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

$15 minimum wage and robotics

$15 minimum wage increase robotics?

  • Need more info

    Votes: 2 14.3%

  • Yes, robots will replace $15 an hour workers

    Votes: 10 71.4%

  • No, robots won't replace workers

    Votes: 2 14.3%
  • Total voters
    14
  • Poll closed .
swing_voter

swing_voter

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2019
Messages
13,042
Reaction score
8,463
Location
'Murica
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
The new burger chef makes $3 an hour and never goes home. (It’s a robot)

In a test kitchen in a corner building in downtown Pasadena, Flippy the robot grabbed a fryer basket full of chicken fingers, plunged it into hot oil — its sensors told it exactly how hot — then lifted, drained and dumped maximally tender tenders into a waiting hopper.

The product of decades of research in robotics and machine learning, Flippy represents a synthesis of motors, sensors, chips and processing power that wasn’t possible until recently.

Now, Flippy’s success — and the success of the company that built it, Miso Robotics — depends on simple math and a controversial hypothesis of how robots can transform the service economy. Costing less to employ than a minimum-wage worker, Flippy is built to slip in right alongside humans on the fast-food line.

Meet the burger-flipping robots that may take over fast food kitchens - Los Angeles Times
Click to expand...



Will Bernie's $15 an hour minimum wage create an increase in robotic workers?
 
swing_voter said:
Will Bernie's $15 an hour minimum wage create an increase in robotic workers?
Click to expand...

Of course it will. Remember that employees cost much more than just the wages they receive. The employer must pay worker comp, FICA, unemployment taxes, plus any other benefits that go with the job.
 
The day they create an AI controlled robotic CEO is the day the wealthy realize they are being screwed over also.
 
aociswundumho said:
Of course it will. Remember that employees cost much more than just the wages they receive. The employer must pay worker comp, FICA, unemployment taxes, plus any other benefits that go with the job.
Click to expand...

Not if they 1099 them...or use a temp agency.
 
swing_voter said:
Will Bernie's $15 an hour minimum wage create an increase in robotic workers?
Click to expand...

Sure...probably...depends upon the industry.

On the other hand, if the cost savings are great enough robotic workers will increase even if the minimum wage is $10.

The larger danger of any minimum wage is that simple economics shows that fixing price points interfere with supply/demand/price equilibrium. Something always loses with such interference.
 
They're going to replace as many of us as they can with automation even if we agree to work for half price. I watch it developing every day in a highly educated and skilled workplace. While I don't think jacking the minimum wage way up is going to solve everything, automation is coming regardless. Employees are an annoying expense to upper management, and they will shed us like dirty napkins as soon as they can get away with it.
 
luddites-promo-295918.jpg
 
Helix said:
They're going to replace as many of us as they can with automation even if we agree to work for half price. I watch it developing every day in a highly educated and skilled workplace. While I don't think jacking the minimum wage way up is going to solve everything, automation is coming regardless. Employees are an annoying expense to upper management, and they will shed us like dirty napkins as soon as they can get away with it.
Click to expand...

They will surely program the robotic workers to buy their corporation's products..
 
swing_voter said:
Will Bernie's $15 an hour minimum wage create an increase in robotic workers?
Click to expand...

it might hasten it but company's are inevitably going to fire people when they can replace them with machines that will save them money and we can only expect cheaper and more capable technology
 
Moonglow said:
They will surely program the robotic workers to buy their corporation's products..
Click to expand...

This is the problem I see that less pay and jobs will, ultimately, hurt these employer's sales.
 
aociswundumho said:
Of course it will. Remember that employees cost much more than just the wages they receive. The employer must pay worker comp, FICA, unemployment taxes, plus any other benefits that go with the job.
Click to expand...

Not really "of course." Robots are reliable, can work 24/7, never take sick days, never need vacation, don't quit for better jobs or because they don't like the crappy hours and pay or the asshole shift manager, etc. So when the technology gets here to reliably replace humans, that's going to happen. Pay levels might speed the process in the very short term, but that's it.

Or we can put it another way. If we do NOT raise the minimum wage, will that stop the adoption of robots in jobs where robots can reliably do the task? That answer is obviously - of course not.
 
Moonglow said:
Not if they 1099 them...or use a temp agency.
Click to expand...

You can't 1099 employees anymore. The IRS has been cracking down on that for years.

If you use a temp agency, then you have to pay much higher wages. The temp agency has to make money too.
 
Think about this way. Let's say I could completely automate healthcare and reduce it to one magic pill that cost $1 and cures whatever ails you and guarantees, if you want, to be able to live to the age of 140 years. If this were real life, naturally I'd tell you to run away from that snake oil salesman of course. Of course if it were true, you'd take the pill and you'd enjoy virtually cost-free fantastic health. I'd buy that for a dollar, wouldn't you?

If that happened tomorrow, all the doctors, nurses, pharmaceutical companies, etc wouldn't be able to sell you their health care products and services.

But, here's the tradeoff, currently all of that money that we spend on health care doesn't disappear. All of that money can now be spent on other things that we want. Vacations, restaurants, cars....maybe a bigger house, maybe a pool for your backyard.

At the end of the day we all value our jobs but economically speaking a job is actually the COST of doing something and for a society to become increasingly wealthy it actually needs to reduce the cost of doing essentially anything really.

Right now the US has a per capita GDP of $59,000

You want to complain about poverty? Health care? Education?

Your underlying gripe is under the broader umbrella of scarcity.

Anything else is frankly a bunch of neo-Luddism.

Automation is the ultimate solution to scarcity.
 
Last edited:
swing_voter said:
Will Bernie's $15 an hour minimum wage create an increase in robotic workers?
Click to expand...
In technical terms, 'yes'. The price of labor is one of the input parameters in deciding to adopt technology. However it will be relatively minor, in relation to the technological adaptation already occurring.
 
aociswundumho said:
You can't 1099 employees anymore. The IRS has been cracking down on that for years.

If you use a temp agency, then you have to pay much higher wages. The temp agency has to make money too.
Click to expand...

Temp agencies have exploded in my state for the simple reason hiring people through them is cheaper than doing it directly. Lots of it has to do with benefits, health, paid vacation and sick days, retirement plans, and temp workers don't get them.
 
JasperL said:
Temp agencies have exploded in my state for the simple reason hiring people through them is cheaper than doing it directly. Lots of it has to do with benefits, health, paid vacation and sick days, retirement plans, and temp workers don't get them.
Click to expand...



Another big thing is that if you hire someone, there might be a problem when you go to lay them off or fire them. With temps there's no of that.
 
Moonglow said:
They will surely program the robotic workers to buy their corporation's products..
Click to expand...

A scenario in which a lot of people just aren't needed in the workforce could get ugly.
 
JasperL said:
Temp agencies have exploded in my state
Click to expand...

Probably because the Trump economy has created so many jobs.

for the simple reason hiring people through them is cheaper than doing it directly.
Click to expand...

It depends, it's not always cheaper. This statement tells me that you've never had any employees.
 
aociswundumho said:
Probably because the Trump economy has created so many jobs.
Click to expand...

No, that trend began long before Trump. Do some research.

It depends, it's not always cheaper. This statement tells me that you've never had any employees.
Click to expand...

So you think that employers use temp agencies because it costs them MORE than hiring directly? If you've had employees, I don't see how your business survived if you think using a more expensive long term option is a good business strategy. :confused:
 
aociswundumho said:
Of course it will. Remember that employees cost much more than just the wages they receive. The employer must pay worker comp, FICA, unemployment taxes, plus any other benefits that go with the job.
Click to expand...

Unemployment taxes for people who are employed? That is not possible.

Under Bernie's health care plan, no employers will provide any private insurance. All taxpayers will be able to keep the same health care wherever they work or even if they don't have jobs.

You have no argument against for robots replacing people.
 
aociswundumho said:
Of course it will. Remember that employees cost much more than just the wages they receive. The employer must pay worker comp, FICA, unemployment taxes, plus any other benefits that go with the job.
Click to expand...
The usual rule of thumb is wages are only half the labor costs.
 
JasperL said:
So you think that employers use temp agencies because it costs them MORE than hiring directly?
Click to expand...

There are costs and benefits to hiring temps and for hiring the employees directly. Which is better depends on the situation.

If you've had employees, I don't see how your business survived if you think using a more expensive long term option is a good business strategy. :confused:
Click to expand...

Well if what you're implying were true, then all employees would be temps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom