See we told you.. Mcdonalds is ordering 7K touch screen to replace cashiers

[itfitzme]

McDonald's orders 7,000 touchscreen kiosks to replace cashiers - Neowin


YOu wanna walk out on your job for more money. Guess what you now might lose your jobs all because of UNIONS who are greedy..

Dude, it's called innovation and efficiency improvement. Businesses have been doing it for hudreds of years. Grocery stores now have self serve kiosk, had them for nearly a decade now.

Just because you actually have an idea, doesn't make it real. Try to think of two things.

 

[WillReadmore]

Correct, we have been getting more and more "help" from our government. As a matter of fact the amount of help we are getting appears to be skyrocketing right along with the price.

By law we're adding the feature that insurance companies can't drop you when you get sick and the feature that you can get insured even if you have a preexisting condition. We're also adding the feature that you can have health care coverage even if you are poor.

Lets remember that EVERY other first world nation has these features, yet spends far less than we do on health care. And, they still outperform us in significant areas.

Out perform? Bull shit. Name one sector of medicine in which we are being out performed. You want cheap medicine? Go to Cuba. You don't like that my dad wanted the best care money could buy for my mom before she died of Pancreatic Cancer? You want to make something of it, by accusing her doctors of overcharging? Screw you. You live in an area with a high cost of living you can expect to pay more for the top professions. You want to live in a communist country move to a communist country.

"Even if you had preexisting..." You want to get a million dollars worth of health care you did not pay for off my paycheck? Screw you. Next you'll want me to give you a new car to replace your totaled one even when you didn't have insurance. What a jerk you are.

What I'm saying is that when life is at stake, there is no choice. It isn't capitalism anymore, because of that fact. You can not expect capitalism to keep prices down when it isn't capitalism.

Obviously, not every health care issue is life or death, but in general there is less capitalism in buying health care than there is in buying big screen TV sets. With my mother (who died of throat cancer, having never smoked), I would have mortgaged my future. With my TV, I could have decided to get entertainment some other way. Maybe I could go to a movie once in a while or maybe do more reading if I thought the price of the TV was too high. So, capitalism works in this case - the TV manufacturer works to keep the price competitive with other TVs and even with other entertainment options.


As for the three features I mentioned (including coverage for preexisting conditions), the previous poster had noted that prices were going up and implied that it is a problem with regulation. I mentioned those three features as having potential for adding upward price pressure and noted that cost effective systems still include those features. If our system (now or before Obamacare) can't handle that, then it is a problem with our system.

And, yes, I do prefer single payer for health care.

 

[flacaltenn]

The hatred between the classes are so evident here in America now, that it is a stinking rotten shame. Did we never learn anything from the past, and about how all of this stuff comes about ? WOW!

THen its a kind of assymetric warfare I suppose. Because all the hate and militarism is coming from the left direction.. Free Market types dont thrive on class warfare. They live in the real world -- automation, changing skill sets, and all...

 

[WillReadmore]

Whether the mob enjoys what they do to a minority group or not, when the girl says rape it's not consensual. Does that help? What good is "supposed" representation when the guy supposedly representing you is slapping you in the face and raping you repeatedly. You call it representation I call it rape by the mob.

I don't accept this analogy.

It would be better if we talked about business and government.

Rape as in economic rape, perv.

You're still postulating a crime.

Your argument boils down to "tax is a crime, thus THIS tax is a crime".

 

[itfitzme]

RANKINGS OF COUNTRY HEALTH CARE FOR EFFICIENCY, LIFE EXPECTENCY AND COST.

http://www.bloomberg.com/visual-data/best-and-worst/most-efficient-health-care-countries

WHO says, US sucks.

 

[SAYIT]

Apple had to sell 10 million I Phones just to pay their tax bill to the US Treasury.
It is a sign of how government creates jobs when you have to manufacture, ship and sell 10 million phones just to pay your tax bill in the US alone.

That's quit a stretch. Gov't created nothing and Apple did not develop and market the IPhone just to pay their tax bill.

Looks like you were out sick the day they taught how to use irony in high school.

Thanks. Just in a cranky mood I guess.

 

[SAYIT]

Fine. Yet I see no cost benefit analysis on this man vs machine question.

When monopoly becomes the norm, the greater good hinges on corporate decision.

I can see how it might benefit McDonalds, but show me how it is better for society that these jobs disappear.

McD has a price ceiling ... the price at which sales and profits suffer. Therefore they must operate efficiently which means constantly adapting. Sometimes jobs are lost. McD's mission is not to provide jobs for society but rather profits for it's shareholders or in the case of franchises, the owners.

Then "job-creators" is quite a misnomer.

Uh, they create jobs all right. It's just not why they are in biz.

 

[RKMBrown]

By law we're adding the feature that insurance companies can't drop you when you get sick and the feature that you can get insured even if you have a preexisting condition. We're also adding the feature that you can have health care coverage even if you are poor.

Lets remember that EVERY other first world nation has these features, yet spends far less than we do on health care. And, they still outperform us in significant areas.

Out perform? Bull shit. Name one sector of medicine in which we are being out performed. You want cheap medicine? Go to Cuba. You don't like that my dad wanted the best care money could buy for my mom before she died of Pancreatic Cancer? You want to make something of it, by accusing her doctors of overcharging? Screw you. You live in an area with a high cost of living you can expect to pay more for the top professions. You want to live in a communist country move to a communist country.

"Even if you had preexisting..." You want to get a million dollars worth of health care you did not pay for off my paycheck? Screw you. Next you'll want me to give you a new car to replace your totaled one even when you didn't have insurance. What a jerk you are.

What I'm saying is that when life is at stake, there is no choice. It isn't capitalism anymore, because of that fact. You can not expect capitalism to keep prices down when it isn't capitalism.

Obviously, not every health care issue is life or death, but in general there is less capitalism in buying health care than there is in buying big screen TV sets. With my mother (who died of throat cancer, having never smoked), I would have mortgaged my future. With my TV, I could have decided to get entertainment some other way. Maybe I could go to a movie once in a while or maybe do more reading if I thought the price of the TV was too high. So, capitalism works in this case - the TV manufacturer works to keep the price competitive with other TVs and even with other entertainment options.


As for the three features I mentioned (including coverage for preexisting conditions), the previous poster had noted that prices were going up and implied that it is a problem with regulation. I mentioned those three features as having potential for adding upward price pressure and noted that cost effective systems still include those features. If our system (now or before Obamacare) can't handle that, then it is a problem with our system.

And, yes, I do prefer single payer for health care.

Do you drive the "safest" car on the road? Or do you compromise? Do accept that there is only one best doctor and he is no longer accepting patients because he can't work 20hrs a day, or do you find the next best doctor that is available? Do you purposefully take the highest price procedure that is not recommended by your doctor or the one the doctor recommends? Would you buy a two year old million dollar scanner for your medical practice or a new one that is better and only costs 200k?

Look at the costs of medical care, examine each element and tell me what's broken. Staring you back in the face will be the problems, government will be at the root of most of them, not our medical professionals. Most of the time the issues will be related to government provided monopolies, price gouging, people not paying their bills and the medical professionals being forced by the government to pass those costs to paying customers.

Our system's costs are mostly due to the government, looking to them to fix it is ludicrous.

 

[RKMBrown]

That's quit a stretch. Gov't created nothing and Apple did not develop and market the IPhone just to pay their tax bill.

Looks like you were out sick the day they taught how to use irony in high school.

Thanks. Just in a cranky mood I guess.

Cheers, I'm in a mood too. These libtards need a spankin.

 

[Montrovant]

Out perform? Bull shit. Name one sector of medicine in which we are being out performed. You want cheap medicine? Go to Cuba. You don't like that my dad wanted the best care money could buy for my mom before she died of Pancreatic Cancer? You want to make something of it, by accusing her doctors of overcharging? Screw you. You live in an area with a high cost of living you can expect to pay more for the top professions. You want to live in a communist country move to a communist country.

"Even if you had preexisting..." You want to get a million dollars worth of health care you did not pay for off my paycheck? Screw you. Next you'll want me to give you a new car to replace your totaled one even when you didn't have insurance. What a jerk you are.

What I'm saying is that when life is at stake, there is no choice. It isn't capitalism anymore, because of that fact. You can not expect capitalism to keep prices down when it isn't capitalism.

Obviously, not every health care issue is life or death, but in general there is less capitalism in buying health care than there is in buying big screen TV sets. With my mother (who died of throat cancer, having never smoked), I would have mortgaged my future. With my TV, I could have decided to get entertainment some other way. Maybe I could go to a movie once in a while or maybe do more reading if I thought the price of the TV was too high. So, capitalism works in this case - the TV manufacturer works to keep the price competitive with other TVs and even with other entertainment options.


As for the three features I mentioned (including coverage for preexisting conditions), the previous poster had noted that prices were going up and implied that it is a problem with regulation. I mentioned those three features as having potential for adding upward price pressure and noted that cost effective systems still include those features. If our system (now or before Obamacare) can't handle that, then it is a problem with our system.

And, yes, I do prefer single payer for health care.

Do you drive the "safest" car on the road? Or do you compromise? Do accept that there is only one best doctor and he is no longer accepting patients because he can't work 20hrs a day, or do you find the next best doctor that is available? Do you purposefully take the highest price procedure that is not recommended by your doctor or the one the doctor recommends? Would you buy a two year old million dollar scanner for your medical practice or a new one that is better and only costs 200k?

Look at the costs of medical care, examine each element and tell me what's broken. Staring you back in the face will be the problems, government will be at the root of most of them, not our medical professionals. Most of the time the issues will be related to government provided monopolies, price gouging, people not paying their bills and the medical professionals being forced by the government to pass those costs to paying customers.

Our system's costs are mostly due to the government, looking to them to fix it is ludicrous.

While government causes problems, I think you are forgetting or underestimating the costs that new medical technologies and techniques have had. Not only does it cost a lot to buy and maintain high tech medical equipment, the constant improvement in medicine leads to longer lifespans, which leads to more need of medical treatment, which leads to greater costs.....

There are also people who game the system, the costs of litigation, etc. There is, I think, quite a lot behind the rising cost of medical care. Blaming it on government is an oversimplification IMO.

 

[SAYIT]

McD has a price ceiling ... the price at which sales and profits suffer. Therefore they must operate efficiently which means constantly adapting. Sometimes jobs are lost. McD's mission is not to provide jobs for society but rather profits for it's shareholders or in the case of franchises, the owners.

Then "job-creators" is quite a misnomer.

They love to use this "JOB CREATORS, speak politically now don't they ? Now what are they I wonder, either they are the creators or they are the greedy takers ? Somebody needs to finally get clarity on this, because when they are attacked for being greedy, then they become the JOB CREATORS, but when they aren't being looked at much, then they become the extreme takers. How can we keep our eye on them, and this so they will stay better balanced somehow ?

They? Silly Socialist.
Can it really be you believe companies can't be both job creators AND profit seekers? Clearly they create jobs. Should they not also be entitled to seek profits?

 

[SAYIT]

If you have the right assets you don't have to worry about minimum wage:

Woo ... if only those assets were real.

 

[RKMBrown]

What I'm saying is that when life is at stake, there is no choice. It isn't capitalism anymore, because of that fact. You can not expect capitalism to keep prices down when it isn't capitalism.

Obviously, not every health care issue is life or death, but in general there is less capitalism in buying health care than there is in buying big screen TV sets. With my mother (who died of throat cancer, having never smoked), I would have mortgaged my future. With my TV, I could have decided to get entertainment some other way. Maybe I could go to a movie once in a while or maybe do more reading if I thought the price of the TV was too high. So, capitalism works in this case - the TV manufacturer works to keep the price competitive with other TVs and even with other entertainment options.


As for the three features I mentioned (including coverage for preexisting conditions), the previous poster had noted that prices were going up and implied that it is a problem with regulation. I mentioned those three features as having potential for adding upward price pressure and noted that cost effective systems still include those features. If our system (now or before Obamacare) can't handle that, then it is a problem with our system.

And, yes, I do prefer single payer for health care.

Do you drive the "safest" car on the road? Or do you compromise? Do accept that there is only one best doctor and he is no longer accepting patients because he can't work 20hrs a day, or do you find the next best doctor that is available? Do you purposefully take the highest price procedure that is not recommended by your doctor or the one the doctor recommends? Would you buy a two year old million dollar scanner for your medical practice or a new one that is better and only costs 200k?

Look at the costs of medical care, examine each element and tell me what's broken. Staring you back in the face will be the problems, government will be at the root of most of them, not our medical professionals. Most of the time the issues will be related to government provided monopolies, price gouging, people not paying their bills and the medical professionals being forced by the government to pass those costs to paying customers.

Our system's costs are mostly due to the government, looking to them to fix it is ludicrous.

While government causes problems, I think you are forgetting or underestimating the costs that new medical technologies and techniques have had. Not only does it cost a lot to buy and maintain high tech medical equipment, the constant improvement in medicine leads to longer lifespans, which leads to more need of medical treatment, which leads to greater costs.....

There are also people who game the system, the costs of litigation, etc. There is, I think, quite a lot behind the rising cost of medical care. Blaming it on government is an oversimplification IMO.

I mentioned new medical tech, so not sure why you thought I forgot about it. Most of the time new tech is cheaper and better than old tech. Only the first generation or two should be crazy expensive. However, when the government grants a monopoly and restricts competition.. that can and often does result in price gouging, no?

I challenge you to show a high cost for a single element of a single procedure that I won't be able to tie directly to government intervention in the free market.

The emotional response is care at any cost... but the reality is that we each have a limited amount to spend on health care procedures. This we must spare no expense on every emergency large or small is not a sustainable policy for a family living on a budget, or for government in spending our family income for us. These single payer folks will make slaves of our health care providers, and they will quit en masse.

 

[BlackSand]

Typical lame argument cherry-pickin'. Two can play that game:
"The United States has the highest corporate tax rate in the world, at 35%. Add in state and local taxes and it averages 40%. No wonder America's most profitable, highest taxed companies will stop at nothing to keep their earnings overseas and out of the grasp of Uncle Sam. Here's a list of the 25 megacorps that pay megataxes..."

Which Corporate Giants Pay The Most In Taxes? - Forbes

Apple had to sell 10 million I Phones just to pay their tax bill to the US Treasury.
It is a sign of how government creates jobs when you have to manufacture, ship and sell 10 million phones just to pay your tax bill in the US alone.

That's quit a stretch. Gov't created nothing and Apple did not develop and market the IPhone just to pay their tax bill.

Well Apple did produce and sell 10 million I Phones ... Which in turn did pay their tax bill.
Someone had to build, ship and sell those phones ... And they probably got paid for it because it was their job.
The government created the need to sell those phones if Apple wanted to make the profit off the other phones they sold.

Although I was being facetious ... The case could be made.
This past weekend President Obama said that unemployment insurance was "one of the most effective ways to boost the economy".
If he can make the case that paying people who are unemployed is a way government can create more jobs ... Then I don't see where it is stretch to include taxes in the equation.

.

 

[SAYIT]

Apple had to sell 10 million I Phones just to pay their tax bill to the US Treasury.
It is a sign of how government creates jobs when you have to manufacture, ship and sell 10 million phones just to pay your tax bill in the US alone.

That's quit a stretch. Gov't created nothing and Apple did not develop and market the IPhone just to pay their tax bill.

Well Apple did produce and sell 10 million I Phones ... Which in turn did pay their tax bill.
Someone had to build, ship and sell those phones ... And they probably got paid for it because it was their job.
The government created the need to sell those phones if Apple wanted to make the profit off the other phones they sold.

Although I was being facetious ... The case could be made.
This past weekend President Obama said that unemployment insurance was "one of the most effective ways to boost the economy".
If he can make the case that paying people who are unemployed is a way government can create more jobs ... Then I don't see where it is stretch to include taxes in the equation.

I prefer to think you were just being facetious.

 

[WillReadmore]

That's quit a stretch. Gov't created nothing and Apple did not develop and market the IPhone just to pay their tax bill.

Looks like you were out sick the day they taught how to use irony in high school.

Think where they'd be if there were no regulated banking system, no transportation infrastructure, no patent office, no SEC, no education system to hire from, no ready supply of dependable energy, no justice system or police force, no international trade agreements supporting open markets, no national defense, no GPS system for their (crappy) mapping, no communications infrastructure for their phones to even bother to talk to, etc.

Apple is a great corporation, but the fact of the matter is that the USA made that possible.

More evidence? The USA is 1/20th the population of earth.

So, for every Apple there should be 20 other Apples in other nations. But, that's clearly not what one finds. Our government has created a hugely advantaged location on earth for there to be innovators such as Apple.

And, boo f'ing hoo if Apple ends up having to pay for part of that as they reap the wealth.

 

[RKMBrown]

I don't accept this analogy.

It would be better if we talked about business and government.

Rape as in economic rape, perv.

You're still postulating a crime.

Your argument boils down to "tax is a crime, thus THIS tax is a crime".

The crime isn't the tax, the crime is "re-distribution" at the point of a gun.

 

[RKMBrown]

That's quit a stretch. Gov't created nothing and Apple did not develop and market the IPhone just to pay their tax bill.

Looks like you were out sick the day they taught how to use irony in high school.

Think where they'd be if there were no regulated banking system, no transportation infrastructure, no patent office, no SEC, no education system to hire from, no ready supply of dependable energy, no justice system or police force, no international trade agreements supporting open markets, no national defense, no GPS system for their (crappy) mapping, no communications infrastructure for their phones to even bother to talk to, etc.

Apple is a great corporation, but the fact of the matter is that the USA made that possible.

More evidence? The USA is 1/20th the population of earth.

So, for every Apple there should be 20 other Apples in other nations. But, that's clearly not what one finds. Our government has created a hugely advantaged location on earth for there to be innovators such as Apple.

And, boo f'ing hoo if Apple ends up having to pay for part of that as they reap the wealth.

You are all over the map. Yes, we need some government. No, some government is not equal to cradle to grave management of every single aspect of every second of every life and a redistribution of the bulk of one's earnings to pay people to not work. Your argument that people who champion liberty are anarchistic, is really quite tiresome.

 

[flacaltenn]

What I'm saying is that when life is at stake, there is no choice. It isn't capitalism anymore, because of that fact. You can not expect capitalism to keep prices down when it isn't capitalism.

Obviously, not every health care issue is life or death, but in general there is less capitalism in buying health care than there is in buying big screen TV sets. With my mother (who died of throat cancer, having never smoked), I would have mortgaged my future. With my TV, I could have decided to get entertainment some other way. Maybe I could go to a movie once in a while or maybe do more reading if I thought the price of the TV was too high. So, capitalism works in this case - the TV manufacturer works to keep the price competitive with other TVs and even with other entertainment options.


As for the three features I mentioned (including coverage for preexisting conditions), the previous poster had noted that prices were going up and implied that it is a problem with regulation. I mentioned those three features as having potential for adding upward price pressure and noted that cost effective systems still include those features. If our system (now or before Obamacare) can't handle that, then it is a problem with our system.

And, yes, I do prefer single payer for health care.

Do you drive the "safest" car on the road? Or do you compromise? Do accept that there is only one best doctor and he is no longer accepting patients because he can't work 20hrs a day, or do you find the next best doctor that is available? Do you purposefully take the highest price procedure that is not recommended by your doctor or the one the doctor recommends? Would you buy a two year old million dollar scanner for your medical practice or a new one that is better and only costs 200k?

Look at the costs of medical care, examine each element and tell me what's broken. Staring you back in the face will be the problems, government will be at the root of most of them, not our medical professionals. Most of the time the issues will be related to government provided monopolies, price gouging, people not paying their bills and the medical professionals being forced by the government to pass those costs to paying customers.

Our system's costs are mostly due to the government, looking to them to fix it is ludicrous.

While government causes problems, I think you are forgetting or underestimating the costs that new medical technologies and techniques have had. Not only does it cost a lot to buy and maintain high tech medical equipment, the constant improvement in medicine leads to longer lifespans, which leads to more need of medical treatment, which leads to greater costs.....

There are also people who game the system, the costs of litigation, etc. There is, I think, quite a lot behind the rising cost of medical care. Blaming it on government is an oversimplification IMO.

Not really.. I sat in a meeting about 12 years ago with a team of folks designing a home use nebulizer for a new drug.. The idea being to reduce the cost of going to the OutPatient clinic multiple times a month.. All the presentations were over from the marketing types and I chimed up and said..

"You've given us no guidance on the recurring COST of this product.. What kind of range were you thinking?"

I got laughed at.. And then the suited marketing creeps explained that the GOVT would STILL cost the reimbursement as an OUTPATIENT procedure. So as long as my engineering team didn't exceed say $500 or $800 for a simple nebulizer --- COST was not a concern...

Since ALL medical codes and reimbursements are based on GOVT reimbursements --- this effect STIFLES cost control from the very start... If govt UNDERSTOOD and REACTED to every potential cost saving reimbursement -- it might be different. But that's WAAAAAAY beyond the scope of their managerial competence..

 

[WillReadmore]

Corporations are successfully sued for damages every day.. This is FAR more of deterrent to them than a few wonky regulators. And ends in more consumer oversight than those folks can claim on their own government..

Sure. But, you're talking about suing the corporation, not the decision makers who caused the damage.

Plus, corporations have significant advantages in defense against liability. Numerous cases can be listed where corporations clearly did wrong and have been excused from compensating for the losses to those impacted by their acts. And, corporations can not be sentenced to jail, no matter how many people they kill.

Gloating about gutting enforcement of regulation is fine, I guess. We certainly do see that as one of the methods for giving corporations advantaged treatment. The right wing would like to claim they are all about law and order, but when it comes to corporate law and order, they gut the police force, put witnesses at serious personal risk and hamstring the courts. Then, YOU come along and say, "See? That wasn't very effective, so we shouldn't bother with regulations!"