More lefties learn the glory of the 15 dollar minimum wage....unemployment.....

[OnePercenter]

Interesting conversation earlier today with a guy who repairs cars. He had "factory training" on two major brands while working previously for dealers.

He built his own shop and equipped it amazingly well - doing it all out of income. No loans.

Dave does good work and has built a good customer base. In fact, he has too much work! When he built the shop he did it with three work stations, intending to hire a couple of technicians.

The "too much work" situation had him ready to hire. A local high school has a good voc-ed program and turns out about 20 well trained technicians each year. Good staffing available and plenty of business.

So he sat down with his accountant.

Learned about the various taxes and insurance requrements (not medical - too small a business to worry), licenses required, generating and filing city, state and government reports.

He found a creative way to deal with it!

He doubled his shop prices and thereby reduced the workload without losing any income! But nobody got a job. The unused work stations? Since he now knew he had no use for them he rented them out for RV storage.

The 20 grad technicians? They're all working mostly at dealerships. About 5 close to home; the rest commuting to the closest "big" city - 45 miles and about an hour (traffic) away.

So, in a perverse sort of way, I guess you cold call it win-win.

So his business plan is complacency?

 

[OnePercenter]

There are no machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, cook and assemble burgers, so your argument is moot..

Actually, we have machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, and cook burgers - do you seriously believe burger assembly is an engineering challenge we can't solve?

Why do we still have cooks?

 

[HenryBHough]

So his business plan is complacency?

Not just complacency, very profitable complacency!

 

[OnePercenter]

Interesting conversation earlier today with a guy who repairs cars. He had "factory training" on two major brands while working previously for dealers.

He built his own shop and equipped it amazingly well - doing it all out of income. No loans.

Dave does good work and has built a good customer base. In fact, he has too much work! When he built the shop he did it with three work stations, intending to hire a couple of technicians.

The "too much work" situation had him ready to hire. A local high school has a good voc-ed program and turns out about 20 well trained technicians each year. Good staffing available and plenty of business.

So he sat down with his accountant.

Learned about the various taxes and insurance requrements (not medical - too small a business to worry), licenses required, generating and filing city, state and government reports.

He found a creative way to deal with it!

He doubled his shop prices and thereby reduced the workload without losing any income! But nobody got a job. The unused work stations? Since he now knew he had no use for them he rented them out for RV storage.

The 20 grad technicians? They're all working mostly at dealerships. About 5 close to home; the rest commuting to the closest "big" city - 45 miles and about an hour (traffic) away.

So, in a perverse sort of way, I guess you cold call it win-win.

No surprise. That's actually a pretty common story.

Complacency is a common story in business?

 

[OnePercenter]

So his business plan is complacency?

Not just complacency, very profitable complacency!

Except businesses strive to build bigger. If Sam Walton was complacent where would Walmart be today?

With the information presented why wouldn't the owner create a second shift? The owner could spread overhead over a 16 hour day instead of an 8 hour day and increase profit.

 

[Brain357]

That's a very general statement. In the first place, define "afford". If a business can raise prices without a significant loss of sales, they can "afford it". If they can lay off workers without a significant loss of productivity, they can "afford it". If they have a large profit margin and don't mind reducing it, they can "afford it". If they don't have any of those options, they can't.

The statement identifies the lie. Can you name one business that failed because the owner of the business paid her/his employees too much?

General Motors .... only a liberal bailout saved them.

The execs had them making crappy cars. Wasn't because employees were paid too much. Poor exec decisions lowered sales.

 

[hadit]

If a machine can grind meat, shape burger patties, cook and assemble burgers for $10/hr, that's the price point beyond which humans will be replaced.

There are no machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, cook and assemble burgers, so your argument is moot.

Perhaps you missed this (it was posted before). Momentum Machines Burger Robot - Business Insider

If automated gas pumps can allow customers to pump their own gas for $2/hr, that's the price beyond which humans will be replaced.

There is no such thing as an automated gas pump. Corporate America has falsely convinced consumers to get out of their car, pump their own gas, and buy something in their convenience store and they 'think' they're saving money, which they aren't.

Really? I tell it how much I want and how I'll pay. Stick the hose in and watch it do its thing.

See, the way you approach this is all wrong. A typical business owner looks at it this way. I have a product that I sell. That product costs me X dollars in raw materials. Then I have to add in Y dollars to assemble the product and Z dollars to transport and sell it. Then I have to add enough to cover the taxes I will be charged by the government (this is why corporate taxation is so stupid. The customer pays them). Finally, after all that, I add in 3% as my profit margin. And, most of the time, labor is the biggest expense a company has. So, when it's all said and done, a job that "makes all the money for an business owner" simply doesn't exist.

Nobody makes a 3% profit.

The Least Profitable Businesses In The U.S.

Want to try again?

 

[hadit]

There are no machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, cook and assemble burgers, so your argument is moot..

Actually, we have machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, and cook burgers - do you seriously believe burger assembly is an engineering challenge we can't solve?

Why do we still have cooks?

The better question is why do we still have MW burger flippers. The answer to that is simple. The automated machines haven't achieved enough market penetration to drive them out.

 

[Spare_change]

There are no machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, cook and assemble burgers, so your argument is moot..

Actually, we have machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, and cook burgers - do you seriously believe burger assembly is an engineering challenge we can't solve?

Why do we still have cooks?

We have cooks ONLY because they are cheaper than automation .... change that and they are outta there.

 

[Spare_change]

So his business plan is complacency?

Not just complacency, very profitable complacency!

Except businesses strive to build bigger. If Sam Walton was complacent where would Walmart be today?

With the information presented why wouldn't the owner create a second shift? The owner could spread overhead over a 16 hour day instead of an 8 hour day and increase profit.

PLEASE tell me you meant that in jest ... your math can't be THAT bad!!

 

[Spare_change]

That's a very general statement. In the first place, define "afford". If a business can raise prices without a significant loss of sales, they can "afford it". If they can lay off workers without a significant loss of productivity, they can "afford it". If they have a large profit margin and don't mind reducing it, they can "afford it". If they don't have any of those options, they can't.

The statement identifies the lie. Can you name one business that failed because the owner of the business paid her/his employees too much?

General Motors .... only a liberal bailout saved them.

The execs had them making crappy cars. Wasn't because employees were paid too much. Poor exec decisions lowered sales.

Ever so wrong ... but that's certainly the story the unions will tell you.

 

[Flopper]

There are no machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, cook and assemble burgers, so your argument is moot..

Actually, we have machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, and cook burgers - do you seriously believe burger assembly is an engineering challenge we can't solve?

How many restaurants serve nothing but hamburgers?

There are no machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, cook and assemble burgers, so your argument is moot..

Actually, we have machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, and cook burgers - do you seriously believe burger assembly is an engineering challenge we can't solve?

Why do we still have cooks?

Fast found restaurants don't just serve hamburgers. A McDonald kitchen prepares fried and broiled chicken sandwiches, fish sandwiches, chicken nuggets, snack wraps, a multitude of special burgers, a variety of egg muffin sandwiches, pancakes, eggs, sausages, biscuits, and constantly changing specials.

Unless your restaurant served just burgers, a burger machine with have a minimal impact on employment because the kitchen staff is still needed to prepare other food.

There is also another problem with automation. It's not flexible. The machine can only perform the tasks that it has been built to perform. So management's menu is limited by the machine; not a good idea since fast food restaurants have built their menu by trying out new menu offerings.
.

 

[Spare_change]

There are no machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, cook and assemble burgers, so your argument is moot..

Actually, we have machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, and cook burgers - do you seriously believe burger assembly is an engineering challenge we can't solve?

How many restaurants serve nothing but hamburgers?

There are no machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, cook and assemble burgers, so your argument is moot..

Actually, we have machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, and cook burgers - do you seriously believe burger assembly is an engineering challenge we can't solve?

Why do we still have cooks?

Fast found restaurants don't just serve hamburgers. A McDonald kitchen prepares fried and broiled chicken sandwiches, fish sandwiches, chicken nuggets, snack wraps, a multitude of special burgers, a variety of egg muffin sandwiches, pancakes, eggs, sausages, biscuits, and constantly changing specials.

Unless your restaurant served just burgers, a burger machine with have a minimal impact on employment because the kitchen staff is still needed to prepare other food.

There is also another problem with automation. It's not flexible. The machine can only perform the tasks that it has been built to perform. So management's menu is limited by the machine; not a good idea since fast food restaurants have built their menu by trying out new menu offerings.
.

Nonsense --- there's not a nickel's difference between cooking chicken or hamburgers. One of the prime concerns when making 'menu changes' is to 1) not use anything new - just find different ways to present the same raw materials, 2) use the same delivery methods in order to avoid increased training costs, and 3) increase profitability for the same materials.

Actually, automation is extremely flexible --- it's just a matter of building it to be flexible.

 

[Brain357]

That's a very general statement. In the first place, define "afford". If a business can raise prices without a significant loss of sales, they can "afford it". If they can lay off workers without a significant loss of productivity, they can "afford it". If they have a large profit margin and don't mind reducing it, they can "afford it". If they don't have any of those options, they can't.

The statement identifies the lie. Can you name one business that failed because the owner of the business paid her/his employees too much?

General Motors .... only a liberal bailout saved them.

The execs had them making crappy cars. Wasn't because employees were paid too much. Poor exec decisions lowered sales.

Ever so wrong ... but that's certainly the story the unions will tell you.

Not at all. Anyone who lived through the era knows they were making the wrong cars. People wanted fuel efficient and they were making guzzlers. They were way behind because of exec decisions. I'd say they are only catching up now.

 

[Brain357]

There are no machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, cook and assemble burgers, so your argument is moot..

Actually, we have machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, and cook burgers - do you seriously believe burger assembly is an engineering challenge we can't solve?

How many restaurants serve nothing but hamburgers?

There are no machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, cook and assemble burgers, so your argument is moot..

Actually, we have machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, and cook burgers - do you seriously believe burger assembly is an engineering challenge we can't solve?

Why do we still have cooks?

Fast found restaurants don't just serve hamburgers. A McDonald kitchen prepares fried and broiled chicken sandwiches, fish sandwiches, chicken nuggets, snack wraps, a multitude of special burgers, a variety of egg muffin sandwiches, pancakes, eggs, sausages, biscuits, and constantly changing specials.

Unless your restaurant served just burgers, a burger machine with have a minimal impact on employment because the kitchen staff is still needed to prepare other food.

There is also another problem with automation. It's not flexible. The machine can only perform the tasks that it has been built to perform. So management's menu is limited by the machine; not a good idea since fast food restaurants have built their menu by trying out new menu offerings.
.

Nonsense --- there's not a nickel's difference between cooking chicken or hamburgers. One of the prime concerns when making 'menu changes' is to 1) not use anything new - just find different ways to present the same raw materials, 2) use the same delivery methods in order to avoid increased training costs, and 3) increase profitability for the same materials.

Actually, automation is extremely flexible --- it's just a matter of building it to be flexible.

A burger machine couldn't cook chicken. Some person would have to change the setting at the very least.

 

[Spare_change]

There are no machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, cook and assemble burgers, so your argument is moot..

Actually, we have machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, and cook burgers - do you seriously believe burger assembly is an engineering challenge we can't solve?

How many restaurants serve nothing but hamburgers?

There are no machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, cook and assemble burgers, so your argument is moot..

Actually, we have machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, and cook burgers - do you seriously believe burger assembly is an engineering challenge we can't solve?

Why do we still have cooks?

Fast found restaurants don't just serve hamburgers. A McDonald kitchen prepares fried and broiled chicken sandwiches, fish sandwiches, chicken nuggets, snack wraps, a multitude of special burgers, a variety of egg muffin sandwiches, pancakes, eggs, sausages, biscuits, and constantly changing specials.

Unless your restaurant served just burgers, a burger machine with have a minimal impact on employment because the kitchen staff is still needed to prepare other food.

There is also another problem with automation. It's not flexible. The machine can only perform the tasks that it has been built to perform. So management's menu is limited by the machine; not a good idea since fast food restaurants have built their menu by trying out new menu offerings.
.

Nonsense --- there's not a nickel's difference between cooking chicken or hamburgers. One of the prime concerns when making 'menu changes' is to 1) not use anything new - just find different ways to present the same raw materials, 2) use the same delivery methods in order to avoid increased training costs, and 3) increase profitability for the same materials.

Actually, automation is extremely flexible --- it's just a matter of building it to be flexible.

A burger machine couldn't cook chicken. Some person would have to change the setting at the very least.

Really?

One person to run a machine that replaces 16 workers --- that isn't automation?

I strongly suspect that I can create a sensor (in fact, I guarantee it) that can differentiate between burger (which is red with white specks in it and weighs 4 ounces +/- 10%) and chicken (which is off-white, and has a variable weight that greatly exceeds the weight band of a hamburger). In fact, make it worth my while and I WILL build it.

And, I can guarantee that if you raise the labor rates enough, it will definitely be worth my while.

 

[Brain357]

There are no machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, cook and assemble burgers, so your argument is moot..

Actually, we have machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, and cook burgers - do you seriously believe burger assembly is an engineering challenge we can't solve?

How many restaurants serve nothing but hamburgers?

Actually, we have machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, and cook burgers - do you seriously believe burger assembly is an engineering challenge we can't solve?

Why do we still have cooks?

Fast found restaurants don't just serve hamburgers. A McDonald kitchen prepares fried and broiled chicken sandwiches, fish sandwiches, chicken nuggets, snack wraps, a multitude of special burgers, a variety of egg muffin sandwiches, pancakes, eggs, sausages, biscuits, and constantly changing specials.

Unless your restaurant served just burgers, a burger machine with have a minimal impact on employment because the kitchen staff is still needed to prepare other food.

There is also another problem with automation. It's not flexible. The machine can only perform the tasks that it has been built to perform. So management's menu is limited by the machine; not a good idea since fast food restaurants have built their menu by trying out new menu offerings.
.

Nonsense --- there's not a nickel's difference between cooking chicken or hamburgers. One of the prime concerns when making 'menu changes' is to 1) not use anything new - just find different ways to present the same raw materials, 2) use the same delivery methods in order to avoid increased training costs, and 3) increase profitability for the same materials.

Actually, automation is extremely flexible --- it's just a matter of building it to be flexible.

A burger machine couldn't cook chicken. Some person would have to change the setting at the very least.

Really?

One person to run a machine that replaces 16 workers --- that isn't automation?

I strongly suspect that I can create a sensor (in fact, I guarantee it) that can differentiate between burger (which is red with white specks in it and weighs 4 ounces +/- 10%) and chicken (which is off-white, and has a variable weight that greatly exceeds the weight band of a hamburger). In fact, make it worth my while and I WILL build it.

And, I can guarantee that if you raise the labor rates enough, it will definitely be worth my while.

I've never been to a fast food restaurant with 16 people just cooking the food. Usually there is maybe 4. And well I haven't seen a machine that can cook more than just burgers. Link?

 

[Spare_change]

Actually, we have machines that can grind meat, shape burger patties, and cook burgers - do you seriously believe burger assembly is an engineering challenge we can't solve?

How many restaurants serve nothing but hamburgers?

Why do we still have cooks?

Fast found restaurants don't just serve hamburgers. A McDonald kitchen prepares fried and broiled chicken sandwiches, fish sandwiches, chicken nuggets, snack wraps, a multitude of special burgers, a variety of egg muffin sandwiches, pancakes, eggs, sausages, biscuits, and constantly changing specials.

Unless your restaurant served just burgers, a burger machine with have a minimal impact on employment because the kitchen staff is still needed to prepare other food.

There is also another problem with automation. It's not flexible. The machine can only perform the tasks that it has been built to perform. So management's menu is limited by the machine; not a good idea since fast food restaurants have built their menu by trying out new menu offerings.
.

Nonsense --- there's not a nickel's difference between cooking chicken or hamburgers. One of the prime concerns when making 'menu changes' is to 1) not use anything new - just find different ways to present the same raw materials, 2) use the same delivery methods in order to avoid increased training costs, and 3) increase profitability for the same materials.

Actually, automation is extremely flexible --- it's just a matter of building it to be flexible.

A burger machine couldn't cook chicken. Some person would have to change the setting at the very least.

Really?

One person to run a machine that replaces 16 workers --- that isn't automation?

I strongly suspect that I can create a sensor (in fact, I guarantee it) that can differentiate between burger (which is red with white specks in it and weighs 4 ounces +/- 10%) and chicken (which is off-white, and has a variable weight that greatly exceeds the weight band of a hamburger). In fact, make it worth my while and I WILL build it.

And, I can guarantee that if you raise the labor rates enough, it will definitely be worth my while.

I've never been to a fast food restaurant with 16 people just cooking the food. Usually there is maybe 4. And well I haven't seen a machine that can cook more than just burgers. Link?

Only 4 when you are there - other times? 16 people out of work.

The discussion was not about what is being used today - obviously we use minimum wage workers, because it's more cost effective. The point was - raise the minimum wage enough and the machine will be built - because it is more cost effective.

Oh, by the way ----- Hamburger-making machine churns out custom burgers at industrial speeds

 

[Brain357]

How many restaurants serve nothing but hamburgers?
Fast found restaurants don't just serve hamburgers. A McDonald kitchen prepares fried and broiled chicken sandwiches, fish sandwiches, chicken nuggets, snack wraps, a multitude of special burgers, a variety of egg muffin sandwiches, pancakes, eggs, sausages, biscuits, and constantly changing specials.

Unless your restaurant served just burgers, a burger machine with have a minimal impact on employment because the kitchen staff is still needed to prepare other food.

There is also another problem with automation. It's not flexible. The machine can only perform the tasks that it has been built to perform. So management's menu is limited by the machine; not a good idea since fast food restaurants have built their menu by trying out new menu offerings.
.

Nonsense --- there's not a nickel's difference between cooking chicken or hamburgers. One of the prime concerns when making 'menu changes' is to 1) not use anything new - just find different ways to present the same raw materials, 2) use the same delivery methods in order to avoid increased training costs, and 3) increase profitability for the same materials.

Actually, automation is extremely flexible --- it's just a matter of building it to be flexible.

A burger machine couldn't cook chicken. Some person would have to change the setting at the very least.

Really?

One person to run a machine that replaces 16 workers --- that isn't automation?

I strongly suspect that I can create a sensor (in fact, I guarantee it) that can differentiate between burger (which is red with white specks in it and weighs 4 ounces +/- 10%) and chicken (which is off-white, and has a variable weight that greatly exceeds the weight band of a hamburger). In fact, make it worth my while and I WILL build it.

And, I can guarantee that if you raise the labor rates enough, it will definitely be worth my while.

I've never been to a fast food restaurant with 16 people just cooking the food. Usually there is maybe 4. And well I haven't seen a machine that can cook more than just burgers. Link?

Only 4 when you are there - other times? 16 people out of work.

The discussion was not about what is being used today - obviously we use minimum wage workers, because it's more cost effective. The point was - raise the minimum wage enough and the machine will be built - because it is more cost effective.

Oh, by the way ----- Hamburger-making machine churns out custom burgers at industrial speeds

And in the reality of now nobody is using machines to make food. I guess walmart employees will be replaced by robots. I'll never understand why the right wants people to make so little.

 

[Spare_change]

Nonsense --- there's not a nickel's difference between cooking chicken or hamburgers. One of the prime concerns when making 'menu changes' is to 1) not use anything new - just find different ways to present the same raw materials, 2) use the same delivery methods in order to avoid increased training costs, and 3) increase profitability for the same materials.

Actually, automation is extremely flexible --- it's just a matter of building it to be flexible.

A burger machine couldn't cook chicken. Some person would have to change the setting at the very least.

Really?

One person to run a machine that replaces 16 workers --- that isn't automation?

I strongly suspect that I can create a sensor (in fact, I guarantee it) that can differentiate between burger (which is red with white specks in it and weighs 4 ounces +/- 10%) and chicken (which is off-white, and has a variable weight that greatly exceeds the weight band of a hamburger). In fact, make it worth my while and I WILL build it.

And, I can guarantee that if you raise the labor rates enough, it will definitely be worth my while.

I've never been to a fast food restaurant with 16 people just cooking the food. Usually there is maybe 4. And well I haven't seen a machine that can cook more than just burgers. Link?

Only 4 when you are there - other times? 16 people out of work.

The discussion was not about what is being used today - obviously we use minimum wage workers, because it's more cost effective. The point was - raise the minimum wage enough and the machine will be built - because it is more cost effective.

Oh, by the way ----- Hamburger-making machine churns out custom burgers at industrial speeds

And in the reality of now nobody is using machines to make food. I guess walmart employees will be replaced by robots. I'll never understand why the right wants people to make so little.

It has nothing to do with 'want[ing] people to make so little' - it's about not wanting to pay more for labor than it's worth.

Today, nobody uses the hamburger-making machine because minimum wage labor is less expensive - raise the wages and see what happens.

And, I can guarantee when Walmart employees cost more than robots, they're gone.