evenflow1969
Gold Member
Fact remains the same we still need human eyes at the grocery. Or the grocery gets robbed blind. Uniins would have prevented the machines from being installed. Can not out source local service it's that simple. By the time machines can take over that function doctors and lawyers ate now completed against by machines and it is game over we are done machines rule.I get it you want the billionaires to make all the rules because they know better what is good for you. When in reality they know better what is good for them. Soon under republican leadership only those who own the machines will be able to make a living.And we paid higher prices before Wal-Mart because in large part we were the world's biggest manufacturer until the rest of the world recovered from that little unpleasantness in the 40's that destroyed their manufacturing base. Today, in a global economy with technology advancing the way it is, low skilled low education jobs will become fewer every year, no matter how many unions you throw at them. Machines just do a better, more consistent job than humans do and their costs drop while the cost of humans climbs. When those lines cross, bye-bye human jobs.Well first off more unions mean less poor. More people making a living wage. You can not out source the service of local buyers to other countries because they are not present in our local market. We got along just fine before Walmart existed . All of your arguments are horse shit.Oh, it would be this way with or without a union because the global market and advancing technology WILL replace low skilled, low educated workers world-wide. It's inevitable. In fact, the ONLY way to prevent that from happening is to make human workers so cheap they couldn't live on the pay anyway. Trying to lock down human jobs by legislative fiat won't work, because that would just cede them to other countries entirely.Yep, how dare we think a living wage is reasonable for 40 hours a week work. You are on to something though. It is not the immigrant stealing your job it's tech. Of course it would not be this way if Walmart had a union. Lol. Typical republican wanna play monopoly for ten turns and the let the leader make the rules of the game after that and thinks it will benefit the players that are behind. HilariousYesterday I stopped into a Walmart in Wooster, Ohio to pick up a cheap gym bag. I actually found a pretty nice one, not exactly "cheap", but not outlandish. I figured I'd scored and headed to the front of the store.
When I got there, I was shocked to see that not a single check-out lane had an actual cashier. Every single lane was self-serve. Every. Single. One.
Years ago, my then 16 year old daughter made $6.25 an hour as a cashier for Walmart. As long as her grades were good, we allowed her to work as many hours as she was offered. She wasn't getting rich, obviously, but she had her own money to do with as she pleased.
When I asked the self-serve "attendant" about it, she told me that they went to an all self-serve model after the minimum wage became the latest perceived panacea for the left. There were about 20 checkout lanes. There's only one person overseeing the self-checkout lanes.
That means that 19 people who could've had cashier jobs have been replaced by technology.
That's very good news for Walmart, and very shitty news for the 19 people who could've had those jobs...
Now, if Wal-Mart had a union, where would you send the poor of this country to buy the things they can't afford at Wal-Mart any more?