|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On October 30 2018 02:35 Slaughter wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2018 02:19 ticklishmusic wrote:
if my neighborhood kroger is any indication, no more than 50% of the checkout aisles are actually staffed with cashiers at any time. actually, even costco at peak hours doesn't ever have every lane staffed and they don't have a self checkout option either - maybe at holidays when it's absolutely insane they fill up, though. When I worked at Kroger they basically understaff the checkout department then just forced workers from other departments to also train as cashiers and call them up to work registers when they got overwhelmed (which was common). It pissed everyone off.
If you describe the same thing in different terms, it makes complete sense. The amount of cashiers required fluctuates quite a bit, and there is really no point in having more cashiers working the register than necessary to deal with the customers. It is a lot better if you have people who can jump in when you need more cashiers then the complete minimum that sits there fulltime, and have those people do other things that are not time-critical while you don't need as many cashiers, rather than having a bunch of cashiers sitting around doing nothing if the demand is not as high.
|
On October 30 2018 03:03 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2018 02:35 Slaughter wrote:On October 30 2018 02:19 ticklishmusic wrote:
if my neighborhood kroger is any indication, no more than 50% of the checkout aisles are actually staffed with cashiers at any time. actually, even costco at peak hours doesn't ever have every lane staffed and they don't have a self checkout option either - maybe at holidays when it's absolutely insane they fill up, though. When I worked at Kroger they basically understaff the checkout department then just forced workers from other departments to also train as cashiers and call them up to work registers when they got overwhelmed (which was common). It pissed everyone off. If you describe the same thing in different terms, it makes complete sense. The amount of cashiers required fluctuates quite a bit, and there is really no point in having more cashiers working the register than necessary to deal with the customers. It is a lot better if you have people who can jump in when you need more cashiers then the complete minimum that sits there fulltime, and have those people do other things that are not time-critical while you don't need as many cashiers, rather than having a bunch of cashiers sitting around doing nothing if the demand is not as high.
Except cashiers also had plenty of things to do when they weren't manning the register. However, they paid them significantly more then other departments. Cashiers didn't like it because it meant less hours for them and every other department didn't like it because it put them behind because they had to drop whatever they were doing and go up. On very bad days the store looked like shit and was under stocked because the people doing it spent 70% of their entire shift up front. Especially when you take into consideration that they often understaffed the other departments as well.
|
Amazon is forcing the other stores to follow suit. It is the logical progression and I'm here for it.
|
Eliminating jobs like cashiering is a huge positive for humanity. We should always be finding ways to better utilize humans. We used to have humans connecting lines for people making phone calls. Now we have humans doing more valuable things.
|
Isn't it what small and medium stores have been doing for ages? They have a total of like 4 employees on at once when it is peak time. 1 at or near registers, others stacking, cleaning and so on until the queue at checkout starts growing when they start filling up the others to keep queue time decent.
Don't really see what a store with nobody doing checkouts has going for it compared to ordering the food home? A bit lower price?
|
On October 30 2018 05:23 Mohdoo wrote:
Eliminating jobs like cashiering is a huge positive for humanity. We should always be finding ways to better utilize humans. We used to have humans connecting lines for people making phone calls. Now we have humans doing more valuable things.
I want to amend this: Eliminating cashiers at big box retailers is likely a net gain. Cashiers are helpful a whole bunch of other smaller retail environments.
|
On October 30 2018 05:23 Mohdoo wrote:
Eliminating jobs like cashiering is a huge positive for humanity. We should always be finding ways to better utilize humans. We used to have humans connecting lines for people making phone calls. Now we have humans doing more valuable things.
Agreed. We also need to make sure that the proceeds of this improvement don't only make the owners richer, while leaving the people who used to be cashiers or other similar jobs poorer and unemployed.
In general, however, i absolutely agree that having less people do pointless repetitive jobs is a big plus. I doubt that there are people who love being a cashier, or to whom that job is the best job they can imagine. It is always just a means to survive. (Of course there is some satisfaction in a job well done, even if that job isn't the most interesting. But i think you can find more satisfaction in a more fulfilling job, and also be more productive at the same time.)
|
On October 30 2018 05:30 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2018 05:23 Mohdoo wrote:
Eliminating jobs like cashiering is a huge positive for humanity. We should always be finding ways to better utilize humans. We used to have humans connecting lines for people making phone calls. Now we have humans doing more valuable things. Agreed. We also need to make sure that the proceeds of this improvement don't only make the owners richer, while leaving the people who used to be cashiers or other similar jobs poorer and unemployed. In general, however, i absolutely agree that having less people do pointless repetitive jobs is a big plus. I doubt that there are people who love being a cashier, or to whom that job is the best job they can imagine. It is always just a means to survive. (Of course there is some satisfaction in a job well done, even if that job isn't the most interesting. But i think you can find more satisfaction in a more fulfilling job, and also be more productive at the same time.)
The setup to run an autonomous store is probably quite immense and I kinda doubt it'll drop off anytime soon. So there's a side effect here too that smaller stores will now have an even higher operational cost compared to big box stores (employing cashiers) which will potentially accelerate the decline of local businesses in affected sectors.
|
On October 30 2018 06:05 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2018 05:30 Simberto wrote:On October 30 2018 05:23 Mohdoo wrote:
Eliminating jobs like cashiering is a huge positive for humanity. We should always be finding ways to better utilize humans. We used to have humans connecting lines for people making phone calls. Now we have humans doing more valuable things. Agreed. We also need to make sure that the proceeds of this improvement don't only make the owners richer, while leaving the people who used to be cashiers or other similar jobs poorer and unemployed. In general, however, i absolutely agree that having less people do pointless repetitive jobs is a big plus. I doubt that there are people who love being a cashier, or to whom that job is the best job they can imagine. It is always just a means to survive. (Of course there is some satisfaction in a job well done, even if that job isn't the most interesting. But i think you can find more satisfaction in a more fulfilling job, and also be more productive at the same time.) The setup to run an autonomous store is probably quite immense and I kinda doubt it'll drop off anytime soon. So there's a side effect here too that smaller stores will now have an even higher operational cost compared to big box stores (employing cashiers) which will potentially accelerate the decline of local businesses in affected sectors.
They have to go for another segment. They can't compete for people that want the best deals and are willing to travel 20+ minutes to get to a store. They should target the segments that don't have cars (or don't want to go far) and those that just need to pick up a few stuff between the weekly shopping stops.
|
On October 30 2018 06:15 Yurie wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2018 06:05 Logo wrote:On October 30 2018 05:30 Simberto wrote:On October 30 2018 05:23 Mohdoo wrote:
Eliminating jobs like cashiering is a huge positive for humanity. We should always be finding ways to better utilize humans. We used to have humans connecting lines for people making phone calls. Now we have humans doing more valuable things. Agreed. We also need to make sure that the proceeds of this improvement don't only make the owners richer, while leaving the people who used to be cashiers or other similar jobs poorer and unemployed. In general, however, i absolutely agree that having less people do pointless repetitive jobs is a big plus. I doubt that there are people who love being a cashier, or to whom that job is the best job they can imagine. It is always just a means to survive. (Of course there is some satisfaction in a job well done, even if that job isn't the most interesting. But i think you can find more satisfaction in a more fulfilling job, and also be more productive at the same time.) The setup to run an autonomous store is probably quite immense and I kinda doubt it'll drop off anytime soon. So there's a side effect here too that smaller stores will now have an even higher operational cost compared to big box stores (employing cashiers) which will potentially accelerate the decline of local businesses in affected sectors. They have to go for another segment. They can't compete for people that want the best deals and are willing to travel 20+ minutes to get to a store. They should target the segments that don't have cars (or don't want to go far) and those that just need to pick up a few stuff between the weekly shopping stops.
A lack of competition in capitalism won't have any bad outcomes...
|
On October 30 2018 06:21 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2018 06:15 Yurie wrote:On October 30 2018 06:05 Logo wrote:On October 30 2018 05:30 Simberto wrote:On October 30 2018 05:23 Mohdoo wrote:
Eliminating jobs like cashiering is a huge positive for humanity. We should always be finding ways to better utilize humans. We used to have humans connecting lines for people making phone calls. Now we have humans doing more valuable things. Agreed. We also need to make sure that the proceeds of this improvement don't only make the owners richer, while leaving the people who used to be cashiers or other similar jobs poorer and unemployed. In general, however, i absolutely agree that having less people do pointless repetitive jobs is a big plus. I doubt that there are people who love being a cashier, or to whom that job is the best job they can imagine. It is always just a means to survive. (Of course there is some satisfaction in a job well done, even if that job isn't the most interesting. But i think you can find more satisfaction in a more fulfilling job, and also be more productive at the same time.) The setup to run an autonomous store is probably quite immense and I kinda doubt it'll drop off anytime soon. So there's a side effect here too that smaller stores will now have an even higher operational cost compared to big box stores (employing cashiers) which will potentially accelerate the decline of local businesses in affected sectors. They have to go for another segment. They can't compete for people that want the best deals and are willing to travel 20+ minutes to get to a store. They should target the segments that don't have cars (or don't want to go far) and those that just need to pick up a few stuff between the weekly shopping stops. A lack of competition in capitalism won't have any bad outcomes...
Presumably there's still competition. Here in Spain at least, we have more than 1 chain of supermarkets?
|
I'm all for automation getting rid of crappy jobs, but I've seen nothing in the way of society adjusting for that so the people that need those shitty jobs can do something else.
|
On October 30 2018 07:51 Gahlo wrote:
I'm all for automation getting rid of crappy jobs, but I've seen nothing in the way of society adjusting for that so the people that need those shitty jobs can do something else.
The example I like to use is: computers made being a typist no longer a valid career. How many jobs have been created as a result of computers? Technological advancement doesn't always mean immediately apparent benefits.
|
It's also not just crappy jobs. Some of the jobs that are lost used to pay fairly well and allowed people to sustain a family. Even a whole lot of a single town sometimes.
Within a capitalist framework there is no reason why those jobs should be protected, it doesn't impact the life of anyone who matters. You get some ghost towns when the town industry delocalizes or goes automatic, but there's no profit incentive to care about that fact specifically, so the invisible hand of the market isn't going to help and you're going to need some other influence.
|
United States24782 Posts
On October 30 2018 08:03 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2018 07:51 Gahlo wrote:
I'm all for automation getting rid of crappy jobs, but I've seen nothing in the way of society adjusting for that so the people that need those shitty jobs can do something else. The example I like to use is: computers made being a typist no longer a valid career. How many jobs have been created as a result of computers? Technological advancement doesn't always mean immediately apparent benefits.
Automation of cashiers turns low-skilled and typically low-paid jobs into mid-tier design, installation, and maintenance jobs. It's not necessarily easy to tell which condition is better for humanity as a whole. The automation is good for the store (presumably), but I find this a very complex topic.
|
On October 30 2018 08:20 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2018 08:03 Mohdoo wrote:On October 30 2018 07:51 Gahlo wrote:
I'm all for automation getting rid of crappy jobs, but I've seen nothing in the way of society adjusting for that so the people that need those shitty jobs can do something else. The example I like to use is: computers made being a typist no longer a valid career. How many jobs have been created as a result of computers? Technological advancement doesn't always mean immediately apparent benefits. Automation of cashiers turns low-skilled and typically low-paid jobs into mid-tier design, installation, and maintenance jobs. It's not necessarily easy to tell which condition is better for humanity as a whole. The automation is good for the store (presumably), but I find this a very complex topic.
I would argue any time humans are performing work which requires more brain power or expertise, humanity as a whole is benefiting. Somewhere, more value and impact is being created by that human. This is definitely not an all-inclusive statement, but I think it roughly holds true.
|
United States24782 Posts
On October 30 2018 08:35 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2018 08:20 micronesia wrote:On October 30 2018 08:03 Mohdoo wrote:On October 30 2018 07:51 Gahlo wrote:
I'm all for automation getting rid of crappy jobs, but I've seen nothing in the way of society adjusting for that so the people that need those shitty jobs can do something else. The example I like to use is: computers made being a typist no longer a valid career. How many jobs have been created as a result of computers? Technological advancement doesn't always mean immediately apparent benefits. Automation of cashiers turns low-skilled and typically low-paid jobs into mid-tier design, installation, and maintenance jobs. It's not necessarily easy to tell which condition is better for humanity as a whole. The automation is good for the store (presumably), but I find this a very complex topic. I would argue any time humans are performing work which requires more brain power or expertise, humanity as a whole is benefiting. Somewhere, more value and impact is being created by that human. This is definitely not an all-inclusive statement, but I think it roughly holds true.
That is definitely true if ten cashiers are trained up and become ten technicians. It's not necessarily true if two of the cashiers become technicians and support the store and the other eight cashiers starve to death. Obviously that is an extreme example, but it shows that you need to take the whole system into account, which is very difficult to do when discussing one particular situation involving a store.
|
The answers to the questions of what do to about workers in obsolete fields (cash register operators) are going to sound familiar:
(1) we need a social insurance system
(2) we need progressive taxation to pay for it
(3) we also need to fund cheap/free public education at the community college level
|
It is the rarest of days when CNN has the best headline covering Trump. Trump's recently announcement that he plans to fulfill the dream of Miller and Steve Bannon by ending birthright citizenship is not only stupid, but has also shown that many news outlets are happy to include a bold face lie as a headline. It is embarrassing that three years into the Trump administration so many news outlets are still repeating his lies as headlines without any critical thought.
Also, this executive order it complete bullshit.
Trump claims he can defy Constitution and end birthright citizenship
|
Didn't his father or grandfather come into the country...illegally?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
