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

[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.
.

When people cost more than machines, and machines can do a better job than people, machines will do the job. It used to be that a man could make a career bolting or welding car parts together on an assembly line. Not any more. It used to be that a woman could make a career out of making clothes by hand. Not any more. It used to be that a computer programmer could make a career out of writing file I/O and screen painting routines. Not any more.

I agree that when wage cost are more than machines and those machines can do a better job, those machines will replace the workers. However, there is more to it than that. What if wage costs are much lower than the cost of machines that can do the job better and produce a better product. Will the business pay more for the machines that delivery better products? Maybe or maybe not. In China and third world countries, cheap labor is producing tons of junk that last only long enough to sell because it's more profitable than using expensive machines.

If the cost of labor is exceedingly high, say $25/hr. The business must buy the burger machine to stay in business and the public will have to put up with the crappy burgers because they just can't or won't pay $20 for a good burger.

My point is neither a very high or very low minimum wage is desirable.

Actually, the machine can make burgers as good, if not better, than a human can. It can start with fresh ground custom blends of meat, shape them perfectly every time, and cook them precisely every time.

Can it also collect trays, take out the trash, mop the floor, clean restrooms, police the parking lot, etc etc? That machine would work great for a walk up type restaurant with no dining in option, otherwise you still need employees.

You're right --- instead of 10 employees, the store would only need 3. That is how it works.

And one day we will all be replaced by robots unless we all take pay cuts except for the 1%. I get it.

 

[Spare_change]

Why don't we raise it to 20 dollars, 25, 30?

I think you know answer. Minimum wages increases are typically in a range of 10% to 20%. The primary reasons we raise minimum wage are reductions in labor turnover; improvements in organizational efficiency; reductions in wages of higher earners ('wage compression'); and small price increases. There have been a number of studies that conclude that moderate increases in minimum wage do not effect job growth. There can be some layoffs of course, but minimum wage puts more money in the hands of people that spend ever dime of it which can offset any negative effect.

Although there is no evidence that moderate minimum wage increases have any negative effect on the economy, there is no evidence that they have any positive effect.

On one hand you admit there are layoffs. Than in the same breath you suggest there are no effects on job growth(I presume you mean employment). Then you go on to say there is no evidence of positive effects. You need to get your story straight here. Perhaps you should reevaluate holding a position you say produces layoffs and has no measured positive effect.

Layoffs(unemployment) certainly seems like an negative effect to me, but perhaps we have differing views on this matter.

The CBO projects approximately 500,000 to 1,000,000 jobs will be lost raising minimum wage to $10.10 by 2016, that isn't even touching the $15 dollar an hour issue. But this is basic economics, when you create price controls, that is, a price floor, in this case, a wage floor, you create a surplus(in this case, a surplus of workers not employable at the above market price set by the government). So were not even just talking about the unemployment we see created, but the potential jobs we don't see created.

The Effects of a Minimum-Wage Increase on Employment and Family Income Congressional Budget Office

If we ARE going to have a minimum wage, attach it to CPI. But really, at the end of the day, minimum wage is bad economic policy that harms more than it hurts. A $15 dollar an hour wage would harm the very people it purports to help, by making many of them unemployable. They will just hire a more skilled and productive laborer at that wage and prevent the lower rung of the labor market from entering to begin with.

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage will cause people to lose their jobs.

Not true: A review of 64 studies on minimum wage increases found no discernable effect on employment. Additionally, more than 600 economists, seven of them Nobel Prize winners in economics, have signed onto a letter in support of raising the minimum wage to $10.10 by 2016.

Minimum Wage Mythbusters - U.S. Department of Labor

I guess they don't view hundreds of thousands losing there job as a discernable effect. I disagree.

Min wage has increased many times. It has not ever led to increased unemployment.

How many times has minimum wage increased 60-90%? Your argument holds no validity.

 

[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.
.

When people cost more than machines, and machines can do a better job than people, machines will do the job. It used to be that a man could make a career bolting or welding car parts together on an assembly line. Not any more. It used to be that a woman could make a career out of making clothes by hand. Not any more. It used to be that a computer programmer could make a career out of writing file I/O and screen painting routines. Not any more.

I agree that when wage cost are more than machines and those machines can do a better job, those machines will replace the workers. However, there is more to it than that. What if wage costs are much lower than the cost of machines that can do the job better and produce a better product. Will the business pay more for the machines that delivery better products? Maybe or maybe not. In China and third world countries, cheap labor is producing tons of junk that last only long enough to sell because it's more profitable than using expensive machines.

If the cost of labor is exceedingly high, say $25/hr. The business must buy the burger machine to stay in business and the public will have to put up with the crappy burgers because they just can't or won't pay $20 for a good burger.

My point is neither a very high or very low minimum wage is desirable.

Actually, the machine can make burgers as good, if not better, than a human can. It can start with fresh ground custom blends of meat, shape them perfectly every time, and cook them precisely every time.

All that and nobody is using it.

Dollars and cents, my friend, dollars and cents.

Yes a business needs employed customers.

 

[Spare_change]

When people cost more than machines, and machines can do a better job than people, machines will do the job. It used to be that a man could make a career bolting or welding car parts together on an assembly line. Not any more. It used to be that a woman could make a career out of making clothes by hand. Not any more. It used to be that a computer programmer could make a career out of writing file I/O and screen painting routines. Not any more.

I agree that when wage cost are more than machines and those machines can do a better job, those machines will replace the workers. However, there is more to it than that. What if wage costs are much lower than the cost of machines that can do the job better and produce a better product. Will the business pay more for the machines that delivery better products? Maybe or maybe not. In China and third world countries, cheap labor is producing tons of junk that last only long enough to sell because it's more profitable than using expensive machines.

If the cost of labor is exceedingly high, say $25/hr. The business must buy the burger machine to stay in business and the public will have to put up with the crappy burgers because they just can't or won't pay $20 for a good burger.

My point is neither a very high or very low minimum wage is desirable.

Actually, the machine can make burgers as good, if not better, than a human can. It can start with fresh ground custom blends of meat, shape them perfectly every time, and cook them precisely every time.

Can it also collect trays, take out the trash, mop the floor, clean restrooms, police the parking lot, etc etc? That machine would work great for a walk up type restaurant with no dining in option, otherwise you still need employees.

You're right --- instead of 10 employees, the store would only need 3. That is how it works.

And one day we will all be replaced by robots unless we all take pay cuts except for the 1%. I get it.

Bingo.

 

[Brain357]

I think you know answer. Minimum wages increases are typically in a range of 10% to 20%. The primary reasons we raise minimum wage are reductions in labor turnover; improvements in organizational efficiency; reductions in wages of higher earners ('wage compression'); and small price increases. There have been a number of studies that conclude that moderate increases in minimum wage do not effect job growth. There can be some layoffs of course, but minimum wage puts more money in the hands of people that spend ever dime of it which can offset any negative effect.

Although there is no evidence that moderate minimum wage increases have any negative effect on the economy, there is no evidence that they have any positive effect.

On one hand you admit there are layoffs. Than in the same breath you suggest there are no effects on job growth(I presume you mean employment). Then you go on to say there is no evidence of positive effects. You need to get your story straight here. Perhaps you should reevaluate holding a position you say produces layoffs and has no measured positive effect.

Layoffs(unemployment) certainly seems like an negative effect to me, but perhaps we have differing views on this matter.

The CBO projects approximately 500,000 to 1,000,000 jobs will be lost raising minimum wage to $10.10 by 2016, that isn't even touching the $15 dollar an hour issue. But this is basic economics, when you create price controls, that is, a price floor, in this case, a wage floor, you create a surplus(in this case, a surplus of workers not employable at the above market price set by the government). So were not even just talking about the unemployment we see created, but the potential jobs we don't see created.

The Effects of a Minimum-Wage Increase on Employment and Family Income Congressional Budget Office

If we ARE going to have a minimum wage, attach it to CPI. But really, at the end of the day, minimum wage is bad economic policy that harms more than it hurts. A $15 dollar an hour wage would harm the very people it purports to help, by making many of them unemployable. They will just hire a more skilled and productive laborer at that wage and prevent the lower rung of the labor market from entering to begin with.

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage will cause people to lose their jobs.

Not true: A review of 64 studies on minimum wage increases found no discernable effect on employment. Additionally, more than 600 economists, seven of them Nobel Prize winners in economics, have signed onto a letter in support of raising the minimum wage to $10.10 by 2016.

Minimum Wage Mythbusters - U.S. Department of Labor

I guess they don't view hundreds of thousands losing there job as a discernable effect. I disagree.

Min wage has increased many times. It has not ever led to increased unemployment.

How many times has minimum wage increased 60-90%? Your argument holds no validity.

We both know it won't be increasing that much.

 

[Steinlight]

On one hand you admit there are layoffs. Than in the same breath you suggest there are no effects on job growth(I presume you mean employment). Then you go on to say there is no evidence of positive effects. You need to get your story straight here. Perhaps you should reevaluate holding a position you say produces layoffs and has no measured positive effect.

Layoffs(unemployment) certainly seems like an negative effect to me, but perhaps we have differing views on this matter.

The CBO projects approximately 500,000 to 1,000,000 jobs will be lost raising minimum wage to $10.10 by 2016, that isn't even touching the $15 dollar an hour issue. But this is basic economics, when you create price controls, that is, a price floor, in this case, a wage floor, you create a surplus(in this case, a surplus of workers not employable at the above market price set by the government). So were not even just talking about the unemployment we see created, but the potential jobs we don't see created.

The Effects of a Minimum-Wage Increase on Employment and Family Income Congressional Budget Office

If we ARE going to have a minimum wage, attach it to CPI. But really, at the end of the day, minimum wage is bad economic policy that harms more than it hurts. A $15 dollar an hour wage would harm the very people it purports to help, by making many of them unemployable. They will just hire a more skilled and productive laborer at that wage and prevent the lower rung of the labor market from entering to begin with.

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage will cause people to lose their jobs.

Not true: A review of 64 studies on minimum wage increases found no discernable effect on employment. Additionally, more than 600 economists, seven of them Nobel Prize winners in economics, have signed onto a letter in support of raising the minimum wage to $10.10 by 2016.

Minimum Wage Mythbusters - U.S. Department of Labor

I guess they don't view hundreds of thousands losing there job as a discernable effect. I disagree.

Min wage has increased many times. It has not ever led to increased unemployment.

That's not true. And it certainly prevents unemployment from decreasing.

Yes it is true.

No it isn't.

 

[Brain357]

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage will cause people to lose their jobs.

Not true: A review of 64 studies on minimum wage increases found no discernable effect on employment. Additionally, more than 600 economists, seven of them Nobel Prize winners in economics, have signed onto a letter in support of raising the minimum wage to $10.10 by 2016.

Minimum Wage Mythbusters - U.S. Department of Labor

I guess they don't view hundreds of thousands losing there job as a discernable effect. I disagree.

Min wage has increased many times. It has not ever led to increased unemployment.

That's not true. And it certainly prevents unemployment from decreasing.

Yes it is true.

No it isn't.

According to the department of labor it is.

 

[Steinlight]

There is no question as to whether it's possible. The question is whether a machine can be built at a reasonable price to provide burgers to the restaurant's specification, prepare the other foods the kitchen help must prepare, and be flexible enough to prepare other items the restaurant may decide to add to their menu.

The cost comes in when you start talking about precision.
The cost of precision when your talking about cutting tomatoes is a joke.

I would say the cost would be pretty high for a machine that would cook everything the kitchen prepares and any items management might want to add to the menu plus meet all customer requests.

Again ....you dont know shit.
Let me know when you know you know shit about automation.

The way you talk I don't understand why anyone is still hiring people to make food. I guess it's because in reality the machines you claim can be made so easily don't exist. You still have provided no links to support your wild claims.

Damn --- wake up!!!

Nobody said these machines were in use today. What they are saying is that there will come a point in time when the cost of human labor exceeds the cost of automation. We've shown the technology exists - it's a simple matter of dollars and cents.

When that happens, machines are in -- and people are out. It's simple economics.

There are plenty of machines in use today.

I don't know if most of you are shut ins, but in most grocery stores and pharmacies, they have moved to automated checkouts now. Fast foot restaurants and some sit down restaurants have moved to automated ordering systems because capital costs are now in many instances lower than labor costs.

 

[Steinlight]

I guess they don't view hundreds of thousands losing there job as a discernable effect. I disagree.

Min wage has increased many times. It has not ever led to increased unemployment.

That's not true. And it certainly prevents unemployment from decreasing.

Yes it is true.

No it isn't.

According to the department of labor it is.

The department of labor never said minimum wage doesn't cause unemployment.

 

[Brain357]

The cost comes in when you start talking about precision.
The cost of precision when your talking about cutting tomatoes is a joke.

I would say the cost would be pretty high for a machine that would cook everything the kitchen prepares and any items management might want to add to the menu plus meet all customer requests.

Again ....you dont know shit.
Let me know when you know you know shit about automation.

The way you talk I don't understand why anyone is still hiring people to make food. I guess it's because in reality the machines you claim can be made so easily don't exist. You still have provided no links to support your wild claims.

Damn --- wake up!!!

Nobody said these machines were in use today. What they are saying is that there will come a point in time when the cost of human labor exceeds the cost of automation. We've shown the technology exists - it's a simple matter of dollars and cents.

When that happens, machines are in -- and people are out. It's simple economics.

There are plenty of machines in use today.

I don't know if most of you are shut ins, but in most grocery stores and pharmacies, they have moved to automated checkouts now. Fast foot restaurants and some sit down restaurants have moved to automated ordering systems because capital costs are now in many instances lower than labor costs.

And unemployment going down.

 

[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?

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.
.

When people cost more than machines, and machines can do a better job than people, machines will do the job. It used to be that a man could make a career bolting or welding car parts together on an assembly line. Not any more. It used to be that a woman could make a career out of making clothes by hand. Not any more. It used to be that a computer programmer could make a career out of writing file I/O and screen painting routines. Not any more.

I agree that when wage cost are more than machines and those machines can do a better job, those machines will replace the workers. However, there is more to it than that. What if wage costs are much lower than the cost of machines that can do the job better and produce a better product. Will the business pay more for the machines that delivery better products? Maybe or maybe not. In China and third world countries, cheap labor is producing tons of junk that last only long enough to sell because it's more profitable than using expensive machines.

If the cost of labor is exceedingly high, say $25/hr. The business must buy the burger machine to stay in business and the public will have to put up with the crappy burgers because they just can't or won't pay $20 for a good burger.

My point is neither a very high or very low minimum wage is desirable.

Actually, the machine can make burgers as good, if not better, than a human can. It can start with fresh ground custom blends of meat, shape them perfectly every time, and cook them precisely every time.

Burgers as good, if not better than human made? According to who? Momentum Machines, a 5 person start-up who has a pro-type and has yet to sell any machines but hopes to open a robot run restaurant. I suspect that after Congress finally acts on minimum wage, we hear the last of burger machines until the next fight over minimum wage.

Restaurants will automate but not with burger making machine. Most of the large fast food franchisers are looking at or testing customer order taking systems. Chili's will begin a roll-out of a tablet ordering system. McDonald's has been testing a kiosk ordering system. Also many restaurants are now accepting orders via smartphone apps. These are all tested technological that will reduce cost and will not effect the creation or delivery of the product.

These systems are not a response to a proposed minimum wage increase. They will be implemented regardless. Minimum wage increases may speed up the automation process but it's going happen with or without minimum wages increases.

A "Computer World" article predicts 3 out of 5 jobs will be replaced by automation by 2025. However, that doesn't mean high unemployment because automation creates jobs as well as destroying them in 3 ways:

1. The company that makes, markets, installs, and maintains the automated system must hire new employees.
2. The business that uses the automation can expand their frontiers of production which requires hiring more people.
3. The general public saves money on the reduced cost of the product or service. This saved money can then be spent on the rest of the economy.

 

[Spare_change]

On one hand you admit there are layoffs. Than in the same breath you suggest there are no effects on job growth(I presume you mean employment). Then you go on to say there is no evidence of positive effects. You need to get your story straight here. Perhaps you should reevaluate holding a position you say produces layoffs and has no measured positive effect.

Layoffs(unemployment) certainly seems like an negative effect to me, but perhaps we have differing views on this matter.

The CBO projects approximately 500,000 to 1,000,000 jobs will be lost raising minimum wage to $10.10 by 2016, that isn't even touching the $15 dollar an hour issue. But this is basic economics, when you create price controls, that is, a price floor, in this case, a wage floor, you create a surplus(in this case, a surplus of workers not employable at the above market price set by the government). So were not even just talking about the unemployment we see created, but the potential jobs we don't see created.

The Effects of a Minimum-Wage Increase on Employment and Family Income Congressional Budget Office

If we ARE going to have a minimum wage, attach it to CPI. But really, at the end of the day, minimum wage is bad economic policy that harms more than it hurts. A $15 dollar an hour wage would harm the very people it purports to help, by making many of them unemployable. They will just hire a more skilled and productive laborer at that wage and prevent the lower rung of the labor market from entering to begin with.

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage will cause people to lose their jobs.

Not true: A review of 64 studies on minimum wage increases found no discernable effect on employment. Additionally, more than 600 economists, seven of them Nobel Prize winners in economics, have signed onto a letter in support of raising the minimum wage to $10.10 by 2016.

Minimum Wage Mythbusters - U.S. Department of Labor

I guess they don't view hundreds of thousands losing there job as a discernable effect. I disagree.

Min wage has increased many times. It has not ever led to increased unemployment.

How many times has minimum wage increased 60-90%? Your argument holds no validity.

We both know it won't be increasing that much.

We do? Maybe you haven't been paying attention .... Seattle, $15/hr ... San Francisco, $15/hr ... etc., etc., etc.

 

[Spare_change]

I would say the cost would be pretty high for a machine that would cook everything the kitchen prepares and any items management might want to add to the menu plus meet all customer requests.

Again ....you dont know shit.
Let me know when you know you know shit about automation.

The way you talk I don't understand why anyone is still hiring people to make food. I guess it's because in reality the machines you claim can be made so easily don't exist. You still have provided no links to support your wild claims.

Damn --- wake up!!!

Nobody said these machines were in use today. What they are saying is that there will come a point in time when the cost of human labor exceeds the cost of automation. We've shown the technology exists - it's a simple matter of dollars and cents.

When that happens, machines are in -- and people are out. It's simple economics.

There are plenty of machines in use today.

I don't know if most of you are shut ins, but in most grocery stores and pharmacies, they have moved to automated checkouts now. Fast foot restaurants and some sit down restaurants have moved to automated ordering systems because capital costs are now in many instances lower than labor costs.

And unemployment going down.

You asked the question wrong .... how many work hours have been created?

We all know that the government has changed the way they calculate the unemployment rate, in order to hide the truth. So, how many of these supposed jobs are full time jobs? What is the average wage per hour of these newly created jobs?

You can't accept the numbers prima facie ... you need to look at the reality that created the numbers.

 

[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.
.

When people cost more than machines, and machines can do a better job than people, machines will do the job. It used to be that a man could make a career bolting or welding car parts together on an assembly line. Not any more. It used to be that a woman could make a career out of making clothes by hand. Not any more. It used to be that a computer programmer could make a career out of writing file I/O and screen painting routines. Not any more.

I agree that when wage cost are more than machines and those machines can do a better job, those machines will replace the workers. However, there is more to it than that. What if wage costs are much lower than the cost of machines that can do the job better and produce a better product. Will the business pay more for the machines that delivery better products? Maybe or maybe not. In China and third world countries, cheap labor is producing tons of junk that last only long enough to sell because it's more profitable than using expensive machines.

If the cost of labor is exceedingly high, say $25/hr. The business must buy the burger machine to stay in business and the public will have to put up with the crappy burgers because they just can't or won't pay $20 for a good burger.

My point is neither a very high or very low minimum wage is desirable.

Actually, the machine can make burgers as good, if not better, than a human can. It can start with fresh ground custom blends of meat, shape them perfectly every time, and cook them precisely every time.

Burgers as good, if not better than human made? According to who? Momentum Machines, a 5 person start-up who has a pro-type and has yet to sell any machines but hopes to open a robot run restaurant. I suspect that after Congress finally acts on minimum wage, we hear the last of burger machines until the next fight over minimum wage.

Restaurants will automate but not with burger making machine. Most of the large fast food franchisers are looking at or testing customer order taking systems. Chili's will begin a roll-out of a tablet ordering system. McDonald's has been testing a kiosk ordering system. Also many restaurants are now accepting orders via smartphone apps. These are all tested technological that will reduce cost and will not effect the creation or delivery of the product.

These systems are not a response to a proposed minimum wage increase. They will be implemented regardless. Minimum wage increases may speed up the automation process but it's going happen with or without minimum wages increases.

A "Computer World" article predicts 3 out of 5 jobs will be replaced by automation by 2025. However, that doesn't mean high unemployment because automation creates jobs as well as destroying them in 3 ways:

1. The company that makes, markets, installs, and maintains the automated system must hire new employees.
2. The business that uses the automation can expand their frontiers of production which requires hiring more people.
3. The general public saves money on the reduced cost of the product or service. This saved money can then be spent on the rest of the economy.

You're 'whistling past the graveyard', my friend ....

 

[Brain357]

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage will cause people to lose their jobs.

Not true: A review of 64 studies on minimum wage increases found no discernable effect on employment. Additionally, more than 600 economists, seven of them Nobel Prize winners in economics, have signed onto a letter in support of raising the minimum wage to $10.10 by 2016.

Minimum Wage Mythbusters - U.S. Department of Labor

I guess they don't view hundreds of thousands losing there job as a discernable effect. I disagree.

Min wage has increased many times. It has not ever led to increased unemployment.

How many times has minimum wage increased 60-90%? Your argument holds no validity.

We both know it won't be increasing that much.

We do? Maybe you haven't been paying attention .... Seattle, $15/hr ... San Francisco, $15/hr ... etc., etc., etc.

Both are not going up from the federal min wage. Both will take years to reach $15. The fed min wage will not be increased very much if at all.

 

[Brain357]

Again ....you dont know shit.
Let me know when you know you know shit about automation.

The way you talk I don't understand why anyone is still hiring people to make food. I guess it's because in reality the machines you claim can be made so easily don't exist. You still have provided no links to support your wild claims.

Damn --- wake up!!!

Nobody said these machines were in use today. What they are saying is that there will come a point in time when the cost of human labor exceeds the cost of automation. We've shown the technology exists - it's a simple matter of dollars and cents.

When that happens, machines are in -- and people are out. It's simple economics.

There are plenty of machines in use today.

I don't know if most of you are shut ins, but in most grocery stores and pharmacies, they have moved to automated checkouts now. Fast foot restaurants and some sit down restaurants have moved to automated ordering systems because capital costs are now in many instances lower than labor costs.

And unemployment going down.

You asked the question wrong .... how many work hours have been created?

We all know that the government has changed the way they calculate the unemployment rate, in order to hide the truth. So, how many of these supposed jobs are full time jobs? What is the average wage per hour of these newly created jobs?

You can't accept the numbers prima facie ... you need to look at the reality that created the numbers.

Sorry but your claims have been proven false. Despite increased machine use unemployment is going down.

 

[Spare_change]

I guess they don't view hundreds of thousands losing there job as a discernable effect. I disagree.

Min wage has increased many times. It has not ever led to increased unemployment.

How many times has minimum wage increased 60-90%? Your argument holds no validity.

We both know it won't be increasing that much.

We do? Maybe you haven't been paying attention .... Seattle, $15/hr ... San Francisco, $15/hr ... etc., etc., etc.

Both are not going up from the federal min wage. Both will take years to reach $15. The fed min wage will not be increased very much if at all.

I think you're still missing the point ....

It's not a question of implementation. The schedule, frankly, is irrelevant. It's simple dollars and cents ... over a 5 year period, it will almost double. The overall impact is the same, whether it is 3 years or 10 years. You look at it and say it won't impact that many people - but you forget about all those 'higher than minimum wage' workers you leapfrogged. Their wages go up, as well. That is a new paradigm, and we have no historical proof one way or the other.

Understand - I sincerely hope it works out, and there's no impact. But, frankly, I don't believe that will be the case. The math just doesn't support it. 40.28% of American workers earn $10 or less. That means, if you raise the minimum wage just $3, you have increased the cost of labor nationwide a minimum of 12%.(30% increase for 40% of workers). I can't believe that the consumer will absorb that.

 

[Spare_change]

The way you talk I don't understand why anyone is still hiring people to make food. I guess it's because in reality the machines you claim can be made so easily don't exist. You still have provided no links to support your wild claims.

Damn --- wake up!!!

Nobody said these machines were in use today. What they are saying is that there will come a point in time when the cost of human labor exceeds the cost of automation. We've shown the technology exists - it's a simple matter of dollars and cents.

When that happens, machines are in -- and people are out. It's simple economics.

There are plenty of machines in use today.

I don't know if most of you are shut ins, but in most grocery stores and pharmacies, they have moved to automated checkouts now. Fast foot restaurants and some sit down restaurants have moved to automated ordering systems because capital costs are now in many instances lower than labor costs.

And unemployment going down.

You asked the question wrong .... how many work hours have been created?

We all know that the government has changed the way they calculate the unemployment rate, in order to hide the truth. So, how many of these supposed jobs are full time jobs? What is the average wage per hour of these newly created jobs?

You can't accept the numbers prima facie ... you need to look at the reality that created the numbers.

Sorry but your claims have been proven false. Despite increased machine use unemployment is going down.

You need to revisit this "unemployment is going down' mantra ... it is, simply, false. You are accepting manipulated data put forth by those who are best served by the manipulation.

If unemployment is going down, why is our labor force participation rate the lowest in 75 years? What is the average $/hour for our workers? Why is the average hours/worker trending negative? Counting a part-time job as if it is a full time job is, simply, misleading the public.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Damn --- wake up!!!

Nobody said these machines were in use today. What they are saying is that there will come a point in time when the cost of human labor exceeds the cost of automation. We've shown the technology exists - it's a simple matter of dollars and cents.

When that happens, machines are in -- and people are out. It's simple economics.

There are plenty of machines in use today.

I don't know if most of you are shut ins, but in most grocery stores and pharmacies, they have moved to automated checkouts now. Fast foot restaurants and some sit down restaurants have moved to automated ordering systems because capital costs are now in many instances lower than labor costs.

And unemployment going down.

You asked the question wrong .... how many work hours have been created?

We all know that the government has changed the way they calculate the unemployment rate, in order to hide the truth. So, how many of these supposed jobs are full time jobs? What is the average wage per hour of these newly created jobs?

You can't accept the numbers prima facie ... you need to look at the reality that created the numbers.

Sorry but your claims have been proven false. Despite increased machine use unemployment is going down.

You need to revisit this "unemployment is going down' mantra ... it is, simply, false. You are accepting manipulated data put forth by those who are best served by the manipulation.

If employment is going down, why is our labor force participation rate the lowest in 75 years? What is the average $/hour for our workers? What is the average hours/worker trending negative? Counting a part-time job as if it is a full time job is, simply, misleading the public.

All Brain does is rehash the same crap over and over.

 

[Brain357]

There are plenty of machines in use today.

I don't know if most of you are shut ins, but in most grocery stores and pharmacies, they have moved to automated checkouts now. Fast foot restaurants and some sit down restaurants have moved to automated ordering systems because capital costs are now in many instances lower than labor costs.

And unemployment going down.

You asked the question wrong .... how many work hours have been created?

We all know that the government has changed the way they calculate the unemployment rate, in order to hide the truth. So, how many of these supposed jobs are full time jobs? What is the average wage per hour of these newly created jobs?

You can't accept the numbers prima facie ... you need to look at the reality that created the numbers.

Sorry but your claims have been proven false. Despite increased machine use unemployment is going down.

You need to revisit this "unemployment is going down' mantra ... it is, simply, false. You are accepting manipulated data put forth by those who are best served by the manipulation.

If employment is going down, why is our labor force participation rate the lowest in 75 years? What is the average $/hour for our workers? What is the average hours/worker trending negative? Counting a part-time job as if it is a full time job is, simply, misleading the public.

All Brain does is rehash the same crap over and over.

History doesn't change and the facts are the facts.