What To Do About The Long-Term Implications of Automation

Probably never...

 

It just leaves one less person to wait for in line. Thank you.

 

I will never use automated check out until 'they' provide a 10% discount on the purchases...if I'm doing all the work then give me a discount...

 

Go for it.

But, don't think for a minute that we're going to slow down free market capitalism by not using an automated checkout station.

For example, Amazon is showing us is that you don't need the STORE let alone the automated check out station.

 

I have no problem with Amazon...I'm just saying if my local Safeway wants me to use self-check instead of a human cashier, then give me a 10% discount for not needing a human cashier. And if they wish to go 100% self-check, this is also fine with me, but the store had better be 10% or more cheaper than competing stores in order to get my business. I won't live long enough where we have 100% automation so I will always have choices!

I also heard a rumor that our local Safeway was going to stop all bagging. Again, this is fine with me but when they do this they better lower their prices 10% or more over their competition who still provides bagging.

IMO it's not practical to achieve 50-100% automation when PEOPLE are involved in the process...like self-check out. Why does Safeway and Home Depot have an attendant at self-check out? Because average people can't understand, or make mistakes, and pricing might be missing or incorrect, etc. etc. Maybe Amazon has figured out how to deal will all of these issues but it's unlikely IMO that most others can create the same discipline...

 

I think you're guessing that stores are somehow violating free market enterprise by installing self-check. Retail stores are in deadly competition for your business. On the whole, people LIKE self checkout. It means shorter lines, lower prices, more privacy (since no checker), etc.

The thing about Amazon is that they own the shopping cart. So, the problems at Safeway kiosks pretty much can't happen.


We have some grocery stores trying a new approach. You pick up a scanner when you walk in the door. You scan each item as you put it in your shopping bag. When you check out, you just put your bag on the scale and it downloads the product info from the scanner (that you return). Then you weigh your bag and pay your bill.

Anything without a bar code is handled the old way - vegetables, for example.

The result is that far less time is spent scanning stuff at the kiosk - so lines are shorter and you're on your way faster.

 

I'm all for free market enterprise since we ourselves are in business. I don't care what Safeway or others might do as long as their new procedures are not solely to benefit higher profits. I'm just saying that when multiple stores basically sell identical products, if one store is automating, and reduces their labor costs, then their products should be cheaper than others. I'm not going to shop at a place simply because they have automation...I shop based on selection and quality and price. I'd say Costco is a good example in which they do things differently, with reduced pricing, reduced selection, and they have created loyal customers...but could they have achieved this if their prices were the same or higher than a local Safeway?

Regarding vegetables and fruits in automation they need to convert from weight to each pricing...Apples are $.25 each for example. Or when a customer selects produce there are scales which can produce a barcode to attach to a bag?? Of course weighing at check out won't be accurate to verify the merchandise.

BTW; since Safeway is cutting back on labor and automating, we now shop at a locally owned store which is another 10 miles in distance, because they have happy and efficient cashiers, no automation, with the same products and relatively same prices. It will be interesting to watch Safeway and others compete for business...

 

The promise of the industrial revolution was that because we could produce more stuff with less labor, the average individual would benefit by getting more stuff and having to work less.

That promise was not kept. What happened was the increased profits went into the hands of the elite and the worker got shafted.

Expect more of the same in the future.

 

Comparing the past 100 years to today; We do produce more! With less labor! With greater selection! And people work less!

Increased profits created the economic and technological growth over the past 100 years.

100 years ago my dad lived on a farm, no indoor plumbing, little education, few opportunities, and who lives like this today?

 

People do not work less compared to say the 1960's and they work for less. Cherry picking an anecdote is not an argument for much.

 

The industrial revolution much earlier than 1960.

Did people have time to complain on the internet prior to the industrial revolution?

 

Costco and Safeway are both working hard to maximize profit. So is your mom/pop grocery. They are just using different strategies.

These companies are not stupid. They know exactly what they're doing. They know how many people are like you and how many are drawn by features that you don't value.

Safeway has "loyalty cards". That is a gigantic treasure trove of information on how you make your decisions . And it isn't even limited to what you buy at Safeway. They know what you probably buy, including stuff you must be buying at other stores. It's so valuable that they will PAY you to use your card!!

Costco has a card, too, but their strategy is slightly different.

If you think these stores are doing something stupid, it's almost certainly a matter of not understanding what they DO understand. Safeway didn't become a 1000 lb gorilla by being stupid.

 

We need to lose low wage jobs anyway; compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment can solve simple poverty in our Republic.

 

The future seems simple it will be a class war where many out of work people smash the machine OR they will fold and go on permanent welfare unless your talented enough to be employable and with how the things look now the latter is more probable. That might be fortunate save will bring in the dystopian future many writers wrote about if the government give you things they own you to I'm on SSI and such and know that.

 

Elect a socialist government. Immediately switch to 4 day week. Ratchet the hours worked down as automaton productivity ratchets up. Job's a good un!

 

Communism doesn't work and to most Americans socialism is Communism, and that is what the young want while democracies in various forms lasted a long time. And you cut hours with the stuff people want your going to need welfare for a lot of people or limiting work to the more skilled and intelligent and well again unemployed people up the butt since half the population is below average in IQ good luck they all can do high tech work. Of course physically gorgeous people will work even if dumb as a block in pretty face jobs not demanding much.

 

This is actually why we need to be talking about automation now.

Its entirely possible in the next 2-5 decades that machines will be better at designing and maintaining machines then people are. (better as in cheaper AND faster AND more through etc etc.

 

Bernie isn't a Communist and he arguably would have defeated Trump. The worst aspect of America is the conservatism of the left. They honestly think they have to be plastic right wingers, typically because they don't respect the American people.

Nope. Automation generates productivity. Socialism just ensures the gains are shared. You're still reliant on the rhetoric of Reaganomics. The interesting aspect of automation is that its a threat to capitalism. It ensures socialism is the efficient outcome. Reminds me of Schumpeter and creative destruction in that way!

 

The only people today who live no better than 100 years ago are an anomaly in our society! This is not anecdotal...this is a fact.
Anyone who works for less than what they feel they need...that person, and only that person, needs to take steps to change their lives...

 

I don't agree that it's all about 'maximizing' profits. Reasonable profits are all that is required whether in a private or public company. In our business we strive to maximize quality, which supports higher pricing, which supports a reasonable profit.

I don't agree with this either...places like Safeway are 'feeling' their way through making changes and won't know the outcome until the dust settles. Further, when a company is perceived to be taking away services or quality or selection, etc. and not giving something in return, there will be negative fallout. Just because they are big companies does not make them smart companies!

I have a Safeway card and they have never reached out to me other than coupons given out at check out of which most of them don't even pertain to me and go straight into the garbage. Based on the items in the coupons, 99% of them I have never purchased in my life, Safeway knows very little about me.

Like Sear's didn't become a 1000 lb gorilla by being stupid...[/QUOTE]

 

100 years ago ? what a ridiculous comparison. WW1 had just ended 100 years ago.

If you compare to the 60's .. we have gone backwards in relation to the value of labor - which after all - is the topic.

 

Compare any range of years with today and today Americans live better.

Average household income in the 60's was $6500 while today it is $55,000 +/-. What's more important is inflation and how we spend. IMO we do a horrible job on the spending side no matter our income. Most of us live beyond our means!

In the info below how are we doing worse today?

The following is a list of factors that are used to determine a country's standard of living:

• Household income
• General health of a population
• Life expectancy of the members of a population
• Availability and quality of housing
• Level of crime
• Access to health care
• Access to education
• Access to social services
• Political freedom
• Social freedom

 

A small privately owned business or a not-for-profit can do whatever it wants. But, for-profit companies such as Safeway, Costco and other such companies have a feduciary responsibility to share holders.

Who said anything about "not giving something in return"?? Remember that these companies have massive resourcces dedicated to making smart business decisions that go right down to the position of products on a shelf - decisions that make use of years of data and serious business theory. There are whole branches of business education that focus on this stuff.

Yes, they can make miistakes. But, do not underestimate the power they bring to their decisions.

 

If automation puts everyone or even 45% of people out of work, where will the guv get their income tax revenue from?
Will the government collapse due to lack of funding?

 

How about companies like Twitter, Uber, Tesla, and Amazon? Lots of companies do not have a prime directive to maximize profits. Add to this the list of all failing companies today, like Sear's, etc. and their prime objective is not maximizing profits. Most all IPO's do not focus on maximizing profits. Biotech companies who need years of time to research and work with government don't focus on profits. Lastly, I will guess all Fortune 500 companies can almost overnight become 10-25% more profitable if they wished to strive for 100% efficiency and effectiveness...every company has under-utilized factory/office space, equipment and labor, etc. and unless they are hemorrhaging losses and/or trying to keep the doors open, will strive to be competitively efficient but maximizing profits is not the highest priority. Yes...public companies have a fiduciary responsibility to make their shareholders happy...but this happiness comes in many forms.

Maybe you can explain why Sear's is failing? Why aren't they smart and resourceful? Same questions with all large companies who have failed or are failing? BTW; I said the 'perception' of not getting something in return...