taking jobs away

taking jobs away (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

aviinterra -> taking jobs away (4/11/2008 5:08:57 AM)
Reading the bbc, I came upon this article about a new technology that allows a restaurant to serve your meal without the need for waiters. ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7335351.stm ). The day before I was at the home depot- and the only cash registers that were open were the four self service ones- manned by one irritated and unhappy employee who looked like they were about to shoot the damn machines if they beeped once more. And they did beep, and told me to put things in bags that were in bags already, and then beeped some more, no matter what I and the continually irritated but very helpful employee did. After some ten minutes spent on a trasaction that should have taken two at the most, I left feeling that this is just not the way to go. All of these neat new advancements would be great and actually fun if we had too little people, but with unemployment increasing ( and please don't give me the silly govt. statistics which only count those taking benefits ), the population increasing, and the economy spirling downwards, should not new positions be made instead of eliminated?? Should not the govt. encourage the creation of jobs here in our homeland by easing employment taxes and making it finally illogical for the employer to try all means to sidestep the decision of actually hiring a human being? If we do use all of these new technologies fully, then what on earth are we going to do with all these extra idle hands? Back in the old days of Rome ( man I miss those togas! ), Marcus Aurelius flately refused to use the rudiments of a steam engine because, he reasoned, the obvious effect will be too many people sitting with nothing to do and no means to contribute. I think he is still right today. But I guess I have rambled on about this enough.

kittinSol -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 5:13:15 AM)
I agree with you. Thing is, machines are cheaper than people. And companies want to maximise their profits, however indecent these profits may be. People are disposable. Personally, I refuse point blank to use these self-service things: what, I have to pay for the goods AND do all the work myself? If I'm going to buy something, I expect a certain amount of service to come with it. These retailers are having a laugh.

aviinterra -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 5:22:22 AM)
I feel the same way as you do, but lately some of the stores around here have not been giving you a choice- there is simply not a single human operated cash register open anywhere within a radius of fifty miles. I will send off a complaint letter, but I doubt it will do any good.

MichiganHeadmast -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 5:31:46 AM)
Sure. Let's bring back elevator operators, too. And if it wasn't for that damned printing press, we could hire thousands to hand-write books. And don't get me started on this evil internet thing. Old Marcus may have been onto something.

GreedyTop -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 5:33:08 AM)
I like the idea of bringing back elevator operators.... and gas station attendants who actually ATTEND..

aviinterra -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 5:35:34 AM)
gas station attendants....what a luxury that would be!! I'm all of it! They are the best thing about pumping gas on the NJ turnpike.

kittinSol -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 5:36:09 AM)
Maybe you get off on the financial slavery thing, Michmast [:D] .

MichiganHeadmast -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 5:37:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GreedyTop I like the idea of bringing back elevator operators.... and gas station attendants who actually ATTEND.. "Getting it up while you're going down"? [:D]

kittinSol -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 5:37:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GreedyTop I like the idea of bringing back elevator operators.... and gas station attendants who actually ATTEND.. Yeah, seriously! I don't know if they did that in the US, but in France they'd always end up wiping your clean windscreen with a dirty, oily rag. There was a certain amount of gallic charm to this gesture :-) .

LadyEllen -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 5:46:04 AM)
There are some things in which one cannot replace a human with a machine - and waiting on tables is one of them, as is operating a checkout. Firms which employ such technology are not going to do as well from it as they believe I fear. In the end, customers are people and most customers prefer a human interaction in such instances. E

kittinSol -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 5:47:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen In the end, customers are people and most customers prefer a human interaction in such instances. What's troubling is that people are nothing much more than consumers, especially in the eyes of the corporate world.

FangsNfeet -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 5:47:52 AM)
This reminds me of the old US Western folk lore of Paul Bunion and Big Henry. Two hard workers put out of a job due to technology. Are machines here to help us or to make sure we get real fat and lazy?

aviinterra -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 5:49:37 AM)
Yes, exactly, we are considered consumers and nothing more. I think we need to take back the word customer and demand that we get something in return for our money.

aviinterra -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 5:53:12 AM)
Machines do help us in a lot of ways, but if we all take a look at our forebearers and the amount of flab on the current population, I think that your assumption that they help make us fat and lazy is right on target. Imagine having to walk half a mile for your loaf of bread- most people can't walk across the street nowadays. The worst offenders are the people that "need" to be dropped off on the fire line of a grocery store, and then have their partner/driver await them right in front of the doors or drive around the parking lot until they step out, because heavens forbid, it is so exhausting to push that cart eight spaces over. That kind of stuff just makes me angry. And they wonder why they are fat.

kittinSol -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 6:03:19 AM)
As a relative newcomer to the land of plenty, I've come to the conclusion that the car, sprawling suburbs and other isolated communities are in part responsible for the lack of walking. Even in small towns such as where I live, it's difficult to go out for a walk outside of the city center. You basically have to take your car in order to go and buy a loaf of bread; you COULD walk it, but it's perilous: there are no pavements. When you do approach the shops, there are so few pedestrian crossings on the roads you might as well fly over them. Urban structures weren't developed outside of the large metropolises because of there was so much land available for development that people just extended their personal territories with little consideration given to what would link people together. I blame Ford automobiles: it was in their interest to influence policy makers in underdeveloping public transport and infrastructures in order to flog their explosion engine units in greater numbers. Time for a rethink, isn't it.

Archer -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 6:03:26 AM)
Yet you continue to shop at the BIG Home Improvement stores rather than suporting their smaller rivals? Certainly there is an ACE franchise somewhere you could frequent? Where are all the lamplighters to light my street, where are the folks to clean up behind the horses, why the washing machine, the dishwasher, the microwave, they took the jobs away from the domestics that middle class america used to hire. Those things have housewives or husbands left with far too much time to sit around with nothing to do. Bring back the rock at the streamside. LOL

kittinSol -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 6:10:34 AM)
If the slaves are too busy washing their laundry by hand, who will build the machines that build the machines that build the... mac... crrrreeekkk... everything will come to a halt... Peace. Quiet. We'll be able to hear the birds tweeting!

Real_Trouble -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 6:14:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aviinterra Reading the bbc, I came upon this article about a new technology that allows a restaurant to serve your meal without the need for waiters. ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7335351.stm ). The day before I was at the home depot- and the only cash registers that were open were the four self service ones- manned by one irritated and unhappy employee who looked like they were about to shoot the damn machines if they beeped once more. And they did beep, and told me to put things in bags that were in bags already, and then beeped some more, no matter what I and the continually irritated but very helpful employee did. After some ten minutes spent on a trasaction that should have taken two at the most, I left feeling that this is just not the way to go. All of these neat new advancements would be great and actually fun if we had too little people, but with unemployment increasing ( and please don't give me the silly govt. statistics which only count those taking benefits ), the population increasing, and the economy spirling downwards, should not new positions be made instead of eliminated?? Should not the govt. encourage the creation of jobs here in our homeland by easing employment taxes and making it finally illogical for the employer to try all means to sidestep the decision of actually hiring a human being? If we do use all of these new technologies fully, then what on earth are we going to do with all these extra idle hands? Back in the old days of Rome ( man I miss those togas! ), Marcus Aurelius flately refused to use the rudiments of a steam engine because, he reasoned, the obvious effect will be too many people sitting with nothing to do and no means to contribute. I think he is still right today. But I guess I have rambled on about this enough. Upon being confronted with a mechanzied backhoe, a man once said: "Oh no, these digging machines can do the job of ten men with shovels!" The economist standing next to him responded: "Yes, and if not for shovels, one hundred men with spoons would have jobs." There's no sense in doing jobs a stupid and inefficient way; when you subsidize labor positions that do not need to exist, all you are doing is lowering the overall standard of living in your country. I mean, think this through to the logical extent - why not replace computers with several hundred men or women with basic calculators instead? That would create a ton of jobs! Job substitution is not an absolute phenomenon. For every waiter eliminated, you are going to be adding a service-person to take care of the machines. The trick is to know what industries to be in...

MichiganHeadmast -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 6:27:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen There are some things in which one cannot replace a human with a machine - and waiting on tables is one of them, E Especially in a "Hooters." [;)]

aviinterra -> RE: taking jobs away (4/11/2008 7:20:34 AM)
quote: There's no sense in doing jobs a stupid and inefficient way; when you subsidize labor positions that do not need to exist, all you are doing is lowering the overall standard of living in your country. Tell that to someone who has been laid off and has kids to feed. In some towns, the Wal-mart like stores are the only major employers. You assume that everyone can retrain as new technology becomes available. The IT job market should be a good indication of what happens when suddenly there is need for a specific job and two years later everyone holds an IT certificate and are back to where they were in the beginning- unemployed or in a bad job. There needs to be something in the job market for everyone, no matter how unskilled or inefficient these people are. Besides, would you really like to live in a world where you don't see anyone but mechanical hands? I certainly would not.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875