Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 02:22pm PT
|
Bringing back jobs should be interesting since 80% of the jobs were lost to automation. I suppose Trump could eradicate robots?
You guys bring this on yourselves. You demand a "living wage" of $15 per hour nationwide, and you have the temerity to believe that companies are going to pay it and keep their labor-force exactly as it is today. But companies are NOT going to pay that keeping everything else the same, because MOST companies simply don't have the wiggle room to go to that sort of entry-level wage. So, they ARE going to be fiscally-motivated to cut that labor-force and automate. McDonalds is already heading that direction, and you have only your own demands to blame.
Individual McDonalds restaurants average 5% profit. That is NO wiggle-room! So, yes, they are certainly going to go to kiosks for ordering instead of paying entry-level workers (who should not even imagine that he/she SHOULD be "supporting a family" on an entry-level wage!) $15 per hour.
You want globalism and "free trade," but you won't swallow the FACT that other nations employ either CHEAP labor (against which our workers cannot compete) or heavy automation. The Japanese beat us at the automation game, producing better, longer-lasting, and cheaper-to-manufacture vehicles. Detroit's response? Labor unions demanding more, more, MORE until they (repeatedly) BURIED the US auto industry, requiring (repeated) bail-outs from the taxpayers. What did Detroit finally do that HAS been minimally successful? Massive cuts in labor, more automation, and hiring MORE expensive engineers to design competitive products that can be built more efficiently, cheaper, with LESS LABOR.
Until the "masterminds" can gain absolute, totalitarian control over the entire economy, "socializing" EVERY aspect of how labor fits into production fits into growth fits into profit fits into demand, etc., well, you'll just have to live with the fact that you CANNOT control the facts of the market. One FACT is that as labor becomes more expensive, companies will simply become more and more motivated to use less and less of it. And yet YOU want globalism without the outsourcing to obtain cheaper labor!
You want all the advantages of a protectionistic labor market, while you expect US companies to compete heads-up in the global market (which includes the global labor market) without access to the same resources (including labor) that the companies from other nations enjoy. As always, you can't have it both ways.
You can't blame "Republicans" for the necessary effects of YOUR desired policies. And the vast, vast majority of "evil, profit-hungry corporations" you love to hate are really small businesses earning less than $500,000 per year, with five or fewer employees, and such businesses MUST cut entry-level positions when they become as expensive as you want to make them.
Really, though, all of this is sidebar distractions. "Why it happened," in the simplest terms, is two-fold: 1) The left's polished turd couldn't even beat TRUMP; 2) more and more people in this nation are realizing the simple truth, which is that the left must be stopped.
Most haven't tumbled to the fact that the right must also be stopped. But that will be another story.
|
|
Fossil climber
Trad climber
Atlin, B. C.
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 02:44pm PT
|
A good read on the general decay of western civilization and the collapse of democracy is "Empire of Illusion; The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle", by Chris Hedges. Enlightening, if not very uplifting.
Glad I have lived when I did.
|
|
nah000
climber
no/w/here
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 03:53pm PT
|
mb1:
first you seem to be arguing that increasing costs of labour is the primary cause of increased automation ["you have only your own demands to blame"]. while this is of course one of the causes, you must agree that profit incentive is going to increase automation even if labour costs are no issue. the industrial revolution didn't happen because of the "damn unions" but rather was because of [healthy] capitalist competition/greed...
based on your above logic, the late 1800s and early 1900s laws mandating an 8hr work day, a 12yr old minimum work age, 40hr work weeks, etc and etc were the cause of industrialization, rather than the actual truth being that all of those worker protections happened because of the "excesses" created by industrialization.
we are at a similar fork in the road. automation is going to happen not because of increased labour costs, or whether we like it or don't like it: it is going to happen because capitalism is a system of competition and whether a worker costs a company $5 or $500 per hour, the potentials of automation in many fields means that even third world contractors with no protection are going to be undercut by automation.
the quesion is what do we do?
sounds like according to you the answer is to get rid of those pesky minimum wages, maximum work weeks and minimum age restrictions. aka: the "market" will sort it out...
you seem to be arguing with your statement "you'll just have to live with the fact that you CANNOT control the facts of the market" that the forty hour work week, the safety regulations placed on business and minimum age laws are all an illusion.
kind of unbelievable after the hundreds of years of the "market" repeatedly proving that as a general rule it doesn't give any kind of fUck regarding collective or individual protections or securities, unless regulated.
i do however agree with you that the late 20th century belief that countries could increase free trade [while not enforcing any kind of labour protections in those other countries] while at the same time increasing labour protections at home, was a strange kind of madness...
almost as mad as your perceived belief that it is labour demands that are the primary "cause" of automation...
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 04:25pm PT
|
You are quite straw-manning my arguments.
you seem to be arguing with your statement "you'll just have to live with the fact that you CANNOT control the facts of the market" that the forty hour work week, the safety regulations placed on business and minimum age laws are all an illusion.
What I'm arguing is that there are EFFECTS to all causes, and the left wants to introduce significant causes while pretending that there MUST BE no baleful effects. It's impossible for us to know what the "primary" or "most significant" causes are (either from the perspective of the left, right, or libertarian); these things are FAR to complication to "know" with any degree of reliability, from ANY perspective. But to argue that demanding minimum-wage increases MUST have NO baleful effects (or that all such effects are "morally wrong" in some way) is just ridiculous.
In FACT, McDonalds has flatly stated that the threat of radical wage increases is THE reason it has investigated kiosks for ordering, and that it WILL roll these out in DIRECT response to the push toward much higher minimum wages. Had the left not pushed and pushed on this point, it is likely that McDonalds would have left well-enough-alone. But it was presumed that Hillary would win, that the left would have its way, and McDonalds IS going to try to survive on razor-thin margins (margins which the left pretends are not reality, when they are).
So, I am not arguing that wages are the ONLY or even the primary cause motivating automation. Obviously that's not the case. However, there is ample evidence to support the case that wages are NOT in some vacuum where the left can just have its way with them in the absence of profound and (from its perspective) significantly baleful effects. It's a balancing act, and when you make entry-level wages more expensive than automating those "jobs," you WILL push automation into those "jobs" where it otherwise would not have entered or would have been significantly delayed.
we are at a similar fork in the road. automation is going to happen not because of increased labour costs
As stated, THAT is the fantasy of the left: the idea that "wages don't really matter. We can (and MUST) raise wages, and businesses will just 'absorb' the 'pinch.'" But they DO, and businesses (90% of which are small businesses) CANNOT just "absorb" the pinch of increased wages. I can tell you first-hand that wages are our number-one expense (by a HUGE margin), and you cannot "simply" increase wages BY FIAT, say, 20%, without radically affecting our business decisions and those of countless other businesses that produce 90% of the jobs in this nation!
THAT disconnect in perspective, along with the disconnect about the effect of these trade treaties and globalism writ-large ARE huge in the minds of people that increasingly feel: The left must be stopped.
Hillary stupidly felt that she could alienate the entire rust-belt and manufacturing demographic with impunity. THAT is the arrogance of the leftist-elites. And it was a major factor in costing the left this election.
To the extent that the left can't accept these REALITIES, to that same extent it will render itself increasingly irrelevant. That's actually fine by me. So, why am I arguing this? It's futile and self-defeating for people like me to argue against the leftist fantasy-land.
Better for the left to continue to live in its fantasy land. You know, the one evidenced by threads just like this one. The left doesn't even want to HEAR, much less try to process, ANY other perspective but its own. Instead, it simply attacks in vilest terms those that don't agree. THAT strategy has no future, which is just the outcome I would prefer for the left. So....
Carry on!
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 04:42pm PT
|
Yeah, like I'm going to waste 10 minutes of my life reading that pretentious WOT.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 04:51pm PT
|
Literacy , (particularly historical, cultural and political literacy) has intentionally been eradicated by "progressive" educators.
If by "progressive educators" you mean the likes of the Texas Board of Education, I fully agree with you.
|
|
nah000
climber
no/w/here
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 04:53pm PT
|
mb1:
we seem to talk past each other... and the strange thing is i suspect we disagree on less than you think...
and you seem to be arguing with yourself not me... in the most recent post you write "It's impossible for us to know what the "primary" or "most significant" causes are (either from the perspective of the left, right, or libertarian); these things are FAR to complication to "know" with any degree of reliability, from ANY perspective." whereas the previous post you write "McDonalds is already heading that direction, and you have only your own demands to blame."
so i'm guessing your point is that it is only with regards to mcdonalds that it is the left's demands that are to blame?
because my point mostly agrees with your most recent point: automation is complex and there are many things driving it... i certainly wouldn't argue, even if mcdonalds claimed it, that the only reason automation was happening [even in a particular sector] was due to increased labour pressures [which is what you seem to be arguing at least with regards to mcdonalds]
basically, if you think you have to argue with me that minimum wage increases won't have effects you're mistaken... that is because i agree with you... however you are going to have to argue that even just with regards to the case of mcdonalds that it is only [and "only" is your exact word, not mine] the demands of the left that are to blame... even if you use mcdonalds claims as your evidence.
as far as your second diatribe, i have absolutely no idea how your partial quote of me saying "we are at a similar fork in the road. automation is going to happen not because of increased labour costs" leads to your saying "As stated, THAT is the fantasy of the left: the idea that "wages don't really matter.""
i said in my post above that wages have a cause and effect ["while (the increased costs of labour are) of course one of the causes"]. this is different than saying automation is going to happen regardless. you don't seem to understand the order of magnitude difference automation [like industrialization] is having on the efficiency of our economy. that order of magnitude difference is why i am arguing automation will happen regardless... i certainly did not say nor am arguing it will happen regardless because "wages don't really matter" and therefore have zero effect.
you claim you can't have a discussion because i'm making strawmen... could be... if i am, it's inadvertent as i'm doing my best to use your precise words to understand what you are trying to say. i'd appreciate the same in return...
|
|
Jon Beck
Trad climber
Oceanside
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 04:54pm PT
|
Literacy , (particularly historical, cultural and political literacy) has intentionally been eradicated by "progressive" educators.
Says the right wing as they reject science and deny global warming
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 05:54pm PT
|
could be... if i am, it's inadvertent as i'm doing my best to use your precise words to understand what you are trying to say. i'd appreciate the same in return...
I think that we both feel the same way.
Perhaps one problem is that I take you to be usually arguing "from the left," despite the fact that we might well agree on more than we disagree. And I am often taken to be arguing "from the right," although I am just about as disgusted with the right as the left.
What I most can't abide is how both "sides" are arrogantly determined to control that which is uncontrollable, yet they both arrogantly congratulate themselves for the damage they do, while blaming the other "side" for any PERCEIVED damage that people complain about.
Both "sides" are factious power-seekers, and both will stop at nothing to gain power and then USE that power to attempt to control people in ways that are wrong and impossible. Most recently the left seems (to me and many others) to be more odious in this respect than the right. However, in fairness, BOTH sides put up turds as candidates. The left has been more odious in polishing their turd, and the left has been more (ridiculously) shocked and angry that their turd couldn't even beat Trump.
Seriously, I prefer that the left (as evidenced by the likes of Dirtbag) should LIVE in their relentlessly-arrogant echo-chamber. Because I so firmly believe that the left must be stopped, I'm happy to see the left exhibit such amazing cluelessness. FAR be it from me to disturb their self-confirming perspectives! This is a fact I just tumbled to in the last hour, the idea that it is better for everybody if the left is not willing to admit the real answers to this thread's OP question. FAR better for everybody if the left continues to "blame" the "other half" for being "racist, misogynist, uneducated idiots." Yup, THAT is the "real" answer to the OP question.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 06:18pm PT
|
Oh, no, you must mean "never before" except for how the left relentlessly (even on this very site) attacked EVERYBODY that wasn't up for gobbling down their polished turd of a candidate, calling such people the foulest names and employing the most vicious rhetoric. "Never before" that? Is that what you mean? And now that you're getting BACK a tiny shred of what you dished out (in such arrogant certainty of your inevitable win), NOW it's "contemptible, indeed." It is to laugh.
I see why your name is "mad". Sorry to challenge your reading comprehension. As far as I know, no one on the TACO represented any campaign. I'm talking about the principles, and their controlled operations. I've never seen a candidate mock handicapped people. I've never seen a candidate mock a woman, just because she is a woman. I've never seen the courting of anti-semites, anti-blacks, anti-immigrants. Not like this time.
Continue thinking it is funny. makes me think of the hilarity you would think of dropping a climber on belay, to "teach them a lesson".
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 06:20pm PT
|
MB, why don't we let the resident Bolshies explain to us why the Eurozone is failing on social AND economic fronts? Surely it is because greedy American rich and corporations are oppressing them?
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 06:26pm PT
|
CANNOT just "absorb" the pinch of increased wages. I can tell you first-hand that wages are our number-one expense (by a HUGE margin), and you cannot "simply" increase wages BY FIAT, say, 20%, without radically affecting our business decisions and those of countless other businesses that produce 90% of the jobs in this nation!
Here again, your argument gets diluted to nothing by the lies. ARE YOU REALLY ASSERTING THAT 90% of the workers in America make minimum wage?????
Really?
No wonder you have no margins in your business, you don't even understand what you do!
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 06:27pm PT
|
MB, why don't we let the resident Bolshies explain to us why the Eurozone is failing on social AND economic fronts? Surely it is because greedy American rich and corporations are oppressing them?
Good point, Reilly. But, seriously, I have come to realize that the absolute best thing for everybody is for the left (as evidenced here) to live in its echo-chamber, always believing that ONLY it "knows" and "sees" and has the ONLY "high moral ground."
While they waste their time (and space on this thread) bashing on Trump, they continue to fail. And failing is just what we want them to do.
Even the last post, again bashing on HOW horrible Trump is compared to every other candidate in history, cannot accept that the left's polished turd could not even beat THAT.
So, I say: Let them live in their echo chamber. It really is best for everybody that the left continues in the exact rhetoric we see represented right here in the crucible that is the Taco Stand. Let's leave them to it.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 06:28pm PT
|
Actually, Reilly, why don't you explain how we are now all going to be brought together by the "march of the Billionaires".
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 06:31pm PT
|
Even the last post, again bashing on HOW horrible Trump is compared to every other candidate in history, cannot accept that the left's polished turd could not even beat THAT.
I certainly accept that.
I accept that the dems had a floor that they would not descend below. Trump would.
I accept that the mainstream Repubs had a floor that they would not descend below. Trump would.
It's like being proud that you've found a contractor that is willing to torture children, and then being proud that they actually did, and the other side did not---and now claim the other side were the lesser ones because of it.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 06:38pm PT
|
Well, Ken, that wasn't my question, not that y'all ever give an honest answer to a question you don't or can't answer. I would be happy to answer your question if it was an honest question rather than a bit of rhetorical nonsense. If you must, since nobody has really seen The Donald's economic plan, I will make your day by saying I am quite skeptical that we will see any significant number of manufacturing jobs repatriated. However, since we are essentially at full employment I fail to see the need for that, especially in view that new manufacturing jobs will not be very high paying as moving parts to and from a robot does not require a highly educated worker.
|
|
Jon Beck
Trad climber
Oceanside
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 06:44pm PT
|
moving parts to and from a robot does not require a highly educated worker.
worker shmerker, we gots another robot for that job
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 07:00pm PT
|
Still hatin' the players, not the game....
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 07:04pm PT
|
Still waiting for a Bolshie economist to splain why the Eurozone, aka The Hallowed Zone, is disintegrating.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 - 07:07pm PT
|
ARE YOU REALLY ASSERTING THAT 90% of the workers in America make minimum wage?????... No wonder you have no margins in your business, you don't even understand what you do!
ROFL
Uh, no, actually, I am NOT asserting what you say.
Seriously, it's clear that most people on the left (if this thread is any indication) are simply not willing to think about any other perspectives than their own.
Example: My saying that 90% of businesses in the US are "small business," and that most jobs are produced by "small business," does NOT correlate in ANY way with the claim that 90% of "small business" jobs are minimum wage jobs.
Let's say that I have five employees (as does the average "small business"). Of the five, one is a minimum wage worker, say, a "receptionist" sort of position. Let's say that the average "small business" operates on a 20% profit margin (that's what the owners are able to "take" and pay taxes on as "net income" after all "overhead" is paid). Most don't do quite that well, but it's a reasonable average.
Now, you virtually double my minimum-wage-worker's wages from about $16,000 per year to about $30,000 per year. But, you have done more damage to the business than that! Wage-related expenses are a percentage of wages, not a flat amount. So, you've not only increased my costs for this worker in terms of wages, but you've added an average of 12-15% of that wage in increased wage-related expenses. So, the real "hit" is not a differential of $14,000 per year. It's a real hit (at 13% wage-related expenses) of about $15,820.
Now, let's say that an average annual revenue is $300,000 per year. 20% of that is 60,000. So, you've just reduced the operating profit from about $60,000 per year to about $44,180.
Now, the likes of YOU are probably thinking: "Oh, see. The owners HAVE the money. They just want to pocket it instead of paying it to the workers that deserve it!" But that mode of thinking makes multiple mistakes:
1) WHO "deserves" the money? Did the minimum-wage worker design a product, market it, analyze the market and beat out the competition to bring the product to market at a competitive price and carve out enough market share to even grow a company? Does the minimum wage worker put in 60-hour weeks to make up the shortfall between what needs to get done and what the "workers" can be paid to get it done? No. The contribution of the minimum-wage worker is, well, minimum!
2) The fact of the above can be illustrated by the fact that most businesses facing what I've just described WILL find some way to either eliminate that minimum-wage job or reduces its hours to half-time or less. Most businesses WILL seek automation of some sort. Such businesses will seek a fully-automated call-center that eliminates all need for a "receptionist" sort of position. And that reflects a LOT of businesses that are simply not going to pay $30,000 per year just to have a live-human voice on the phone, transfer calls, etc. Unskilled labor is ALWAYS vulnerable to automation, and beyond a pretty low dollar amount, automation is going to appear VERY attractive wherever it can be implemented.
3) The "profit" that must be declared as such on paper is not REAL! Unless your business is a C-Corp (not viable unless you are doing at least $1.5 million in revenues, which is then NOT a "small business"), you MAY NOT "reinvest" that profit, even on paper! You MUST pay taxes on it as INCOME, as LLCs and S-Corps are "pass-through" entities. We, for example, every year pay income taxes on money we never actually SEE in our pockets! We reinvest our "profits" into growing the company, as do the owners of almost all "small businesses." And THAT is investment that the minimum-wage worker has no interest in making! The irony is that such reinvestment is what MAKES a viable and growing company, which is the necessary condition of the minimum-wage worker even having a job at all. So, the reinvestment of this on-paper "profit" is precisely what the minimum-wage worker NEEDS the owners to do, while at the same time the minimum-wage worker is DEMANDING that such "profit" be diminished ever-more.
4) The "margin" most "small businesses" operate on leaves precious little "wiggle room" to cover unforeseen expenses and market downturns. In our case, we try to maintain a "backstop" account that can entirely keep the company afloat for at least six months. THAT sort of responsible "investment" is what keeps the minimum-wage worker IN a job, even while the market has its ups and downs. Reduce that "backstop" only at your peril! And there are increased insurance costs, the costs of everything from bandwidth to advertising. And it goes on an on. The "margin" is always sucked up by more and more demands.
And there is more. Much more. But the FACT remains that if you basically double what it costs a small business to keep it's one minimum-wage worker, you are really telling the small business that it can no longer afford it's one minimum-wage worker.
Now, you tell me: Is it better for the worker to HAVE 50% of what you think is "morally required" or 100% of nothing? For MOST small businesses that have minimum-wage workers, that's what you are facing. If you would rather have the 50% of something, but you still demand the doubling of wages, then you are STILL going to get only 50%, because if you double wages, most businesses are going to cut hours and make up the difference via automation or just not get all of that minimum-wage work done.
Of course, it's easy for you non-business-owners to speculate all you want about how things "should" be juggled to "make" businesses hand the minimum-wage worker double the money. But you are not facing the reality of actually running a business. There simply ISN'T the "extra" money to go around, and most businesses are running on a very tight margin (that is necessary in almost all fields, just to be competitive).
Too many on the left live like money literally grows on trees. In the REAL world of small business, which provide 90% of jobs in the US, the proportion of wage-related expenses is BY FAR the most significant expense businesses have. Businesses are necessarily ALWAYS looking to reduce costs, and ANY job that can be done cheaper or in automated fashion IS going to be done cheaper (often by reducing hours) or by automation.
So, raising wages simply IS a significant motivator for a business to reduce hours and/or automate. Of course, you can ignore the above and just pursue your agenda. Good luck with that. The tide is turning against you. Except for your few liberal strongholds, MOST of this nation is realizing that your agenda is unsustainable.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!