10-02-2018, 01:46 PM
(10-02-2018, 12:20 PM)Benton Wrote: Because they still have to have some employee.
It's like self check at Walmart. Yeah, they can cut out X amount of jobs, but you will never be able to completely automate a retail environment. It would be fun to watch the looting for the company that tries... maybe they could have the robot stockers hang sings on the shelves that said "Sorry for the inconvenience, the parent company wanted to save money and the item you're looking for was recently stolen by someone without a job."
I'm not a fan of the BEZOS though. Carrots work better than sticks. But, ultimately, something needs to be done. It's ridiculous that taxpayers are forced to keep companies profit margins high.
Well Amazon is kind of already doing this with their convenience stores. They use a system of cameras and sensors to basically bill people for anything they take. You don't completely automate store but you greatly reduce staffing. If I only need two people to run a store I'd normally need five for, I can pay the two 50% more and keep two workers worth of salary back.
The question going forward will become "are more jobs at lower pay better than less jobs at higher pay?" It's being tested out in many industries and it's why a lot of people in tech think there will need to be a universal income to offset the amount of jobs that will continue to be lost to technology advancements going forward. I mean heck don't let this 15$/hr thing with Amazon fool you, they are currently working to automate a lot of their sorting and distribution centers. This to me signals they are getting close to having a working model that will allow them to reduce part of their work force.
