. And now we are up to our eyeballs in student loan debt that cannot be eliminated by bankruptcy and ended up getting paid shit, anyway. This is what Hillary supporters don't get when they accuse us "kids" (Seriously? I turn 30 in April, quit calling us "kids&quot of wanting "free stuff". We are simply demanding what our elders promised us and we are NOT going to take "no" for an answer.

As of next year the 18-35 age bracket will be 100% Millennial. We are not "dumb kids", we are really pissed off grown ups.

[highprincipleswork]

75. I don't blame you. Join the club.

I'm much older, but the lies and false ideas that have been slung around here since the days of Raygun have mounted up to a very not pretty picture. Only Bernie seems to really get it. Only Bernie can be counted upon to really take action and stand up for the right thing even when the odds don't look good.

Guess that means we have to stand up with him and for him and for these better principles for as long as it takes.

[tazkcmo]

2. Great!

Enjoy your bankruptcy proceedings, sir!

[hobbit709]

3. He won't see either me or any of my money at one of his restaurants

[-none]

4. More proof Republicans have no idea of how the economy works

This idiot does not understand that people without money cannot spend it in his restaurant. He cannot see past his own little business at the moment, to the bigger picture down the road.
If the minimum wage is raised, more people could afford to buy the gut bombs he sells and his business, and everyone elses business would do better in the long run.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

9. Exactly. And this is why strong worker protections are so critical.

Your typical sociopathic CEO will cut everything he can to improve this quarter's bottom line. No thought to employee safety or well-being. No thought to a year out, or 5 years or 10. He knows he can and he knows he must because he knows the sociopathic CEOs of his competitors will be doing the same.

Only through strong regulations, worker protections, and a livable minimum wage can we put a stop to this.

[-none]

27. And that is why we need Bernie and to drag the Democratic party back to Center and Center Left.

What we are doing now sure is not working very well for way too many people.

[Tracer]

52. Even Henry Ford understood this almost 100 years ago.

Raised his employees wages to $5/hour. They were able to buy his cars.

[wobble]

6. wow

So eliminating low wage food service laborers will somehow increase the revenue of the firm?

Mr. Puzder surely is familiar with the concept of Inferior and Normal goods, this is not rocket science.

[DetlefK]

7. In a world of robot-workers, who can afford to buy products?

How large is the work-force in the US? 50 million?
Let's say, automatization replaces 10 million paid employees with 10 million unpaid robots. What will those 10 million people do? What will those 10 million people consume? And how will they buy the products they consume?

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

13. Maybe once he gets rid of all the humans

He will transition to selling, like, oil and batteries...you know, the stuff that his new "employees" need.

[-none]

29. And start the cycle all over again.

Mr. business owner having learned nothing.

[mac56]

31. Lather, rinse, repeat.

[Oneironaut]

14. Everything becomes dirt cheap.

Eventually, not everyone may need to have a job. The cost of goods might become so cheap that you can purchase almost everything with very little. Robots can get us there.

[DetlefK]

20. But this would mean a massive overhaul of the way unemployment is treated.

What if there simply aren't jobs available for humans because robots are cheaper?

Will corporations be forced to employ a quota of humans?
Will unemployed humans get a guaranteed income (consisting of taxpayer-money) so they can afford to buy stuff and keep the corporations in business?
Or will the government cut out the middle-man and buy millions of pants because the pants-industry must be kept alive and no consumer can afford to actually buy new pants?

[Xolodno]

37. Welcome to the problems of capitalism.

On one hand, you cut costs....but then eventually nobody can afford to buy your products.

Capitalism breeds shortsightedness in business decisions that have long term implications.

But you were on the mark on "overhaul". If less skilled employment gets automated, then you need to increase the skill level of the work force. Make Junior Colleges free...or even make Four (technically Five theses days) free. Oh and lower the retirement age while overhauling social security (increase payroll contributions), require every employer to provide pensions and 401k's (not one vs the other).

[DetlefK]

57. You cannot force economic growth and the creation of job-openings.

China did that and now their economy is on the verge of collapse. (Economic experts fear a rerun of the banking-crisis of 2008. China is already taking counter-measures to deflate the bubble and bring their economy back to a sustainable level before it pops.)



As I see it, jobs that need flexibility will always be held by humans:
- service
- artisanal/custom-made products
- art/science

There are only so many people a corporation needs for services, or for custom-making products, or for doing thinky jobs. Even a good education is no guarantee that the economy NEEDS you.

[Xolodno]

60. That's not forcing economic growth...

...its responding to market inefficiencies in the economy.

And yeah, sure some service sectors (plumbers, etc.) won't be phased out. A good education doesn't guarantee you a spot, not a whole lot of demand for Philosophers. So better education is needed on "what" you can do with a degree and what pay levels, difficulty, etc.

And don't dismiss a higher education out right, studies have shown a higher skilled work force is more flexible and adaptive. And has given rise to new industries, companies, etc.

China is a "planned" economy, in your previous post of "guaranteed income, etc.", believe it or not, you were essentially advocating doing what they are.

You can't stop progress, granted the Koch brothers are trying to do that with their fossil fuel portfolio, but eventually, they will fail. Its simple economics. Hell, in the insurance industry, they are preparing for the day in the long term when Auto Insurance will be a very minor portion of their portfolio as to major today. Why? Driver-less and electric cars, they know they are coming, its just a matter of when.

[The2ndWheel]

80. Could be more like the problems of technology

It can go back to sharpening a stick to make it easier to hunt. Or planting a seed with a purpose.

Life is short sighted. If we had to factor in every variable, humans wouldn't do most of the things that we've done, do, and will do. Plus we can't take everything into account beforehand anyway, because whatever it is that we've come to call existence is complex. What are the long term implications of saving human life anywhere and everywhere? We don't care, we just save the life first, and whatever happens after that happens after that.

[Autumn Colors]

39. Culling the herd, so to speak

A) Die from hunger
B) Die from assault (after becoming homeless)
C) Die from disease
D) Commit suicide

See? Problem solved .... no more 10 million extra, unneeded people

[Odin2005]

71. This is exactly the "internal contradictions" of Capitalism Marx talked about 150 years ago.

The drive to cut costs and maximize profits ultimately undermines the system because people are not paid enough to buy products. The Keynesians and New-Dealers tried to save Capitalism from itself by regulating it, but, as many socialists predicted, the short-term selfishness of the Capitalist class won out in the form of Neo-Liberalism, Reaganism, Thatcherism, and Clintonism.

[21st Century Poet]

8. It's not because 'screw the employees.'

I'll leave the minimum wage discussion to others (that's a tough one to crack) but, as far as automation goes, it's not because 'screw the employees'. It's progress, whether we like it or not. Thinking otherwise is Luddite. Very repetitive tasks can be easily automated. We have known this for a long time now. You cannot un-invent technology.

You enter a car factory and you see far fewer employees around today than you used to 100 years ago, but it's not all bad news. A more cheaply made car means more people can afford a car. In countries with very low wages, sometimes automation costs more money than manual labour but very often automation is worthwhile. In fast food, there are also other advantages such as machines engaging in less disgusting activities (not to mention pranks) than humans do.

I feel the employees' pain but if a fast food chain can automate, save money, increase profit margins and provide a better and cleaner service, it would be unrealistic to expect it not to happen.

Now I'll leave it up to the rest of you to argue about whether raising the minimum wage lowers job growth. I recently read an economic paper which argued that raising the minimum wage by a little does not impact job growth but raising it past a certain ceiling does.

[hobbit709]

34. I get $968/mo. on SS. I couldn't afford a new car no matter what.

Let his robots sell crappy food to other robots.
I go out to eat for human interaction.
And a question for you "Whose side are you on" since most of your posts defend the corporations.

[21st Century Poet]

40. On the side of technology and modernisation

Well, you can probably afford a bicycle. Don't you think that robots help make bicycles too? And smartphones and computer chips, and probably more than half the things you will see, touch, wear and use today. Do you think that the internet which Democratic Underground depends on would be possible without advancements in automation, or do you think you could pay for anything using a credit card, or cash for that matter since the production of currency notes is also largely automated?

I'm on the side of technology and modernisation. I have no desire to go back to a pre-industrial era. Do you?

[Kittycat]

65. "You can probably afford a bicycle"

I'd really love to have a debate with you on SSI and survival, but this isn't the thread. I've been trying to forecast survival for my son, as he approaches adulthood. We have about 6 years left to plan. Sounds like a lot, but trust me when I say, it's not. Not everyone can work multiple jobs, not everyone can go to college. And the system penalizes those with disabilities that try to be productive in society. Not only for their financial well being, but for their social-emotional well being. A living wage is the least our government could mandate. But they aren't beholden to citizens in any way, they are beholden to corporations and ceo's who bleed not only their employees lives, but the tax payers dry.

[ryan_cats]

10. Unintended consequences

Unintended consequences. I love how people bleat on and on about a $15 an hour wage and when these things happen, which people like me always mention, are actually shocked.

This is what happens when you screw with one variable in a complex system to forward a social agenda without any actual real world experience to guide or justify the process.

I, for one, don't want to pay $10 for a Big Mac so the SJW class can sleep at night as we all know they'll never sleep as long as there is perceived injustice in the world.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

15. Wow.

Are you sure you're on the right website?

And no, raising the minimum wage to $15 will not cause your crappy hamburger to suddenly cost $10. Employee wages are a relatively small percentage of total costs, so doubling the minimum wage would result in maybe a 20% increase in prices at the absolute maximum.

[ryan_cats]

21. I am

I am in the correct place.

1) Cr**py hamburger, maybe I should have mentioned a tofu burger from Whole Foods.

2) Your post #9 acknowledges the problem but in typical feel good rhetoric, requires an ever increasing amount of government control to work. It's amazing to me that people who should support freedoms in all things actual want to increase control which I guess is OK but what happens when Trump or one of his clones is elected? I don't think you're going to want government control then.

3) Nice try saying employee costs are a small percentage (please define and cite this as I know you can't unless you are relying on the bogus study I think you are) but, I know this is hard to understand in a world that requires colleges to have safe spaces, but a business exists to produce a profit, no other. A business will cut costs in every way possible to maximize profits, and wages are a way costs can be controlled whether it is via Ipads to replace waiters or robots to replace workers.

4) If we extend this thinking, then everyone should make the same from burger flipper to Neurosurgeon. You may think this would form a utopia but reality is everyone would ask themselves, why should I bust my rump when we all make the same? Wonderful future that would form unless the goal is to go back to living in caves.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

26. WTF?

1) Take this bullshit somewhere else.

2) If you haven't noticed, this is Democratic Underground, not Libertarian Underground. Again, with the views you're expressing I don't think you're on the right site.

3) If you knew anything about the restaurant industry, you would know that labor costs are typically 25-35% of gross revenue. Table service restaurants tend toward the higher end of that range and fast food restaurants tend toward the lower end of that range.

4) Who ever made that assertion? What, a neurosurgeon making $400k is going to look at a burger flipper making $30k and say, "Screw it, why should I bust my rump?" You make no sense.

5) I don't need to read crap like this on DU. Welcome to ignore.

[-none]

32. You are not alone in your assessment.

You just beat me to it. I think he'd be a better fit on DI.

[21st Century Poet]

35. You leave one question unanswered.

You might be right about labour costs but you still fail to give a compelling reason as to why a business should not cut costs wherever it can.

For example, low cost-airlines have had great success cutting into legacy airlines' market but they will do virtually anything to keep costs as low as possible: fly at a higher altitude, carry less fuel for the aeroplane to be lighter, reduce the number of bathrooms from three to one so that six more seats can be fitted in, and sometimes completely insane ideas too. Ryanair, the most successful airline in Europe, once proposed standing-up seats and charging overweight people more.

This stuff works. People love it. Companies which cut costs and sell a decent but cheaper service or product than the opposition tend to make brisk business. And low-cost-airlines have allowed millions of people who had never flown before to finally take to the skies. You have to look at an issue from all angles.

[brush]

41. Costco pays its workers a living wage. Walmart does not

Costco is thriving. Walmart is not, even as its business model depends on government subsidies in the form of its workers having to rely on food stamps to get by.

[trotsky]

64. What you're describing is otherwise known as a "race to the bottom."

And the only thing that can stop it is government regulation. Imagine how much an assembly line could save if they could only eliminate all safety equipment. Or if they could just fire someone when they get hurt. And on and on.

Same with wages - the race to the bottom can only end with essentially a wage slave populace and a gawd-awful economy. Government has to step in and save business from itself.

[21st Century Poet]

30. Ryan Cats is saying some important and realistic things.

Ryan Cats is making some important points. Why wouldn't a business cut costs as much as possible? The bottom line for a business (especially one with slim profit margins such as that of fast-food) is making a profit. If one restaurant chain doesn't automate, then the others will and the former will lose business. There is no proof that automation will make businesses go bust. Quite the contrary in fact. Should cars go back to being built by hand? And do you think that the smartphone in your pocket could be built without robotics?

The other day there was a video of a Google robot on this website. Everyone loved it because it was a funny, cute humanoid. Then, the same people people get shocked when people discover that a robot will start doing a job previously done by a human. Why do you think the robot was built? Just to look cute?

My point is that you cannot be selective. If you accept automation as a fact of life in, say, the chemicals industry, then you have to accept the fact that fast-food restaurants will also go through this process. If, on the other hand, you think that automation is evil and steals jobs, you should be consistent and demand that we revert to a pre-industrial era, ideally when tractors were not existent and printing presses were still a twinkle in Johannes Gutenberg's eye.

And no, automation does not mean that all human jobs will disappear. Only the mundanely repetitive ones will.

[brush]

42. Costco pays its workers a living wage. Walmart does not

Costco is thriving. Walmart is not, even as its businessmodel depends on government subsidies in the form of its workers having to rely on food stamps to get by.

[21st Century Poet]

46. Yes, but why is Costco thriving?

Is it thriving because it is paying a living wage or is it thriving in spite of it, because, for example, it has better products, better name recognition, it offers its customers better deals and so on?

And the big question related to the article above is: Could Costco do even better if it were to automate?

[PoliticAverse]

50. Costco is likely already using as much automation as it practically can. Note that...

Costco was perfectly willing to replace some human checkout personal with self-checkout stations
- they even tried them out they just didn't work very well.

See: http://www.businessinsider.com/costco-is-eliminating-self-checkout-2013-6?op=1

[brush]

54. It's thriving because of better, innovative management . . .

that understands that retaining good workers by paying them a living wage leads to better run stores, better maintained store shelves, a better customer envirnonment, thus, better profits.

Maybe not extreme profits that could come from automation, but robust profits nonetheless with less labor turnover that results in not bearing the expense of training new workers continuously.

Also, they might actually have considered it's better for the country to actually pay people a living wage, not a small thing at all.

[Kittycat]

70. Also..

When you pay your employees a little more, they have more to spend. It's common knowledge there is a market threshhold that anything below a specific income spends more of what comes in vs saves vs the upper end of the income bracket that makes more than it can spend. Costco offers such a wide range of products, and even services, that the employees are able to put more Money back in to the company that puts more in their pocket each week.

[brush]

73. Yes, yes, yes. Henry Ford did the same so his workers could buy his cars.

I don't get the Waltons, greed must be clouding their judgment.

[brush]

45. Costco pays its workers a living wage. Walmart does not

Costco is thriving.

Walmart is not, even as its business model depends on government subsidies in the form of its workers having to rely on food stamps to get by.

[trotsky]

18. The Magical World Where McDonald's Pays $15 an Hour? It's Australia

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/08/the-magical-world-where-mcdonalds-pays-15-an-hour-its-australia/278313/

So there's a certain irony that in Australia, where the minimum wage for full-time adult workers already comes out to about $14.50 an hour, McDonald's staffers were busy scoring an actual raise. On July 24, the country's Fair Work Commission approved a new labor agreement between the company and its employees guaranteeing them up to a 15 percent pay increase by 2017.

...

That said, not every extra dollar of worker compensation seems to get passed onto the consumer. Again, take Australia. According to the The Economist, Aussies have paid anywhere from 6 cents to 70 cents extra for their Big Macs compared to Americans over the past two years, a 1 percent to 17 percent premium. If you were to simply double the cost of labor at your average U.S. Mickey D's and tack it onto the price of a sandwich, you'd expect customers to be paying at least a dollar more.

It's right-wing nonsense that a Big Mac would cost $10 if we paid workers a living wage. Don't repeat it for them.

[stillwaiting]

19. We really shouldn't belong to the same political Party. We really shouldn't. nt

[ryan_cats]

36. You

You should learn correct pronoun usage.

The party I belong to always stood for freedom, freedom to think and act as individuals and to achieve based on merit and work. Now that isn't fair, waaaaa! It used to be the right that wanted to shut down free speech and force everyone to be drones. Now, I am amazed that groupthink has replaced independent thought and that it is celebrated by some here. Enjoy your police state, no matter who the person holding the reigns of power, you are still on a leash although you seem to be OK with that.

If you thought logically instead of emotionally, you would say, well, too little regulation gives us Sckrelli and it does unfortunately. The solution, balance. Given the choices this year, I want Bernie and yes he is in favor of a lot of things I am not but a half a loaf is better than the government cheese we got with Reagan, Nevertheless, I will vote for whoever is on the D ballot in the GE. The thought of Jeb scared me, I cannot imagine Trump, Sckrelli writ large.

[mac56]

38. Tell you what.

Go and start Libertarian Underground.

[Kittycat]

72. I'm confused how you align with Sanders.

I'm a fervent Sanders supporter, longtime DUer and identify as a DS. Your comments are in direct opposition with what is necessary to move out platform forward under Bernie, or any other candidate offering more socially minded democratic values.

Examining your words further, I'd say they're more in alignment with Rand Paul's Libertarian viewpoint, and read like they were taken directly from TheLibertarianRepublic website (specifically on minimal wage and automation). If that's your belief, it's certainly your right. I just disagree with you, and don't think DU is the right place since we tend to support workers rights vs CEOs and shareholders trampling them, while they profit off of it. Particularly since so many low wage workers are forced to use the social service safety net, as a result. Which is a subset of corporate welfare.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

82. There are a few "Sanders supporters" here who can't maintain the gimmick n/m

[ProfessorGAC]

53. Prove It

You brought up the $10 hamburger. Now, you prove it. And please don't do any Econ 101, two dimensional, x therefore y arguments, since everybody who has done advanced studies in economertrics knows that none of that actually occurs.

You made the assertion. Now, you provide the evidence.

[Kittycat]

69. $21/Hr? Not all that different at checkout

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/global-mcdonalds-protests_n_5324938.html




Btw. How about the CEO consider a paycut?

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

81. Your slip has been showing for A LONG TIME

SJWs seems to be a drumbeat for you, now you are against the working poor.

Maybe you need to check the name of the website and see if there are other forums out there where your talking point trash will be welcome.

[Marrah_G]

87. Wrong website

[edhopper]

11. Your Colon begs you

not to eat at Carl Jrs.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

16. That too.

[The2ndWheel]

12. Everyone wants more for less

That's not going to happen in every sphere of life, except labor.

[Tom Rinaldo]

17. The essanse of capitalist morality

"Does it really help if Sally makes $3 more an hour if Suzie has no job?"

Does it really help Suzie if we don't raise the minimum wage so she can hold onto her malnutrition wages job for another 18 months until a robot becomes cheap enough to replace her?

[ghostsinthemachine]

22. Humans Need Not Apply (must watch video)

reality. It is here and we have better find a way to move away from the employment age into a non employment age real soon or we are going to see a lot of desperate people. This is here, not some future scenario, but right now.

[mac56]

23. Foolish humans.

[Initech]

25. Thread over!

[pampango]

24. Trump knows that the blame lies not with American CEO's but with Mexicans, Chinese, Japanese and

a host of other foreigners. Wall off the foreigners and we will be just fine.

[yuiyoshida]

67. Yeah but what is he gonna do with

some of us, who are already inside the wall? California has a nice large population of Mexicans, Chinese, Japanese, Filipinos, Taiwanese, Singaporeans, Malaysians, Indonesians, Thai, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Humong, Koreans, Native Americans, Pacific Islanders, Indians (from India) Pakistanis, Other Latinos, Blacks etc, etc.

Guess His next huge project after that wall, will be internment camps... it sounds like something Trump would want...Unless He will start a fleet of ships that will deport people he doesn't want to various ports of call. I for one, don't wish to be sent to China.. I am Not Chinese nor born in Asia. I was born here, but I am sure the camps will have to do, while he figures things out with his "terrific brain".

[Recursion]

28. Nobody's going to run a business as a charity to give people jobs, though

I mean, no matter how you feel about it, if there's a way to do it more cheaply without people, that's just what's going to happen. I mean, look at manufacturing; it's been happening there for 40 years.

[21st Century Poet]

86. Finally, somebody who speaks some sense.

It is shocking to me to see how Luddite many people here are. Some people seem to feel entitled to a job they didn't create in a company they didn't build and to which they are not responsible for. Workers are not owed a job.

While respecting workers' rights is very important , one also has to admit that there are and have been very many jobs which have become obsolete over time, everything from the lamplighter to the elevator operator. Humans have been innovating since the dawn of time. Technology makes tasks easier and that means it requires less manual labour. You can argue that workers deserve better training opportunities, better wages and good severance packages but you cannot fight or un-invent technology (which is also created by workers).

None of the little luxuries we take for granted today would be possible without automation and improvements in technology. Cars destroyed a huge industry based around horses, carriages and that sort of thing but, honestly, what can you do?

[PoliticAverse]

33. I still remember going into places that had human elevator operators. n/t

[Major Nikon]

47. It really doesn't matter if the employees are paid 50 cents per hour

If someone can figure out a way to get the equivalent work done for 25 cents, they will.

You can't fight technology. The fight that is worth having is figuring out how to have a viable middle class in an economy that is increasingly less reliant on unskilled labor.

[titaniumsalute]

43. Who will be left to buy their shitty burgers?

[PoliticAverse]

51. I'm pretty sure their employees aren't a significant source of revenue for them...

burger-sale wise.

[titaniumsalute]

58. Well my point was more of a grande statement...

...machines replacing lower-wage people will not help retail businesses or the service industry.

[Major Nikon]

44. And here I was boycotting them because their food is shitty

[Erose999]

48. I'd boycott them but I already wasn't eating there.

[n2doc]

49. Another prediction come true from Idiocracy

[MindPilot]

56. Y'all going to be singing the same tune when renewable energy eliminates coal miners?

Where were you when automation reduced the crew of a trash truck from three to one? Or when traffic lights replaced that poor bastard who had to stand in the middle of the intersection? Or phone operators?

if a job can be automated, that is a pretty clear sign that it is a job a human should not be doing.

ETA I think the automation actually creates jobs because it takes more people to create and maintain the automation than it does to actually do the task. Before computers, a large company might have a half dozen people in the typewriter repair shop. Now that same company needs a couple of hundred people staffing their IT department.

[muntrv]

59. Hey Andy! Who's gonna sell Carl's Jr./Hardee's hamburgers to the robots?

[leftyladyfrommo]

61. Robots are the future. It's coming.

I don't know what people will do for work. Everyone will probably get a small guaranteed wage to live on. Or not.

I think it's really scary.

[Xolodno]

62. Its not a matter of if they will lose their jobs, its when.

Sooner or later the technology will become even cheaper and automation will eliminate the jobs.

What are you going to do? Pass a law that the food service industry cannot do this? Won't past the muster in any State Supreme Court, much less Federal.

One of the reasons Repubs are against the minimum wage hike is precisely this, its a valid reason, albeit a shitty one. Its band-aid on a much bigger problem and delaying the inevitable. Not too mention, forcing people to stay in poverty longer.

Training, education must be made available....and not by more "student loans" at for profit colleges that over promise and under deliver....which rich Repubs prefer as they no doubt have a steak in this in getting guaranteed federal money.

[peabody]

90. Train for what?

I keep hearing this training, training, training mantra over and over again yet nobody ever gets specific. Train for what? How are these people going to afford this training? What will they do to pay for food, shelter, and bills while they get this training?

[GreatGazoo]

63. Just as the prophecy of "Idiocracy" predicted years ago...

[WillowTree]

66. Here's the question that I always have when I see stuff like this.

Would it be better for the people who have more-in-line-with-the-future, no doubt better-paying jobs designing, building, marketing and repairing the machines to lose their jobs to save the lower-skilled, lower-paying jobs from extinction?

Wouldn't the better solution be to find a way to train people for the jobs that are likely to be around 5 years from now rather than all this fighting technology (which is futile anyway) to protect the jobs of those who have not kept up either through lack of foresight or lack of opportunity?

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

78. That would obviously be better

Problem is, it doesn't happen. If Mr. Greasyburger here fires his workers in favor of robots, they're just dumped out in the street and left trying to find another job. Many could end up homeless or on welfare.

Here's a shock of an idea: someone like this sorry excuse for a CEO could realize that his fortune was built on the backs of these workers he so easily dismisses,and that maybe, just maybe, he has an obligation to them as a result.

But no, he would rather pay them starvation wages, dump them when they're no longer useful, and leave the rest of us supporting them via welfare and other government programs. Because, you know, it's just business.

[The2ndWheel]

84. Which jobs are likely to be around 5 years from now?

Not only automation, but there are billions of people around the world. How many ____ can there be until those well paying jobs don't pay as well because there are so many people trained to be ____?

I think there's another dynamic to the question. It's not just capitalism/socialism/mixed economy/whatever, or technology vs jobs. It's also about this increasingly single, global system, whatever one wants to call it, with no alternative to it.

[Sunlei]

74. order taking is a 'trouble spot' fastfood could improve with a machine.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

79. Because why interact with another human being when you could tap buttons on a computer?

[Sunlei]

85. for 'fastfood' yes, especially drive through & online.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

89. If I'm eating fast food

I'm not doing it for the human interaction, I'm doing it to get fast food.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

76. GOP would want him as president with an attitude like that.

The only reason you cant afford to pay Suzie $3 more an hour is your need to maximize profits.

If the most important thing a corp did was employ people and be a responsible neighbor, then you would not have this problem.

People need to start to notice what the negative factor is in all these situations, not hard to figure out.

[Gormy Cuss]

77. IMHO Puzder is just using this as a fearmongering tactic.

They'd look at automation to save costs even without an increase in the minimum wage.

[1939]

83. Wage costs are an incentive to seek automation or workarounds

Think of how many construction jobs we could create with workers using shovels and mattocks if we outlawed bulldozers and front loaders.

We could employ a lot more carpenters if the remaining ones weren't using power tools.

[Rex]

88. Government does not drive up the cost of labor, fuck Carl's Jr.