McDonalds Introduces Self Serving Kiosks in Response to Min Wage Increase

[Uncensored2008]

Are you advocating they should all become CEO's to get a pay increase?

I think what he is advocating is that you pull your head from your anal cavity and try thinking...

 

[buckeye45_73]

I'm calling bullshit.

They would have done the kiosk thing anyway.

How long does it take to design and develop the kiosks and computer programs? How long to install them nationwide?

This has been in the works longer than the call for wage increases.

They have sped it up because you guys want the min wage increased every 5 years.

 

[danielpalos]

how do you believe we got our first world economy; it was, "forced by the government".

Not at all true. The American miracle was largely driven by agricultural specialization. For the first time in recorded history, the majority of people owned their own land. This meant that farmers decided which crops to grow, rather than doing as nobles ordered. The natural canals of the North East provided a means of transportation, these canals were expanded to the Erie Canal, which meant that specialists could concentrate on a single crop, then take it to market where they would sell the excess and buy what they needed.

This was the "Market Revolution," which literally changed the world. For the first time, those not in the nobility were able escape the need to spend every moment scratching the dirt in desperate hope of producing enough that they and their family would not starve to death. Instead these people were able to produce in abundance, not only providing them with security, but also with leisure, something unheard of outside of the aristocracy. This allowed farmers to pursue education, and even art. Hence arose for the first time in history, the middle class.

The left has worked diligently ever since to destroy these usurpers of Aristocratic privilege..

Confusing the Industrial Revolution with the Agricultural Revolution ushered in by FDR?

 

[Uncensored2008]

how do you believe we got our first world economy; it was, "forced by the government".

Not at all true. The American miracle was largely driven by agricultural specialization. For the first time in recorded history, the majority of people owned their own land. This meant that farmers decided which crops to grow, rather than doing as nobles ordered. The natural canals of the North East provided a means of transportation, these canals were expanded to the Erie Canal, which meant that specialists could concentrate on a single crop, then take it to market where they would sell the excess and buy what they needed.

This was the "Market Revolution," which literally changed the world. For the first time, those not in the nobility were able escape the need to spend every moment scratching the dirt in desperate hope of producing enough that they and their family would not starve to death. Instead these people were able to produce in abundance, not only providing them with security, but also with leisure, something unheard of outside of the aristocracy. This allowed farmers to pursue education, and even art. Hence arose for the first time in history, the middle class.

The left has worked diligently ever since to destroy these usurpers of Aristocratic privilege..

Confusing the Industrial Revolution with the Agricultural Revolution ushered in by FDR?

Ah Dan, you should have stuck out 3rd grade.

You truly are an ignorant fool with zero knowledge of history, to complement your complete lack of grasp of economics.

 

[Winston]

how do you believe we got our first world economy; it was, "forced by the government".

Not at all true. The American miracle was largely driven by agricultural specialization. For the first time in recorded history, the majority of people owned their own land.

Stop right there. Come on. You are talking about the early 19th century. The Land Ordinance Act of 1785 was the first public sale of federal land. It was a minimum purchase of 640 acres at one dollar an acre. Seriously, how many people you think had $640 laying around.

And the Erie Canal, I am pretty sure Stephen Van Rensselaer owned the entire Hudson valley at the time. Land ownership was not that prevalent during the Colonial period nor the period following the Revolutionary War. Tenant farming was the standard in many parts of the United States, especially the Hudson valley, these areas were more like feudal lordships than any "free market", despite what you might read in the fairy tale history books or from the revisionist historians.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[
Stop right there. Come on. You are talking about the early 19th century.

I am indeed.

The Land Ordinance Act of 1785 was the first public sale of federal land. It was a minimum purchase of 640 acres at one dollar an acre. Seriously, how many people you think had $640 laying around.

The land ordinance act designated 1 mile square, or 850 acre plots. No idea where you came up with 640.

Regardless, the settlers indeed had the needed funds, and the plots were snatched up as fast as they were made available, including the central townships of them

And the Erie Canal, I am pretty sure Stephen Van Rensselaer owned the entire Hudson valley at the time. Land ownership was not that prevalent during the Colonial period nor the period following the Revolutionary War. Tenant farming was the standard in many parts of the United States, especially the Hudson valley, these areas were more like feudal lordships than any "free market", despite what you might read in the fairy tale history books or from the revisionist historians.

Ah, one who thinks Howard Zinn is not only accurate history, but the only history..

The Market Revolution

 

[danielpalos]

how do you believe we got our first world economy; it was, "forced by the government".

Not at all true. The American miracle was largely driven by agricultural specialization. For the first time in recorded history, the majority of people owned their own land. This meant that farmers decided which crops to grow, rather than doing as nobles ordered. The natural canals of the North East provided a means of transportation, these canals were expanded to the Erie Canal, which meant that specialists could concentrate on a single crop, then take it to market where they would sell the excess and buy what they needed.

This was the "Market Revolution," which literally changed the world. For the first time, those not in the nobility were able escape the need to spend every moment scratching the dirt in desperate hope of producing enough that they and their family would not starve to death. Instead these people were able to produce in abundance, not only providing them with security, but also with leisure, something unheard of outside of the aristocracy. This allowed farmers to pursue education, and even art. Hence arose for the first time in history, the middle class.

The left has worked diligently ever since to destroy these usurpers of Aristocratic privilege..

Confusing the Industrial Revolution with the Agricultural Revolution ushered in by FDR?

Ah Dan, you should have stuck out 3rd grade.

You truly are an ignorant fool with zero knowledge of history, to complement your complete lack of grasp of economics.

Yet, uncencored2008, it is You who has nothing but diversion and that form of fallacy for your Cause. Do you need a flag so you can be the ensign?

Rural America was a high priority for Roosevelt and his energetic Secretary of Agriculture, Henry A. Wallace. FDR believed that full economic recovery depended upon the recovery of agriculture, and raising farm prices was a major tool, even though it meant higher food prices for the poor living in cities.

Many rural people lived in severe poverty, especially in the South. Major programs addressed to their needs included the Resettlement Administration (RA), the Rural Electrification Administration (REA), rural welfare projects sponsored by the WPA, National Youth Administration (NYA), Forest Service and Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), including school lunches, building new schools, opening roads in remote areas, reforestation, and purchase of marginal lands to enlarge national forests. In 1933, the Administration launched the Tennessee Valley Authority, a project involving dam construction planning on an unprecedented scale to curb flooding, generate electricity, and modernize poor farms in the Tennessee Valley region of the Southern United States. Under the Farmers' Relief Act of 1933, the government paid compensation to farmers who reduced output, thereby rising prices. As a result of this legislation, the average income of farmers almost doubled by 1937.[53]--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal

 

[Uncensored2008]

how do you believe we got our first world economy; it was, "forced by the government".

Not at all true. The American miracle was largely driven by agricultural specialization. For the first time in recorded history, the majority of people owned their own land. This meant that farmers decided which crops to grow, rather than doing as nobles ordered. The natural canals of the North East provided a means of transportation, these canals were expanded to the Erie Canal, which meant that specialists could concentrate on a single crop, then take it to market where they would sell the excess and buy what they needed.

This was the "Market Revolution," which literally changed the world. For the first time, those not in the nobility were able escape the need to spend every moment scratching the dirt in desperate hope of producing enough that they and their family would not starve to death. Instead these people were able to produce in abundance, not only providing them with security, but also with leisure, something unheard of outside of the aristocracy. This allowed farmers to pursue education, and even art. Hence arose for the first time in history, the middle class.

The left has worked diligently ever since to destroy these usurpers of Aristocratic privilege..

Confusing the Industrial Revolution with the Agricultural Revolution ushered in by FDR?

Ah Dan, you should have stuck out 3rd grade.

You truly are an ignorant fool with zero knowledge of history, to complement your complete lack of grasp of economics.

Yet, uncencored2008, it is You who has nothing but diversion and that form of fallacy for your Cause. Do you need a flag so you can be the ensign?

Seriously dude, you SHOULD be embarrassed, but you lack the education to grasp why you are making such a fool of yourself.

 

[Dschrute3]

Keep in mind, McDonalds was gonna implement these kiosks no matter what the Minimum Wage was. It's a Corporation that doesn't care about Americans or America. It only cares about the money. But who knows? Maybe this move has put it on Trump's shitlist. I hope so.

 

[danielpalos]

how do you believe we got our first world economy; it was, "forced by the government".

Not at all true. The American miracle was largely driven by agricultural specialization. For the first time in recorded history, the majority of people owned their own land. This meant that farmers decided which crops to grow, rather than doing as nobles ordered. The natural canals of the North East provided a means of transportation, these canals were expanded to the Erie Canal, which meant that specialists could concentrate on a single crop, then take it to market where they would sell the excess and buy what they needed.

This was the "Market Revolution," which literally changed the world. For the first time, those not in the nobility were able escape the need to spend every moment scratching the dirt in desperate hope of producing enough that they and their family would not starve to death. Instead these people were able to produce in abundance, not only providing them with security, but also with leisure, something unheard of outside of the aristocracy. This allowed farmers to pursue education, and even art. Hence arose for the first time in history, the middle class.

The left has worked diligently ever since to destroy these usurpers of Aristocratic privilege..

Confusing the Industrial Revolution with the Agricultural Revolution ushered in by FDR?

Ah Dan, you should have stuck out 3rd grade.

You truly are an ignorant fool with zero knowledge of history, to complement your complete lack of grasp of economics.

Yet, uncencored2008, it is You who has nothing but diversion and that form of fallacy for your Cause. Do you need a flag so you can be the ensign?

Seriously dude, you SHOULD be embarrassed, but you lack the education to grasp why you are making such a fool of yourself.

FDR "making like Henry Ford" is a "revolution" for the left. Henry Ford doubled wages, and so did FDR.

In 1870, almost 50 percent of the US population was employed in agriculture.[16] As of 2008, less than 2 percent of the population is directly employed in agriculture.[17][18]--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_the_United_States

FDR made that happen sooner, rather than via a normal capital profit motive under capitalism.

Socialism already took us to the Moon and back, last millennium. Capitalism is still looking for its capital clues and its capital Cause.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Not at all true. The American miracle was largely driven by agricultural specialization. For the first time in recorded history, the majority of people owned their own land. This meant that farmers decided which crops to grow, rather than doing as nobles ordered. The natural canals of the North East provided a means of transportation, these canals were expanded to the Erie Canal, which meant that specialists could concentrate on a single crop, then take it to market where they would sell the excess and buy what they needed.

This was the "Market Revolution," which literally changed the world. For the first time, those not in the nobility were able escape the need to spend every moment scratching the dirt in desperate hope of producing enough that they and their family would not starve to death. Instead these people were able to produce in abundance, not only providing them with security, but also with leisure, something unheard of outside of the aristocracy. This allowed farmers to pursue education, and even art. Hence arose for the first time in history, the middle class.

The left has worked diligently ever since to destroy these usurpers of Aristocratic privilege..

Confusing the Industrial Revolution with the Agricultural Revolution ushered in by FDR?

Ah Dan, you should have stuck out 3rd grade.

You truly are an ignorant fool with zero knowledge of history, to complement your complete lack of grasp of economics.

Yet, uncencored2008, it is You who has nothing but diversion and that form of fallacy for your Cause. Do you need a flag so you can be the ensign?

Seriously dude, you SHOULD be embarrassed, but you lack the education to grasp why you are making such a fool of yourself.

FDR "making like Henry Ford" is a "revolution" for the left. Henry Ford doubled wages, and so did FDR.

In 1870, almost 50 percent of the US population was employed in agriculture.[16] As of 2008, less than 2 percent of the population is directly employed in agriculture.[17][18]--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_the_United_States

FDR made that happen sooner, rather than via a normal capital profit motive under capitalism.

Socialism already took us to the Moon and back, last millennium. Capitalism is still looking for its capital clues and its capital Cause.

The depth of your ignorance is astounding.

 

[danielpalos]

Confusing the Industrial Revolution with the Agricultural Revolution ushered in by FDR?

Ah Dan, you should have stuck out 3rd grade.

You truly are an ignorant fool with zero knowledge of history, to complement your complete lack of grasp of economics.

Yet, uncencored2008, it is You who has nothing but diversion and that form of fallacy for your Cause. Do you need a flag so you can be the ensign?

Seriously dude, you SHOULD be embarrassed, but you lack the education to grasp why you are making such a fool of yourself.

FDR "making like Henry Ford" is a "revolution" for the left. Henry Ford doubled wages, and so did FDR.

In 1870, almost 50 percent of the US population was employed in agriculture.[16] As of 2008, less than 2 percent of the population is directly employed in agriculture.[17][18]--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_the_United_States

FDR made that happen sooner, rather than via a normal capital profit motive under capitalism.

Socialism already took us to the Moon and back, last millennium. Capitalism is still looking for its capital clues and its capital Cause.

The depth of your ignorance is astounding.

Why do you believe FDR did not usher in our US, Agricultural Revolution? The Industrial Revolution did not change the capital dynamics, that much, apparently.

 

[Winston]

[
Stop right there. Come on. You are talking about the early 19th century.

I am indeed.

The Land Ordinance Act of 1785 was the first public sale of federal land. It was a minimum purchase of 640 acres at one dollar an acre. Seriously, how many people you think had $640 laying around.

The land ordinance act designated 1 mile square, or 850 acre plots. No idea where you came up with 640.

Regardless, the settlers indeed had the needed funds, and the plots were snatched up as fast as they were made available, including the central townships of them

And the Erie Canal, I am pretty sure Stephen Van Rensselaer owned the entire Hudson valley at the time. Land ownership was not that prevalent during the Colonial period nor the period following the Revolutionary War. Tenant farming was the standard in many parts of the United States, especially the Hudson valley, these areas were more like feudal lordships than any "free market", despite what you might read in the fairy tale history books or from the revisionist historians.

Ah, one who thinks Howard Zinn is not only accurate history, but the only history..

The Market Revolution

A square mile is 640 acres.

And yes, a few people were flocking to buy up those lots. But come on, who are you kidding. In 1785 hard currency was hard to come by. Most everyone had already sold their Continental currency for pennies on the dollar just to get some damn food. And you think they had $640 laying around? Comical.

So I plug it in to an inflation calculator and I come up with right at fifteen grand. I say that is too low but we can go with it. And the wealth distribution today is damn near close to what it was in 1785. How many people do you know that has fifteen grand laying around that they can spend on undeveloped land. Although I will take all the square mile lots you can give me at fifteen grand.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[


A square mile is 640 acres.

And yes, a few people were flocking to buy up those lots. But come on, who are you kidding. In 1785 hard currency was hard to come by. Most everyone had already sold their Continental currency for pennies on the dollar just to get some damn food. And you think they had $640 laying around? Comical.

So I plug it in to an inflation calculator and I come up with right at fifteen grand. I say that is too low but we can go with it. And the wealth distribution today is damn near close to what it was in 1785. How many people do you know that has fifteen grand laying around that they can spend on undeveloped land. Although I will take all the square mile lots you can give me at fifteen grand.

$15,000 for a square mile of land is give away levels. Pretty much anyone can afford it.

 

[Winston]

[


A square mile is 640 acres.

And yes, a few people were flocking to buy up those lots. But come on, who are you kidding. In 1785 hard currency was hard to come by. Most everyone had already sold their Continental currency for pennies on the dollar just to get some damn food. And you think they had $640 laying around? Comical.

So I plug it in to an inflation calculator and I come up with right at fifteen grand. I say that is too low but we can go with it. And the wealth distribution today is damn near close to what it was in 1785. How many people do you know that has fifteen grand laying around that they can spend on undeveloped land. Although I will take all the square mile lots you can give me at fifteen grand.

$15,000 for a square mile of land is give away levels. Pretty much anyone can afford it.

Which is why I said the inflation level was too low. But the fact that fifteen grand in today's dollars got you a square mile in 1785 and it's going to take something in the range of five million today is another conversation.

But again, you can't possibly believe it was common, to have $640 laying around in 1785. That was about ten years worth of work in New England, maybe six down south. And real incomes declined till the end of the century.

But your perception, that early America was fueled by small farmers who owned their land is a Thomas Jefferson fantasy. Early America was owned by land barons, like George Washington. Many, like both he and Aaron Burr, dreamed have having their very own kingdom.

The federal land sales of 1785 were conducted prior to the whiskey tax and prior to the government guaranteeing all federal and state issued continental scripts. Which means those scripts used to pay for that government land were virtually worthless. Bought for pennies on the dollars from the farmers who held them.

Now Jefferson, who authored the original act of 1784, wanted smaller parcels. So Congress shipped his ass off to France and got the deed done before he got back.

 

[Conservative65]

He contradicts himself when he says he doesn't want someone paid more than they are worth. He already claimed that skills don't matter and someone should get paid enough to support him/herself and one other simply because the work is 40 hours. What he doesn't seem to get is that there are jobs that don't produce a dime in revenue yet he's willing to pay them a substantial amount.

Maybe I have it wrong, but from what I can understand, he's saying that companies that have jobs that pay less than $15.00 per hour (because those positions don't produce enough profit) should be eliminated. Okay, eliminated by who? Should government close down McDonald's because they have jobs that don't produce enough profit to pay a worker $15.00 an hour or more? People in a community should suffer because of that?

I can't figure out what he's offering as a good solution to the problem.

I support a minimum wage of fifteen dollars an hour.

I do not want an employer to pay an employee more than the value of his production. But, if the employer wants to pay an employee at least fifteen dollars an hour, even when the employee doesn't produce fifteen dollars worth of value, I don't care.

Now,the problem, especially in regards to both Walmart and McDonalds, is not there there is not enough "profit" being generated by these employees to justify fifteen dollars an hour. In both cases, Walmart and McDonalds, the required increase in labor cost to get those employees to fifteen dollars can be financed from the money those companies are spending on stock buybacks. In other words, instead of spending money on rent seeking activities those companies will be investing money in their employees.

It always amazes me that these gigantic corporations are able to compensate from market fluctuations in the cost of supplies and raw materials, rent, tax increases, increased advertising costs, increased executive pay

Yet when someone advocates an increase in pay for their lowest workers, it will bring them to their knees

When are those advocates of increased pay for the lower workers going to advocate those workers increase their skill level?

Are you advocating they should all become CEO's to get a pay increase?

I'm advocating they do something besides simply demand more money for a skill one step above what a monkey could be trained to do. You hear those in fast food demanding a higher wage but you don't hear them saying what they'll do to better themselves in order to earn it.

 

[Conservative65]

Maybe I have it wrong, but from what I can understand, he's saying that companies that have jobs that pay less than $15.00 per hour (because those positions don't produce enough profit) should be eliminated. Okay, eliminated by who? Should government close down McDonald's because they have jobs that don't produce enough profit to pay a worker $15.00 an hour or more? People in a community should suffer because of that?

I can't figure out what he's offering as a good solution to the problem.

I support a minimum wage of fifteen dollars an hour.

I do not want an employer to pay an employee more than the value of his production. But, if the employer wants to pay an employee at least fifteen dollars an hour, even when the employee doesn't produce fifteen dollars worth of value, I don't care.

Now,the problem, especially in regards to both Walmart and McDonalds, is not there there is not enough "profit" being generated by these employees to justify fifteen dollars an hour. In both cases, Walmart and McDonalds, the required increase in labor cost to get those employees to fifteen dollars can be financed from the money those companies are spending on stock buybacks. In other words, instead of spending money on rent seeking activities those companies will be investing money in their employees.

It always amazes me that these gigantic corporations are able to compensate from market fluctuations in the cost of supplies and raw materials, rent, tax increases, increased advertising costs, increased executive pay

Yet when someone advocates an increase in pay for their lowest workers, it will bring them to their knees

When are those advocates of increased pay for the lower workers going to advocate those workers increase their skill level?

Are you advocating they should all become CEO's to get a pay increase?

yes, that is the right wing solution. never mind that all capitalists cannot make like Henry Ford and double wages to realize gains from efficiency.

That is the leftwing bullshit belief.

 

[danielpalos]

"After the war, therefore, many who had earlier opposed federal spending on internal improvements softened their position. Presidents James Madison and James Monroe, for example, suggested that the federal government should at least make money available to the states for this purpose. In addition, state governments threw off their former reserve and invested heavily in internal improvements."

 

[Uncensored2008]

[
Which is why I said the inflation level was too low. But the fact that fifteen grand in today's dollars got you a square mile in 1785 and it's going to take something in the range of five million today is another conversation.

But again, you can't possibly believe it was common, to have $640 laying around in 1785. That was about ten years worth of work in New England, maybe six down south. And real incomes declined till the end of the century.

But your perception, that early America was fueled by small farmers who owned their land is a Thomas Jefferson fantasy. Early America was owned by land barons, like George Washington. Many, like both he and Aaron Burr, dreamed have having their very own kingdom.

The federal land sales of 1785 were conducted prior to the whiskey tax and prior to the government guaranteeing all federal and state issued continental scripts. Which means those scripts used to pay for that government land were virtually worthless. Bought for pennies on the dollars from the farmers who held them.

Now Jefferson, who authored the original act of 1784, wanted smaller parcels. So Congress shipped his ass off to France and got the deed done before he got back.

Again, the fact that the land (which was in addition to all of the grants already given) was bought up as fast as it was surveyed shows that the common people could indeed afford it.

You keep speaking of script, which was used almost exclusively by the Continental Congress to pay the military. It was indeed worthless, but not terribly relevant since most of the country was on hard currency, silver and gold coins.

 

[Dschrute3]

I hope Trump kicks some McDonalds ass. Another Corporation that doesn't care about America. It's consumed with evil greed.