Galt's Gulch

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

    -
  • Posted by preimert1 9 years, 7 months ago
    If a worker must provide added value to his employer (return on investment) in excess of the cost of his wages, benefits and overhead, how many burgers (less cost of goods sold) per hour on average would he/she have to sell in order for the employer to break even? This would be a good math problem for Common Core. In fact Obama should try this one if its no too advanced for him.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 7 months ago
      I like your answer - quite a good style. Hmmm.

      "If a fast food worker making $8/per hour and who makes an average of 20 burgers during that amount of time provides a profit of $1 per hour for his employer, how many burgers does that person need to make in order to support a wage of $15/per hour and still provide the same profit margin?"

      (I just made up the figures for hamburgers per hour and profit for employer, but this is reminiscent of the sorts of (dreaded) 'word problems' that one gets in high school.

      Jan
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by johnpe1 9 years, 7 months ago
        (15/8)*20=37.5 burgers per hour required, if the
        $1 per hour applies to 20 burgers ... increase the
        production and increase the pay. unfortunately,
        no increase in production is being discussed ...
        except as it might apply to an automated process. -- j

        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 7 months ago
          Automation will make labor a smaller part of making things, including burgers.

          I think many people don't see how automation is shaking things up. It's a way bigger deal than politicians dicking with the minimum wage.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by plusaf 9 years, 7 months ago
          ... and those additional 17.5 burgers (output from that one higher-paid flipper) will be purchased by whom? Folks running in off the street from their jobs now that they, too, got an Obama-Raise to $15 an hour, part of which they will sink into buying more burgers?

          Interesting economic theory. Keynes would be proud...
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by $ Your_Name_Goes_Here 9 years, 7 months ago
    And our Dear Leader, The One, Barack Hussein Obama (mmm, mmm, mmm) will apparently soon legalize 5 million people who are in the sacred boundaries of these United States and will *at best* displace the current crowd of entitled fast food workers demanding their $15 per hour minimum wage. The entitled, naturally, will then join the ranks of the takers in the form of the unemployed - which you and I as Producers are paying for.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by DrZarkov99 9 years, 7 months ago
      The "crowd" of supposed fast food worker protesters is a myth produced by unions, who pay unemployed to pretend to be employees of whatever company is being targeted. Media ignores real protests by tens of thousands for causes they don't support (like securing the border), but feverishly hypes "protests" by "dozens" of supposed legitimate employees against companies that employ many thousands as a sign that a majority favor higher minimum wage.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 7 months ago
    Those who comply, if any, will soon be former fast food purveyors. Those who go for the $10 per hour deal will find themselves in competition with sit-down restaurant chain prices. If they compensate by having fewer employees, the "fast" in fast food may go away. No matter what, it's a lose-lose situation for everyone.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 7 months ago
    The robots revolution is coming anyway. We will have robots doing all of the repetitive industrial, service, and delivery (self driving cars) tasks. The reasons are stated in the article, to whit:

    Don't belong to any unions
    • Doesn't complain about working overtime
    • Never smokes weed during its break
    • Doesn't spit in the customer's food
    • Doesn't sue its employer for on-the-job injuries
    • Never protests for higher wages
    • Doesn't need time off for vacations
    • Never steals food from the company
    • Doesn't sexually harass the female workers

    Even if the workers go back to their current jobs without a raise, the above reasons are compelling and cost effective.

    Jan
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 7 months ago
      It's already here. Most of what I do for my job is get production lines that are heavily robotics, functioning and running smoother and faster.

      In addition to your "Don'ts" they also don't:
      Need bathroom breaks
      Need lunch breaks
      Slow down during the day
      Do things differently under the same conditions
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 7 months ago
        Yes, you are right, Robbie, industrial robots are now probably the norm. But I do not look behind the scenes and see my car being assembled by robots. When I go to a Carls Jr, I see the fast food workers doing their jobs. It will be a big change for me to see robots in their places, or to see robots delivering FedEx parcels to the office.

        One of the things that most needs to be put on the list of 'why robots' is that "robots never have life crises". I cannot say how many of these I have nursed various employees through (and had a few myself). You can loose a lot of work when a top notch employee has a personal crisis and his work efficiency drops 90%.

        Ahhh! Robots!

        Jan
        (In a creative business that will not be easily robotized. We may help _make_ some, though...)
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 7 months ago
          Don't be so sure. A lot of "creativity" is really just joining two (or more) things in a new way.

          I wonder what our society is going to be like when productivity gets so high that one person can produce all that needs to be produced? That's obviously an exaggeration, but not by much. There are complete factories where they don't turn the lights on, since the robot cameras can "see" in the dark and there are virtually no humans in the plant, other than to go and fix a robot.

          Can we all just provide non-life sustaining services to one another? Can we all be singers and poets? Is there "value" to that?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 7 months ago
            This is an important question, which a friend of mine clarified by differentiating 'value' from 'product'. I currently make a product - medical software. Let us say that making this product has been taken over by robots. Let us further hypothesize that I live in a society wherein I was supported by the products of robots and had no need to earn a living. The what would I produce that was of value?

            Lots of stuff. I am interested in genetic paleontology, I hand spin fibers and make them into things, yes - I write poetry.

            I think that robots can make me incapable of adding value to mine environment by mass production of a product, but they would not prevent me from extending human knowledge (a venue where a creative mind will surpass a robotic mind for a long time), doing historical research, or hand-crafting something.

            That world does not sound bad. But it does tend to blur the distinction between the producers and the parasites.

            Jan
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 7 months ago
              I agree that those things have "value", but they do not create "wealth," at least not on an economic scale. Thus, we contribute some of our wealth to those who provide us value, but do not themselves contribute to increasing the wealth of the overall economy.

              My query is; what happens when all wealth is created by non-humans, and all humans consume that wealth indiscriminately?
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by johnpe1 9 years, 7 months ago
              Jan, you intelligent poet! (lame allusion to SNL)

              "Dead Poets' Society" helped -- if I make things,
              get paid, and buy your poetry, or just contribute to
              your living, I would consider you a producer.

              I love music, and buy recordings -- yet musicians
              don't make food, clothing or shelter ... they make
              the enjoyment of life better. producers, all.

              question::: do the producers decide which others
              are not parasites, but instead are producers?
              or are there graduations within the producer
              category -- from fundamental to ethereal? -- j

              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by starguy 9 years, 7 months ago
    A little more that 2 years, and Barry Hussein will be able to golf all the time.

    Because he sure isn't doing a very good job with this "president" thing, is he?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 9 years, 7 months ago
    Semi-related...

    talked to a personnel associate where I work (we all know where that is...)

    My store is constantly trying to hire more people
    Biggest obstacle? Getting potential employees who can pass both the drug screen and background check...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo