Presidential Race 2016

[Gunther]

15 minutes ago, Lihu said:

Not really, robots cost a lot. Just a 6 axis arm and controller costs $18,000 for one of the cheapest ones. We're actively working on one for a lot less, but they require maintenance. We'd be replacing a few minimum wage workers with a higher paid one.

But like you said, I'm probably thinking backwards on this one.

These companies amortize them so the cost is fixed over that time.  They're definitely cheaper and easier to manage than an entry-level min wage worker in the lon run.  ROI is surprisingly fast and you don't have to worry about someone adding an ingredient to the special sauce.

[Lihu]

Just now, saevel25 said:

One Kiosk costs  about $140,000 at Mcdonalds. McDonalds is open from 5 am to 9 PM. Lets make it simple and say 2-8 hour shifts. Lets say this one kiosk takes up two job positions since there are two shifts. 

I've read that it costs the employer about 40% more than the wage the employee gets to employ that person. So a $15/hour means the true cost to the employer is $21/hour. 

At $21/hour, with 16 hours of work a day, over an entire year would cost the employer $122,305 to pay those two employees. McDonalds will be saving money in just over 1 years time. 

 

Not really, but I think we all prefer to have more skilled labor to maintain robots than to take orders and flip burgers...

[Chilli Dipper]

47 minutes ago, Lihu said:

I'd never thought I would see the day that robots would be cheaper than minimum wage workers, but one could argue that supposedly well meaning governmental decisions catalyzed companies to innovate once again and workers suffer once again.

There's another conundrum about Trump's economic platform. He is all about bringing back blue-collar jobs, but those jobs weren't all just sent overseas: many thousands of them were made redundant by advanced technology and automation.

Here, we have leaders in the service industry arguing they can't justify paying its employees a living wage when robots can do it cheaper. Humans have already replaced by robots in so many parts of the manufacturing process; how can we expect the expansion of American manufacturing to result in prosperity for the middle class? Won't the manufacturing industry make the same argument about automation that the service industry is making now?

[Lihu]

5 minutes ago, Chilli Dipper said:

There's another conundrum about Trump's economic platform. He is all about bringing back blue-collar jobs, but those jobs weren't all just sent overseas: many thousands of them were made redundant by advanced technology and automation.

Here, we have leaders in the service industry arguing they can't justify paying its employees a living wage when robots can do it cheaper. Humans have already replaced by robots in so many parts of the manufacturing process; how can we expect the expansion of American manufacturing to result in prosperity for the middle class? Won't the manufacturing industry make the same argument about automation that the service industry is making now?

Yes, but more skilled labor comes back here thanks to technology. Socks, for example, are cheaper to make by machine in USA. The maintenance crew is more skilled than a loom operator.

I'd argue all day for automation, but not over raw cost. Not in the near future, anyway. Maybe in 5 years or more?

[Chilli Dipper]

1 minute ago, Lihu said:

Yes, but more skilled labor comes back here thanks to technology. Socks, for example, are cheaper to make by machine in USA. The maintenance crew is more skilled than a loom operator.

I'd argue all day for automation, but not over raw cost. Not in the near future, anyway. Maybe in 5 years?

Then you need an educated workforce that is prepared to meet the demands of a high-tech economy. That matches up with the argument both Democratic candidates make on education; I don't know where Trump stands, because that's an issue he never brings up.

[newtogolf]

23 minutes ago, Chilli Dipper said:

Then you need an educated workforce that is prepared to meet the demands of a high-tech economy. That matches up with the argument both Democratic candidates make on education; I don't know where Trump stands, because that's an issue he never brings up.

Right and it's up to the individual (not taxpayers) to get the education and training required to make themselves marketable to prospective employers.  No one is entitled to a job, they have to earn it.  

[Lihu]

35 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

Right and it's up to the individual (not taxpayers) to get the education and training required to make themselves marketable to prospective employers.  No one is entitled to a job, they have to earn it.  

Yes, having the taxpayers pay for "education" just perpetuates the crappy public education we have today.

The issue with public schools just like any other government organization is that they are not fully accountable for the success of their students. Instead, they prefer to waste resources to make children conform to their idea of "normal".

 

57 minutes ago, Chilli Dipper said:

Then you need an educated workforce that is prepared to meet the demands of a high-tech economy. That matches up with the argument both Democratic candidates make on education; I don't know where Trump stands, because that's an issue he never brings up.

Unfortunately, the examples used by government educators noting the success of all our education programs represent less than 5% of the total population. Most if not all of the successful kids supplement their education with some other form of learning or tutoring run by private companies who are accountable for the success of their students. If they do not produce, they go out of business.

[Chilli Dipper]

13 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

Right and it's up to the individual (not taxpayers) to get the education and training required to make themselves marketable to prospective employers.  No one is entitled to a job, they have to earn it.  

I won't argue with that, but it's not a actionable policy.

If Burger King says they don't want to pay six people $25,000 a year to work the counter when they can pay three people $40,000 a year to maintain the computerized service network, that's a perfectly reasonable business decision. Where are the people in line to make $25,000 going to find the opportunities to attain the skills required for all of those $40,000 jobs for which Burger King is now desperate to find qualified candidates? Regardless of whether it's the government's responsibility to provide career-training programs or not, there needs to be policy in place to address the demands of the marketplace. Burger King isn't going to start an IT school.

[Lihu]

8 minutes ago, Chilli Dipper said:

I won't argue with that, but it's not a actionable policy.

If Burger King says they don't want to pay six people $25,000 a year to work the counter when they can pay three people $40,000 a year to maintain the computerized service network, that's a perfectly reasonable business decision. Where are the people in line to make $25,000 going to find the opportunities to attain the skills required for all of those $40,000 jobs for which Burger King is now desperate to find qualified candidates? Regardless of whether it's the government's responsibility to provide career-training programs or not,

This is not the purpose of the government. I agree with supporting families in need over wasting billions of dollars on stuff we don't need, but at the same time, the safety net we made is far too big.

It's up to the government to not stifle companies from growing so they can hire and train people.

 

Quote

there needs to be policy in place to address the demands of the marketplace. Burger King isn't going to start an IT school.

No, but they would train their employees to operate and maintain their own machines. It's in their best interest as with all companies to train their personnel to maximize performance.

 

[newtogolf]

4 minutes ago, Chilli Dipper said:

I won't argue with that, but it's not a actionable policy.

If Burger King says they don't want to pay six people $25,000 a year to work the counter when they can pay three people $40,000 a year to maintain the computerized service network, that's a perfectly reasonable business decision. Where are the people in line to make $25,000 going to find the opportunities to attain the skills required for all of those $40,000 jobs for which Burger King is now desperate to find qualified candidates? Regardless of whether it's the government's responsibility to provide career-training programs or not, there needs to be policy in place to address the demands of the marketplace. Burger King isn't going to start an IT school.

No one is going to get an education that enables them to maintain the BK kiosks, they just need the background education in computers and electronics, BK will have to send them for specific training on their particular kiosks.  

The issue I see is Obama and democrats want to move unskilled labor jobs from jobs high school and college kids and recently senior citizens worked to earn some extra spending money to career jobs and that's a recipe for failure.  Businesses can't afford to pay people $15 to take orders, stock shelves, etc.  Those aren't jobs you take to support your family long term, they are stop gap jobs at best. 

We need to stop handing people fish and force them to learn how to fish for themselves through the education we already provide.  We need to break the cycle in low income neighborhoods where kids have poor role models and aren't encouraged to get the most out of their education.  

No one is holding them back but themselves and maybe their family.  When every kid starts first grade they have an opportunity to achieve amazing things in life, our education system has be modified to reach these kids at a young age and not just teach them math and spelling but how to reach for greatness and the importance of pride in ones accomplishments.   The only way to get people out of poverty is to show the youth that there is a way out and that hard work in school is the first step. Sports can't be seen as the only way out of the ghetto it has to be education and the quicker our government gets that mentality changed the better we will all be for it. 

[Chilli Dipper]

9 minutes ago, Lihu said:

No, but they would train their employees to operate and maintain their own machines. It's in their best interest as with all companies to train their personnel to maximize performance.

 

Companies, especially small businesses, cannot be expected to pay for their own post-secondary institutions. A large corporation like Burger King probably has a scholarship system that reimburses its employees for the cost of, say, an associate degree in computer science or business administration at their local community college, but if they automate their entry-level service positions and that associate degree is now a prerequisite for being hired, what good is that?

[Lihu]

10 minutes ago, Chilli Dipper said:

Companies, especially small businesses, cannot be expected to pay for their own post-secondary institutions. A large corporation like Burger King probably has a scholarship system that reimburses its employees for the cost of, say, an associate degree in computer science or business administration at their local community college, but if they automate their entry-level service positions and that associate degree is now a prerequisite for being hired, what good is that?

A better educated public because children learn early on that they need to have at least a decent high school or college education just to survive?

16 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

No one is holding them back but themselves and maybe their family.  When every kid starts first grade they have an opportunity to achieve amazing things in life, our education system has be modified to reach these kids at a young age and not just teach them math and spelling but how to reach for greatness and the importance of pride in ones accomplishments.   The only way to get people out of poverty is to show the youth that there is a way out and that hard work in school is the first step. Sports can't be seen as the only way out of the ghetto it has to be education and the quicker our government gets that mentality changed the better we will all be for it. 

Yes!

[Gunther]

5 minutes ago, Chilli Dipper said:

Companies, especially small businesses, cannot be expected to pay for their own post-secondary institutions. A large corporation like Burger King probably has a scholarship system that reimburses its employees for the cost of, say, an associate degree in computer science or business administration at their local community college, but if they automate their entry-level service positions and that associate degree is now a prerequisite for being hired, what good is that?

Then they get an entry-level job at Quiznos, or Walmart, or a warehouse while they attend Devry at night and earn the certificate that gets them the $40K job at BK.  I fail to see any role for the government in this.

[newtogolf]

16 minutes ago, Chilli Dipper said:

Companies, especially small businesses, cannot be expected to pay for their own post-secondary institutions. A large corporation like Burger King probably has a scholarship system that reimburses its employees for the cost of, say, an associate degree in computer science or business administration at their local community college, but if they automate their entry-level service positions and that associate degree is now a prerequisite for being hired, what good is that?

Our education system is out dated for our current job market.  

We spend too much time teaching things that have no real application in the majority of the business world.  High School needs to be more like college, this idea that we provide kids with a general education and let them specialize in college doesn't work.  Kids that know they want to go to college for computer science shouldn't have to waste 25% of their school day taking History and art classes.  

The college boards (SAT & ACT) focus on math, english (reading and grammar) and science, that's what our schools need to teach.  If kids want to take a history class, music or art, offer it but it should no longer be required.  

I also think kids in the US schools need to stop these summer vacations and go year round like other better educated countries. 

 

[jamo]

3 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

Our education system is out dated for our current job market.  

We spend too much time teaching things that have no real application in the majority of the business world.  High School needs to be more like college, this idea that we provide kids with a general education and let them specialize in college doesn't work.  Kids that know they want to go to college for computer science shouldn't have to waste 25% of their school day taking History and art classes.  

The college boards (SAT & ACT) focus on math, english (reading and grammar) and science, that's what our schools need to teach.  If kids want to take a history class, music or art, offer it but it should no longer be required.  

I also think kids in the US need to stop these summer vacations and go year round like other countries. 

 

Are music and art classes required at most high schools? They weren't at mine.

[Lihu]

4 minutes ago, jamo said:

Are music and art classes required at most high schools? They weren't at mine.

There are core requirements that the UC schools enforce, and I think most schools in CA try to comply with them so their kids have a chance to get in.

http://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/counselors/freshman/minimum-requirements/subject-requirement/

Not sure about other states. . .

[Chilli Dipper]

I wouldn't say that arts education is unnecessary for someone who wants to go to college for computer science. Steve Jobs (who dropped out of college, but then audited every course he could walk into) said the most influential class he sat in on was about calligraphy, and that it led him to developing user-friendly graphic interfaces for Apple computers. The arts encourage students to develop critical thinking skills.

We're getting way off topic, but if it breaks the cycle of circular arguments, I don't mind.

[Ernest Jones]

2 hours ago, newtogolf said:

Our education system is out dated for our current job market.  

We spend too much time teaching things that have no real application in the majority of the business world.  High School needs to be more like college, this idea that we provide kids with a general education and let them specialize in college doesn't work.  Kids that know they want to go to college for computer science shouldn't have to waste 25% of their school day taking History and art classes.  

The college boards (SAT & ACT) focus on math, english (reading and grammar) and science, that's what our schools need to teach.  If kids want to take a history class, music or art, offer it but it should no longer be required.  

I also think kids in the US schools need to stop these summer vacations and go year round like other better educated countries. 

 

If the goal of the education system is to create worker-bots then I'd say your right. I for one, want are children to learn more than how to be a good worker-bot. Art, history, music, these are all things that play an important role in creating well rounded adults and ensure that we maintain our culture and civilization.  Let's not turn the world into a factory. We should expect more from life.