>Minimum wage going up is bad because jobs will get replaced

Robots doing dangerous stuff is what they were meant for. Robots doing stuff like taking people's orders at restaurants is retarded and dehumanizing the customer.

>>130131305
Is your brain really only capable of doing one step and that's it ?
Sometimes it shames me to be a fucking leaf

>>130131911
Really?
What about the tractor example, picking grain isn't "dangerous", and it's not a bad thing that 90% of the population is no longer working in agriculture

>>130131305
Basic income.

File: price-floor-deadweight.jpg (16KB, 378x241px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 378x241px

>>130131305
A minimum wage law creates what in economics is called a price floor.
The minimum wage over here currently sits below the equilibrium price for the employment of legal citizens.
Hiking the wage up above the equilibrium will decrease the number of jobs available over the short to medium term, and reduce flexibility in the job market to buffer the temporary unemployment created by structural changes to the economy.
Flexibility in hiring is the lifeblood of an economy.
>>130133091
Hey nigger. Shouldn't you be stuffing your hole with fried chicken right about now?

File: order screen.jpg (68KB, 640x479px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 640x479px

>>130133164
1.What about the use of a minimum wage in order to push businesses to adopt labour saving technology? Like the order screen as an example, the technology has been around for decades and has only been adopted by McDonalds. I was reading Robert Gordon's Rise and Fall of American Growth, and he talked about the fact productivity growth has stayed flat over the past 15 years, (ever since computers got adopted) which is the real measure of economic growth.
2.If minimum wage isn't the push to get businesses to adopt this type of technology that has been around for decades, what is?

>>130131305
>90% of the population was farmers before, their jobs got replaced by tractors and they found new shit to do.

Yes, but this was a process that multiplied productivity. A tractor could do the work of many humans.

In the case of replacement due to minimum wage raises, it's not that the machines are more efficient, it's that a politician is forcing humans to be less efficient than machines.

File: wawa.jpg (19KB, 400x303px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 400x303px

>>130133816
>Like the order screen as an example, the technology has been around for decades and has only been adopted by McDonalds
You are mistaken.
Wawa convenience stores adopted the order screen across their entire inventory of stores in Pennsylvania over fourteen years ago, back in 2003.
The reason why you saw order screens there before other places is because Pennsylvania is more industrialized than other places, so the higher prevailing wage naturally drove that change.
It's important for these upgrades to be driven organically, rather than by government mandate, because command economies are inefficient allocators of resources when compared to private markets.

>>130131305

Service industries are picky about who they hire. The proliferation of service industries over manufacturing locks large numbers of below-average workers out of the job market.

>>130131911
>dehumanizing the customer
I don't see the problem.
Being served by a robot is much less awkward than interacting with a real human

>>130134343
I understand that command economies are inefficient allocators of resources, I am just asking again what would increase the adoption of labor saving technology, as workers aren't getting more productive even though technology exists today which would allow them to be more productive
The fact that Wawa has had these orderscreens, but Burger King, KFC, and all these other chains do not is annoying

File: 20170418_051508.jpg (655KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

655KB, 2048x1152px

>>130134717
Nothing is ever enough especially for the lower classes.

t. 11 year Walmart associate

>>130131305
>90% of the population was farmers before, their jobs got replaced by tractors and they found new shit to do.
Tractors didn't act like humans. They acted in the place of an animal. What we're having now is completely different. What you have is machines that can act in what were previously uniquely human capacities.
This is the start of the end, once you have machines that can think, you've eliminated the need for employees, rather than shifted the needed employees somewhere else.
Basically, you're a retarded LEAF, and this spells the end for capitalism as we know it (not that communism will replace it).

>machines replaced niggers and now they're all gibsmedats.

>>130134717
>workers aren't getting more productive even though technology exists today which would allow them to be more productive
What workers? What production?
What is your proof for this claim?

>>130131305
Because the way the 1st world is structured the only jobs for useless people are automatically allocated to women and non-Asian, non-Indian minorities. Automation will lead to the extermination of the white race in America.

File: Productivity.gif (36KB, 681x494px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 681x494px

>>130135032
Woops, sorry, should have linked this earlier.

>>130131305

you forgot:

> does not have an attitude
> does not require you to be nice or say anything
> lets you view the menu and deliberate for as long as you want

cashier jobs are definitely dying and it's about time. It's a monkey job.

>>130131911

> amazon.com is dehumanizing to the customer

>>130134717
>The fact that Wawa has had these orderscreens, but Burger King, KFC, and all these other chains do not is annoying
It may be annoying, but it is grounded in economic reality. Wawa's is a small regional chain that only opens stores in higher income areas, where a higher prevailing wage drives the changeover to order screens. It's a high end business, relatively speaking.
Burger King, and KFC, on the other hand, are bottom feeders, chasing the marginal dollar, and so they open stores anywhere, particularly in depressed economies where job opportunities are somewhat limited.They are doing what makes dollars and sense for their model. If you go and impose conditions on them for arbitrary reasons, i.e., you are annoyed that technology does not instantly update across all industries, you will only create harmful disruptions, and suffering as flexibility in employment opportunities is stifled.

>>130134574

t. autistic

>>130134717

The flatlining of productivity can be explained by the shift from secondary to tertiary & quaternary industries. Increasing the productivity of a manufacturing plant is relatively straightforward, if a little expensive. How do you increase the productivity of cashiering by some phenomenal amount, when all the cashiering is done by hand even if it's a self-serve checkout? How do you increase the productivity of bartending? Or teaching? Or providing explicit hour-long service sessions for physical fitness, mental health, sex, or whatever else you can think of?

>>130131911
>Picking grain isn't dangerous
Me granpappy lost the tip of his finger to grain, he did. Whippersnappers like you shouldn't go around pretending you know how to farm. The only farming you kiddies do is on your interactive movie on the picture box

>>130131305
>2017
>Still going into big brands' places


Oh boy....


>>130133091
That's communism, get money instead of bread

>>130131305
Leftists are adult children who suffer from severe disillusion and dunning krueger effect. They believe that when the jobs(service jobs immediately) become automated that they will be free to follow their personal interests as if the rest of society that remains in the workforce is going to support faggot neet niggers living off their tax dollars as they rob their homes when theyre at work. The first to suffer from automation will be all their welfare pets followed by themselves. I cant even begin to imagine how bad it would get to have these types of people sitting idle their entire lives bitching about muh whitey.

>>130133091
COMMUNIST!>>130131305
JUST STOP INGERING WITH THE FUCKING FREE MARKET! REEEEE!

>>130135183
That's merely a single statistic. Presented alone, it proves nothing. You must elaborate the argument you plan to center it in if you expect that to carry any water.

>>130135277
It's a job ment for teenagers to learn responsibility, how to interact with customers and mangers, and how to save money.
It has a good reason to exist, but nogs and burn outs take it as a lifelong career, then cry about being poor in their 30s and onwards.

>>130131305
you're out of your mind if you don't think some mentally ill faggot isnt going to smear blood, boogers, shit and vomit all over the burgertron almost immediately.

File: thinks.gif (2MB, 460x259px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 460x259px

>>130135494
>>130135416
Self-serve checkouts/order screens are the best because they tend to work in tertiary and quarternary industries, you aren't paying someone to check out, the customer is doing it themselves, which reduces the cost to the customer because they don't have to pay for that service.
Ironically it would be the higher end chains where it would make more sense to have cashiers, as you could argue that the customers time is more valuable then that of a cashier
That's why I keep bringing up the self checkout lanes though, is because it is often difficult to get an increase in productivity growth, and this is something that's so universal and also not getting adopted

The service industry is staffed mainly by high school and college kids, sometimes reformed convicts, or mothers women who need income.
Theres going to still need managers and now an entire technical support system.

The problem isnt the jobs themselves. Its fguring out what those employed in the service industry will have to do.
Alot of those people are still under the care of their parents. Or they are going to school.

File: Agriculture.png (228KB, 3000x2100px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 3000x2100px

>>130134873
Tractors may have replaced animals.
But look at the rest of the numbers, we've gone from over 60% to close to under 5% working in agriculture, all those jobs were replaced.

>>130135749
The only people who learn responsibility in starter jobs are those with some sort of promotion or autistic dedication
I worked in retail for 3 years and then got out when I got a chance to work at panam2015.
The only person with autistic dedication was a fat lesbian with buck teeth.
For some reason I have employer loyalty even though that's not a good trait. Gets me free food from my second job though.
All the people I worked with otherwise we're slackers and idiots

>>130135953
you don't want to put self service in niggervilles because they'll just walk straight out.

honestly walking straight out works 9/10 times with people working too, but that 1/10 does effectively stop them.

>>130135933
Janitors though

>>130135953
>Ironically it would be the higher end chains where it would make more sense to have cashiers, as you could argue that the customers time is more valuable then that of a cashier
You can argue that all you want, but Wawa has put plenty of other people who adopted that strategy out of business in the areas they compete in.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating, leaf.

>>130136232
janitors make more money than a person working the counter.

>>130135953
Self checkout makes me ree
Half the time it's broken and the other half people are too stupid to figure it out so the 1 person watching over ends up being the cashier because it's easier

File: think.png (173KB, 2688x2688px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 2688x2688px

>>130135678
I am using the measure of productivity as a real measure of economic growth, as GDP tends to be skewed.
As in if you have a population of 5 people splitting 100$ of GDP, vs 20 people splitting 200$ of GDP, you've doubled GDP but have decreased overall productivity.

>>130131305
What happens when autonomy makes a very major percentage of the work force obsolete? What happens when employment is only available to the most qualified and there is nothing else for the rest to do?

We are not very far off from these being very real problems that we don't have answers for right now. Eventually most work will be automated.

Probably not this generation, but soon.

>>130135953

>That's why I keep bringing up the self checkout lanes though, is because it is often difficult to get an increase in productivity growth, and this is something that's so universal and also not getting adopted


The problem isn't with that technology, it's with the industrial composition of the US economy. It's okay for some jobs to have basically flat productivity. Indeed, some careers never become more productive, look at concert musicians or teachers or prostitutes. It's not okay when most of the economy is made up of workers whose productivity will never dramatically increase.

The reason for this is because of Baumol's cost disease. The wikipedia entry goes into it in more detail, but it's basically that the price of non-productive labor rises in response to increases in productivity in other industries. The reason this is a problem is because in an economy where the majority of workers are seeing wage increases but no productivity increases, you would see inflation.

>>130136330
adding on:
janitor is genuinely not a minimum wage job, and is quite well paid.

on the flip side, a person working the counter has no issues pushing a mop through a bathroom a couple times a night.

>>130136330
It's a shitty job but someone has to do it

Nah, this is good.
those people will be out of a job
those people are going to realize how shit everything has gotten and has been
idle hands and anger is a recipe for redpill

>>130136349
>Central planning 101
Thought provoking.

>>130135101
I get you're trying to push an agenda but you're really reaching with this post

>>130131305
And guess what? The world was fucking better when it was mostly farmers.

>>130136489
better in what way?

>>130136489
Pure ideology

>>130134282
>It's not that machines are more efficient
They are hugely cost efficient.

>>130135564
Do you have any local brand stores that have automated tellers?

>>130136207
The people that learned nothing will be the same retards that are crying for more government gibs when they are in their mid/late twenties as their life hasn't improved. 0 effort = 0 results.
If you work hard and ask for more responsibility you can learn a decent amount about how businesses operate. Although it's possible that this varies depending on the employer.

>>130136564
More self sufficient
Less globalized
More ties to community
Less health problems
Larger families needed to help work
Landowners with invested interest in keeping things good.

>>130136471
I'm not in favor of central planning, I didn't say mandating these automated tellers would work in every business, I was just explaining productivity as a real measure of economic growth as opposed to GDP

File: wdafdasdf.jpg (161KB, 1415x796px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1415x796px

>>130136207
>The only people who learn responsibility in starter jobs are those with some sort of promotion or autistic dedication

the latter hits a bit closer to home.

>>130136877
Thank God I live in a rural area no where near the south.

>>130131305
Look up the documentary obsolete it's really good at answering this

>>130136753
Worked hard is but I was limited by physical ailments, shortened tendons meant I can't handle standing with low movement
I have a good job now at least. I'm a weird type of worker. I do really well when put on a clock or pushed into a corner but I otherwise appear as lax and lazy

>>130136877
Is okay anon. I had a bit of autistic dedication too. I followed the rules but always sought to make more efficient

File: hooflol.jpg (146KB, 904x1198px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 904x1198px

>>130136178
When you say, "All those jobs were replaced," you mean in another field? What's going to replace all the service sector jobs? We're running out of things humans can do that machines can't do better. The reason we have jobs in the first place is that there does not exist currently a more efficient force than people in the industries people are employed in. Once machines close the skill gap with humans, we won't have anything we can do more efficiently.

You can point to historical replacement all you want, but you completely ignore the context, and thus how it was different in the past.

>>130136177
I am not saying that this will replace all the fast food jobs, just that it will increase productivity of workers as you will no longer require 2 people manning the counter taking orders from people
Again, they will find something else to do, see >>130136178

File: 350px-Life-expectancy-us-1900-2011[1].png (29KB, 350x209px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 350x209px

>>130136756
>less health problems
less health problems because people died younger, we simply live long enough to get sick now.

>>130136793
It's called the invisible hand for a reason. An economy is always something of a black box.
The people who figures like that together are not entrepreneurs, businessmen, or economic stakeholders.
Tinkering around with an economy based on numbers produced by bureaucrats too far removed from the underlying processes to produce an accurate gauge of what really goes on in a business sector is the hallmark of central planning, and you can disclaim it all you want, but that kind of bean counting will forever be associated with it in the minds of intelligent people.

>>130133091
>free stuff, please

File: think.gif (617KB, 498x498px) Image search: [Google]

617KB, 498x498px

>>130136361
see
>>130136178
over 60% of the population used to be farmers, now that number is under 5%
If we managed to find jobs for all of them then, what is different now?

>>130137136
>We're running out of things humans can do that machines can't do better.
What proof do you have for that?
>pic: horse hoof
Your kind a century ago would probably say the same of horses, that we have run out of things that machines can do, and will soon vanish, but they are still around, and are now a fancy to occupy the spare time freed up by industrialization.

>>130131305
In case of Fast food orders, they have just turned the ordering equipment 180 degrees so the customer can press the buttons.

The clerk pushing buttons for you was nothing more than an assistant for making the order on the terminal.

If you need less nannying for people to complete their task, that's a good thing overall. Jobs should always serve a function other than being a job.

>>130136361
You have no proof for that claim. You are just making things up.

>>130136389
Why is that okay though?
Concert musicians can perform more concerts, teachers can teach more students, and prostitutes can use new platforms in order to service more customers. Flat productivity isn't okay

How do machines up-sell?

>>130131911
>because i want to be reminded I'm being fed heart disease by a smiling faggot who is pretending to care.

>>130136361
>What happens when employment is only available to the most qualified and there is nothing else for the rest to do?

Then the faggots should start doing the things that are currently deemed "too expensive".

Such as recycling. Adapting products to specific environments - not very hard to do, but needs manhours. Healthcare. Infrastructure.

File: CIA.jpg (79KB, 716x768px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 716x768px

>>130137184
But it's easily argued that the transition from our current system to a free market system could be extremely painful
Like removing the FDA, over time it may be overtaken by brands signalling safety, but the transitionary period would result in a lot of death, especially since a lot of shareholders push corporations to have quarter to quarter profits, over longterm viability, which would result in those corporations "cashing in" during the transitionary period

>>130131911
Grain entrapment, dust explosions, falling into a running combine


Shit happens

File: 20160830_000906.jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

>>130136977
I'm in the northeast. Thank charaties for dropping these west Africans off in a mostly white state.

>>130137674
flashy offer when you're about to press the checkout

but, you wont see "self checkout" in car dealerships any time soon. Or ever.

File: finnish people waiting for the bus.jpg (37KB, 700x309px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 700x309px

>>130134574
t. finn

File: GET.gif (575KB, 498x466px) Image search: [Google]

575KB, 498x466px

>>130137925
For you.
Who said anything about removing the FDA?

Can't wait to rob stores with robot cashiers. Or maybe just burn them down. Luddite here btw.

File: self.jpg (143KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1920x1080px

>>130137674
It gives the other drink options (which are upsells)
When you click on the drink, it gives you a dropdown menu asking which size of drink you want (offering a large drink).

>>130131911
> is retarded and dehumanizing the customer.
shitty and stupid reasoning from a reddit leftist

>>130131305

If the job can be replaced by a robot, it will be replaced by a robot regardless of changes in wage levels.

It's a completely pointless argument.

It's like saying;

>We can't raise horse and buggy drivers wages because then they'll be replaced by cars!

They're getting replaced anyway. Go to China. wages are a pittance there - still self serve checkouts.

>dealing with a human
Though
Over
>A machine that has been touched by every hand wiper and booger eater from here to Albuquerque

>>130137417
>What proof do you have for that?
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watson_%28computer%29
>http://www.lmlmgtfytfy.com/?q=self-driving+cars
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_learning

>Your kind a century ago would probably say the same of horses, that we have run out of things that machines can do, and will soon vanish, but they are still around, and are now a fancy to occupy the spare time freed up by industrialization.
Ah, yes so once humans are useless we'll only be around for fancy? It's true that horses are quite reduced due to the engine.

>>130137337
The industrial revolution already happened.

>>130138353

McDonald's has cheese bites??

File: goldwater.jpg (59KB, 400x590px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 400x590px

>>130138269
I was just using it as an easy example of the cost of replacing regulation with free market.

Thanks again, I do typically argue from more of a free market perspective, but this thread was a result of
1. Frustration I have to talk to people when I order something from not McDonalds despite the technology being around forever.
2. People saying that raising the minimum wage would cause peoples jobs to get replaced by robots, which always seemed more like a feature as opposed to a bug.

>>130138648
that is no proof. It contained only one actual job that might be endangered, most likely the truck drivers will still watch over the autopilot though.

>>130138648
What's your position on open borders and tariff rates on trade with other nations?

>>130137674
They can always advertise the most profitable things based on ingredient prices at the time.

File: Okabe.jpg (65KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 800x450px

>>130138549
Though, if we raised the minimum cost of horse buggy trips (like how most cities have minimum fares for taxis) you would have seen a faster adoption of cars, right?

>>130139057
>Not posting best girl(male)

>>130138740
Yes.
And last time we had an event which changed the labour market we managed to find jobs for all of those people.
In what way has our ability to find those people jobs, changed?

>>130138316
But the robot cashiers tend to be cashless.

>>130138790
Only during the "trail period" where we're still unsure about self-driving cars and phasing them in.

Once all drivers are gone, no, truck driver won't be a fucking job, because human-caused accidents will be nonexistent.

And it is fucking proof. If a machine gets complex enough to fucking think essentially, and we've got fucking machinery for it to move in whatever manner necessary for whatever job you want to imagine, then you're screwed out of work, permanently, and there won't be some "other" job to go to, because robots do everything more efficiently than meatbags who want a salary.

ALSO WATSON IS AN EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING GOING TO REPLACE SAY DOCTORS, CALL CENTERS, WEATHER FORECASTING, AND TAX PREPARATION.

AT LEAST SKIM THE DAMN THING.

If you don't see the ingenuity and multipurpose nature of Watson (which is data analysis and query-answering) and how that can effect any field where a human is doing the same thing, you're purposefully ignorant.

>>130137967
>but, you wont see "self checkout" in car dealerships any time soon. Or ever.
Of course not. There will always be at least some level of predictability to the result of an offer made to a computer, so people would eventually find a pattern and be able to get the most favorable loan every time.

>>130138752
>People saying that raising the minimum wage would cause peoples jobs to get replaced by robots, which always seemed more like a feature as opposed to a bug.
Idle hands are the devil's workshop, as the saying goes.
Public policy should be oriented toward full employment, even if that means a bureaucrat somewhere is compelled to harp that full productivity has yet to be unleashed.
The alternative is revolution, which, I suppose, is more often than not why people push these harmful disruption causing price floors and price ceilings as sane regulation in the first place, but there you go.

>>130138918
Open borders are a no-no because they produce a labor surplus, which depresses wages. Literally only good for top earners.

On tariff rates, it's a rather complex issue, but for a nation that cares about its people, if the opportunity arises to use it in such a way as to grow domestic industry for the good of the people, then that seems like a no-brainer to me.

>>130131305
>hurr durr 10$ is not enough for shit tier job
>derp lets increase minimum wage to 15$
WHY ARE THEY GETTING FIRED
WHY ARE THEY GETTING REPLACED BY MACHINES
FUCK FREE MARKET WE NEED UNIVERSAL INCOME

fucking retarded socialist, if job wont generate profits it will get purged
no one will pay for parasite
hopefully they will keep increasing minimum wage and all those ussles fucks will die out replaced by machines

>>130139500
I can't argue with that.

>>130139243
>Once all drivers are gone, no, truck driver won't be a fucking job, because human-caused accidents will be nonexistent.

sure will

not even trains are automated even though they are on a rail running always forwards

>And it is fucking proof.
Absolutely not, wild speculation.

>If a machine gets complex enough to fucking think
This has not happened.

>we've got fucking machinery for it to move in whatever manner necessary for whatever job you want to imagine
more unbased predictions and extreme scenarios

>ALSO WATSON IS AN EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING GOING TO REPLACE SAY DOCTORS, CALL CENTERS, WEATHER FORECASTING, AND TAX PREPARATION.
Not really. Watson has no clue what it does. In the quiz it had a big advantage over the people because it could basically go through all literature while on the show.
Still, it sometimes gave an answer that was so wrong nobody understood how that could happen.

What will actually happen is that Doctors get a second opinion from their Watson, and they will have better success rates since they now can use common sense AND big data statistics.

What do when robos ask for rights?

It's simply a majority of people haven't accepted the idea yet and until they do we have to deal with dumb as people pushing for $15 an hour for menial jobs.

>>130140056
gay rights?

File: apex think.jpg (50KB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 680x680px

>>130133091
>>130133164
>>130135564
>>130135639
>>130137278
I know you all are memeing about Basic Income, but he is onto something.
Economists often make a mistake, by saying, 'Free trade benefits everyone.' Free trade particularly in a system that now does not have free trade harms a lot of people. A movement to a more free trade system is going to harm a lot of people. A movement to a system that doesn't have the kind of regulations that have now been capitalized in all of the prices that we think of, that we use as signals. One possible solution to get rid of minimum wage laws, to get rid of a lot of restrictions on prices, would be to say, 'A lot of people are harmed by the nimbleness of the market. Let's have a Basic Income.' which means that a benchmark underlying how bad off people can be is going to satisfy a lot of these objections without manipulating the price mechanism. The big problem that we have is using prices as information, and the distortion minimum wages have on those prices, Basic income could solve that problem

>>130131305
List of growth industries:
Pet psychology
Vloging
Social work
Riot police
Social work
E-sports

>>130140707
>E-statement
END THYSELF

>>130139788
>not even trains are automated even though they are on a rail running always forwards
Not sure, might be due to liability. Could also be due to little things the conductor can notice to know something is wrong with the train.

You can say that this would be the same for truck drivers, but they have much smaller loads and there are for more of them, and less components that could go wrong that need to be monitored.

>This has not happened.
Are you one of those people back in the day who were saying, "There's never been an information device using electricity to relay and store information before, that's crazy talk! Only punch cards are possible!"

>more unbased predictions and extreme scenarios
Oh yeah, I forgot hydraulics are fucking conspiracy theorist bullshit.

>Not really. Watson has no clue what it does.
Doesn't need to if it answers 100% right.

>Still, it sometimes gave an answer that was so wrong nobody understood how that could happen.
And that's where refinement comes in. The possibility is there, and because it isn't 100% perfect now, you just deny the very real potential it embodies?

>What will actually happen is that Doctors get a second opinion from their Watson
Doctors make mistakes. Watson makes mistakes. Once Watson makes less mistakes than doctors, the doctors are out of there (talking about the people who do diagnoses). Maybe nurses will be there for the "human touch" or whatever the fuck.

>>130140952
Automated trucks are asking to be robbed desu.
Automation doesn't mean people stop being dicks

>>130137674
Have you never ordered a pizza online?

File: downie.jpg (52KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 600x400px

>>130140215
>get rid of minimum wage laws
That's like trying to remove a piece of shrapnel lodged in the brain of a person who is otherwise mentally unimpaired. Perhaps it is possible, but why disturb the status quo when the walking talking patient might wind up a vegetable or dead on the operating table? It reeks of a certain kind of superficiality, an obsession with the appearance of things, and an utter disregard about how things work at their core.
>muh free shit
And you were doing so well.

>>130140215
Economists are paid to preach, not predict. They really are our generation's priesthood and moral arbiters.

>>130141615
It's logically consistent though
Minimum wage disrupts our usage of price to signal information.
A solution would be a dissolution of minimum wage.
That would be politically unpalatable and harm a lot of people, a solution would be a dissolution of minimum wage alongside a basic income.
I don't think it should be applied on a massive scale right away, but experimentation in a small country could reveal a lot

>>130142188
How about Iran?
http://archive.is/srsiC

>>130142188
>It's logically consistent
A threshold for consideration, not a deciding factor.
>Minimum wage disrupts our usage of price to signal information.
Only if you mess with it. Minimum wages are made redundant by the natural rise in wage level.
>A solution would be a dissolution of minimum wage.
What is this fascination you have with touching political third rails? Don't you know that high voltage can kill you?
>basic income
>muh free shit
>muh free shit
>gibsmedat
Serious question, are you a nigger?

Wow. Just wow.
>>130142188
>It's logically consistent
>A threshold for consideration, not a deciding factor.
>Minimum wage disrupts our usage of price to signal information.
>Only if you mess with it. Minimum wages are made redundant by the natural rise in wage level.
>A solution would be a dissolution of minimum wage.
>What is this fascination you have with touching political third rails? Don't you know that high voltage can kill you?
>basic income
>muh free shit
>muh free shit
>gibsmedat

>>130142477
>>Minimum wage disrupts our usage of price to signal information.
>Only if you mess with it.
What that's totally wrong. Minimum wage hugely effects the labour market.
The existence of all kinds of jobs is opened up by the removal of minimum wage.

>>130142477
Your brain just shuts down when you see people talking about basic income. I'm not even saying it's necessarily the correct solution, just that it is a solution and I'd like to see it tried out and understand the results.