Amazon announce min. hourly wage raise to $15

[MTEE1985]

Forgive me if I’m being too simplistic here in my interpretation of what @Kak is saying but...won’t somebody have the foresight to create jobs for all these displaced workers?

Our economy tends to self correct so when these people making $12-$15/Hour are replaced isn’t there a very high likelyhood and very large opportunity to employ them in a capacity where say $20-$50/hour can be made off of their labor? And isn’t that traditionally what has happened to ALL people who lost their jobs to automation?

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[ChrisV]

At the end of the day AI is going to serve us... it’s here to do our bidding.

On a macro level it’s going to be a net positive for humanity, for sure.

(again, if they decide that they likes us and want to keep us lol)

AI, is probably going to be the best thing that happened to humanity in history.

But there’s going to be a timeline of events where we have to guide it in the right direction until things settle into place.

U.S. Unemployment Rate Falls to Lowest Level Since 1969 U.S. Unemployment Rate Falls to Lowest Level Since 1969

Oh my! That AI is so scary.

Not now. The singularity hasn’t hit yet. Real AI doesn’t exist except in very very simple forms (Netflix recommendations.. which is really just statistics and math.) The singularity is defined as when AI surpasses humans in intelligence. What that means exactly is a little fuzzy but, it’s likely to be a gradual processes...

And again it’s not scary. At the end of the day it’s going to net positive for humanity, but we just have to be thoughtful of the details. And we’re going to have to be careful while the transition is being made. Think about it @Kak .... this in the future but, as an employer are you going to want to buy a Workerbot 9000 for a one-time fee of $999 or are you going to want to pay some unskilled worker $500/wk for the rest of his life. It’s literally a no brainer.

The good news? People are going to be out of work. The bad news? People are going to be out of work.

The good news? AI is going to do all our tedious tasks for us, so we can spend more time with our loved ones

The bad news? We have to figure out how to make that transition.

If all goes well, we’re going to be able to sit back and sip margaritas while our little robot slaves do all our bidding and mow our lawns (which is actually possible now)



But then similar machines are going to cut our hair, fill our gas tanks. And @Kak is right.. there is going to be a need for engineers and programmers to help develop these. But let’s not fool ourselves into thinking we can just pluck some retarded Walmart greeter with a monotooth and just have him learn to backpropagate neural networks in scikitlearn. I mean forum member @lowtek is picking up Machine Learning and dude has a PhD is physics. Machine Learning isn’t for the faint of heart. I was picking it up and it’s complex stuff. Certain things gave me a headache me at first and I have an IQ in the 90th percentile. I mean maybe there are some tedious programming tasks that are less complex than anyone can handle, but if they’re that tedious, you can likely just get the computer to do them.

Humans, as workers, are going to be rendered obsolete in the same way that CD drives replaced floppy disks. Maybe it will happen slowly enough that

But humans will be replaced. It’s not the printing press where you still need a human to push things on their own. Humans will almost completely be unnecessary except in the rare cases where a decision needs to be made. but even that AI will eventually be able to do.

At the end of the day, everything will be fine but we’re gonna have to handle this correctly.

 

[ChrisV]

IQ testing is a fiercely-debated topic, but it is certainly possible to test people and get an idea of their relative abilities. Jordan Peterson claims the armed forces determined that people with <83 IQ could not succeed in the military, in ANY position, and so they refuse to accept them. In reality the military branches use the ASVAB/AFQT exam, and each branch does have a minimum acceptable level. The Army's minimum is 31, Marines 32, Navy 35, Air Force 36, Coast Guard 40. You can draw a rough correlation between AFTQ scores and IQ; 31-32 is roughly equivalent to an IQ of 91-92.

Speaking of Peterson, he makes a distinction between simple and complex jobs. Simple jobs are ones that you learn once and are repetitive. Complex ones are the ones where the situation is always changing. The challenges you face are different every time. IQ predicts performance on complex jobs.

View: https://youtu.be/fjs2gPa5sD0?t=278


He basically says at 4:38 “Jobs for people with IQs under 85 are very very rare.” So what happens when machines get smart enough to start encroaching on the jobs for people with IQs around 90? then encroaching on jobs for people in the 95 IQ range...



Damn I just looked up that lecture that @garyfritz just cited and damn... the conversation we’re having right now is the exact conversation he’s having with his class... almost to a T... AI, IQ and all 1:39:20

View: https://youtu.be/D7Kn5p7TP_Y?t=5928

 

[garyfritz]

The good news? AI is going to do all our tedious tasks for us, so we can spend more time with our loved ones

Don't be so sure that's good news. People NEED work. Idle hands are the devil's workshop and all that. People without work or other "must do" tasks are directionless, aimless, unfulfilled. They are NOT happy. Even elderly retired people -- who have vastly less energy than e.g. a testosterone-fueled 25-30 yr old -- need hobbies &etc or they go stir-crazy.

A nation of bored and disgruntled people is a recipe for disaster.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[theresgot2bemore]

Don't be so sure that's good news. People NEED work. Idle hands are the devil's workshop and all that. People without work or other "must do" tasks are directionless, aimless, unfulfilled. They are NOT happy. Even elderly retired people -- who have vastly less energy than e.g. a testosterone-fueled 25-30 yr old -- need hobbies &etc or they go stir-crazy.

A nation of bored and disgruntled people is a recipe for disaster.

There's a recent commercial, I believe a Ford Focus one, where they showcase their semi autonomous driving skills on their newest model. I do not doubt the chatter is being monitored to see how it is being received by the population.

Maybe the option would be, like Elon Musk said, to become one with the machine - a Transhumanist. I know I would be first in line to get augmentations to become part man part machine.

 

[Real Deal Denver]

Don't be so sure that's good news. People NEED work. Idle hands are the devil's workshop and all that. People without work or other "must do" tasks are directionless, aimless, unfulfilled. They are NOT happy. Even elderly retired people -- who have vastly less energy than e.g. a testosterone-fueled 25-30 yr old -- need hobbies &etc or they go stir-crazy.

A nation of bored and disgruntled people is a recipe for disaster.

When machines take all the low to mid range IQ jobs, we can all go to hear professors tell us what they think about things.

And then, after we accumulate enough credit hours, we can be professors too and have our own classes to teach and talk about all the things we want to talk about!

We could all be PhDs and tallllllk allllll day long...

 

[ChrisV]

Don't be so sure that's good news. People NEED work. Idle hands are the devil's workshop and all that. People without work or other "must do" tasks are directionless, aimless, unfulfilled. They are NOT happy. Even elderly retired people -- who have vastly less energy than e.g. a testosterone-fueled 25-30 yr old -- need hobbies &etc or they go stir-crazy.

A nation of bored and disgruntled people is a recipe for disaster.

Oh I think people will still work, but I think we’ll work on the things we want to work on. It will create an environment where ‘do what you love’ might actually be good advice, and people are free to pursue their careers in Underwater Basket Weaving and become Basketball Philosophers, or whatever puts wind in their stupid sails..

We can get the machines to do all the shit we don’t want to do, so we’re left with what we do want to do.

Even elderly retired people -- who have vastly less energy than e.g. a testosterone-fueled 25-30 yr old -- need hobbies &etc or they go stir-crazy.

My stepfather is a retired workaholic. Like a workaholic. He couldn’t sit down without working on a project.

Literally the week after he retired everyone comment on how relaxed and stress-free he looked. But he still works like crazy. He works on projects around the house.. he refinishes furniture. He mows the law (he definitely has enough money to hire someone but he chooses to mow it.) But again, I just can’t get over the fact that even though he’s still working all day how much people comment how happy he looks.

And what made the change? Autonomy.

And that’s my point.. I think people will be free to work on things if they want to rather than being forced, because labor will be so cheap. If you want to do a task, you can do it. If not, you can outsource it.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[ChrisV]

And that’s where @Kak is 100% right...

It’s just going to continue an upward trend of technology and lift people out of poverty the same way we’ve seen for the past 150 years, but probably at a more exponential rate.



Source: Global Extreme Poverty

Despite are also getting happier as technology progresses*:





Happiness and Life Satisfaction

*That’s at a macro level... at a micro level there are some studies showing that for instance, Facebook can increase the likelihood of you being depressed. But that’s a whole nother topic. At a macro level, happiness is going up with Technology

It gets better..





This is all a result of technology.

So next time you hear some idiot college kid make an emotional rant about the perils of capitalism and globalization, show him those stats. How that relates to AI is AI is going to take that rate and make it even more exponential. And then you have projects like neuralink.

But again, we’re just going to have to be mindful of the transition. At a macro level it’s going to lift people out of poverty and increase the standard of living for everyone, but at a micro level we just have to watch as AI starts taking over those low level jobs. It’s a Republican “-ism” that ‘as long as there are people willing and able to work, there will always be jobs for them’ but the data doesn’t completely support that. Especially with minimum wage laws. Someone with an IQ of 81 is not worth $11/hr, and definitely not $15/hr. So those laws are actually the worst thing for those types of people. Clip: Milton Friedman on minimum wage.

 

[ChrisV]

Also, @Kak - since you have a background/degree related to Economics, do you know what happened..



Looks like in the 1970’s there was just a sharp shift that reduced poverty

From the best I can tell it seems like this maybe the best bet in 1975



If that really is the cause, then AI really really will be the best thing to ever happen to humanity. Because AI is the information revolution on steroids. If that is the cause of that sharp change, then I don’t think it would be unreasonable to predict poverty being completely wiped out within 5 years of the singularity. And I’m being serious.

 

[Real Deal Denver]

Also, @Kak - since you have a background/degree related to Economics, do you know what happened..

View attachment 22020

Looks like in the 1970’s there was just a sharp shift that reduced poverty

From the best I can tell it seems like this maybe the best bet in 1975

View attachment 22021

If that really is the cause, then AI really really will be the best thing to ever happen to humanity. Because AI is the information revolution on steroids. If that is the cause of that sharp change, then I don’t think it would be unreasonable to predict poverty being completely wiped out within 5 years of the singularity. And I’m being serious.

Well, here goes.

I lived the technology age. I was in the office machine business for over 20 years. I started out when manual typewriters were common, and I ended when personal computers were common. I sold and fixed every office machine made within those eras. That's a lot of technology. I witnessed the evolution first hand, in fact, I did more than witness it - I lived it. It didn't end well.

Here's the truth of what happened - not just a graph or a study.

I'll explain the technical side, which will meet up with the sale side in the end. I was a component level electronic technician. You don't know what that means probably, because there is not a need for them anymore. It means I repaired a circuit board, instead of replacing it. That required a very highly specialized and advanced skill set. Eventually the manufacturers started using their own custom components, which I could not buy. These were mostly IC chips that consolidated many individual circuits into one chip. Then, to make things more complex, they invented multi layered circuit boards and surface mount components. That's rather complicated to explain here, so google it if you want details. The end result was that now we had major components that were UNABLE to be repaired. The only option was to replace them. Shooooo - hear that sound? That's the entire service department becoming obsolete and losing its income stream which supported the business. Not good. There might be a graph for that somewhere.

Then it became even worse. Soon afterwards, the entire MACHINE sold for a price point that make it replaceable, instead of serviceable. Now the Wal-Marts and the K-marts could sell computers right off the shelf. No need for dealers that offered repair and support anymore. The business became a commodity market.

What was the end result? MANY manufacturers went out of business because their dealer network dried up and went away. Of course the dealers all died. The business became completely automated and machines were punched out on an assembly line in China and were sold through department stores and by mail order (Amazon, NewEgg, etc.) An entire industry was wiped out. Soon after, software followed, and it too became a commodity. Today software has evolved further and there are free versions of software that are just as good as the premier programs. I know because I use a few of them. Any technical support is farmed out to India and they have a checklist to help you. Is your computer plugged in? Do you have a display? Do you have a keyboard hooked up? Still doesn't work? Your machine needs repair. Well, that was certainly useful information! Thank goodness for those highly trained "technicians." Ad nauseum.

So what we have is the service sector being destroyed first, which led to the eventual slaughter of the sales sector by becoming a commodity market. All in the name of progress. Another industry absorbed into the Wal-Mart consortium. Now Wal-Mart is fighting Amazon. Soon, retail may consist mainly of the mega-factories in China shipping their products here, with someone stocking shelves, and someone packing and shipping the goods. Oh wait - we have that already, don't we? I don't see any good paying jobs in that marketing chain. Everyone makes pennies on the products, and works on scale.

So I, and the entire industry, took our highly refined skills of troubleshooting the most complex machines ever built, and we are now free to "do whatever we want to" because technology has replaced our jobs. I want to paint pictures of flowers. Oh, but I need a job still. Too bad my skills are no longer in demand, in spite of them being so highly advanced.

Pity the people that don't have the skill set I do. It's not just the particular skills that I have, it's the ability to fix any machine made; the ability to figure out anything mechanical, electrical, or electronic. Pretty heavy duty skills there. Get ready for this little enigma: Technology destroyed the technology business. Give that one to your wind bag professor to figure out. I'm sure he'll be able to expound on it for hours, complete with charts and graphs up the wahzoo.

Of course, there are advantages. The computer I am using right now is state of the art. I have a printer that can print, copy, scan, and fax. This printer cost me less than $200, and it vastly outperforms machines that used to cost over TEN times as much. All good right?

Nope.

When everything goes on-line, then we'll all know, and see how few jobs there are, and the ones that remain will be menial. Someone has to refill the Coca-Cola syrup at McDonalds!

But, we can all get better jobs! The world will be a better place. Okay - let's look at the better jobs.

Lawyers are already being replaced with pre-paid legal services that you pay a monthly fee for. Travel agents, banks, mortgages, stock brokers, accountants - all automated; online somewhere way up in the cloud.

Even your own video of an automated lawn mower is a good example of what technology can do. I was also in the spa/pool business for a short time too - it had automatic pool cleaners. Of course. No surprise.

Instead of telling us how great everything is going to be, how about some real answers on how that's going to happen?

I don't see it turning out to be good, and I'm an expert. What makes me an expert? I was there. I lived it. Nobody was more engrossed into the evolution of technology than I was. And I saw it all crumble right before my eyes. Can't argue with facts of what actually happened. But I have a feeling you will anyway.

You can pull out a half a dozen graphs to prove macro trends. That's not of any help whatsoever to anyone in the here and now. Maybe people can be graph makers, and survey takers that get the information to make the graphs? Ooooops - nope. That's automated too.

There is some good news. Nothing will replace the trades. We will always need plumbers, electricians, and builders. But even those are being converted to a commodity market. I work with builders. They don't hire union workers that are paid well. They hire companies that source the work out to untrained people. Any job can be reduced to a list of how to do it, and that's exactly what they do. One week someone is asking if you want to super size your meal, and the next week they're painting, wiring, or shingling a half million dollar home, for two dollars more an hour!

I'll take on your academia staff that you so dearly love, any day. They better have a lot more than generic graphs and studies though.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[ChrisV]

Well that was quite the novel.



@Kak - i will never forgive you for not answering fast enough. Ever.

 

[Kak]

@GoGetter24 sorry I forgot to give you shit on your love for labor unions. Evidently you were on my ignore list for some other “stroke of brilliance.”

The sole purpose of a union labor force is to preform as little work possible for as much pay as possible under the guise of “collective bargaining and worker’s rights.” They are simply terrible for business and industry growth. If you didn’t know this, you’re probably someone that should worry about AI.

This thread bores me now.

 

[ChrisV]

Well, here goes.

I lived the technology age. I was in the office machine business for over 20 years. I started out when manual typewriters were common, and I ended when personal computers were common. I sold and fixed every office machine made within those eras. That's a lot of technology. I witnessed the evolution first hand, in fact, I did more than witness it - I lived it. It didn't end well.

Here's the truth of what happened - not just a graph or a study.

I'll explain the technical side, which will meet up with the sale side in the end. I was a component level electronic technician. You don't know what that means probably, because there is not a need for them anymore. It means I repaired a circuit board, instead of replacing it. That required a very highly specialized and advanced skill set. Eventually the manufacturers started using their own custom components, which I could not buy. These were mostly IC chips that consolidated many individual circuits into one chip. Then, to make things more complex, they invented multi layered circuit boards and surface mount components. That's rather complicated to explain here, so google it if you want details. The end result was that now we had major components that were UNABLE to be repaired. The only option was to replace them. Shooooo - hear that sound? That's the entire service department becoming obsolete and losing its income stream which supported the business. Not good. There might be a graph for that somewhere.

Then it became even worse. Soon afterwards, the entire MACHINE sold for a price point that make it replaceable, instead of serviceable. Now the Wal-Marts and the K-marts could sell computers right off the shelf. No need for dealers that offered repair and support anymore. The business became a commodity market.

What was the end result? MANY manufacturers went out of business because their dealer network dried up and went away. Of course the dealers all died. The business became completely automated and machines were punched out on an assembly line in China and were sold through department stores and by mail order (Amazon, NewEgg, etc.) An entire industry was wiped out. Soon after, software followed, and it too became a commodity. Today software has evolved further and there are free versions of software that are just as good as the premier programs. I know because I use a few of them. Any technical support is farmed out to India and they have a checklist to help you. Is your computer plugged in? Do you have a display? Do you have a keyboard hooked up? Still doesn't work? Your machine needs repair. Well, that was certainly useful information! Thank goodness for those highly trained "technicians." Ad nauseum.

So what we have is the service sector being destroyed first, which led to the eventual slaughter of the sales sector by becoming a commodity market. All in the name of progress. Another industry absorbed into the Wal-Mart consortium. Now Wal-Mart is fighting Amazon. Soon, retail may consist mainly of the mega-factories in China shipping their products here, with someone stocking shelves, and someone packing and shipping the goods. Oh wait - we have that already, don't we? I don't see any good paying jobs in that marketing chain. Everyone makes pennies on the products, and works on scale.

So I, and the entire industry, took our highly refined skills of troubleshooting the most complex machines ever built, and we are now free to "do whatever we want to" because technology has replaced our jobs. I want to paint pictures of flowers. Oh, but I need a job still. Too bad my skills are no longer in demand, in spite of them being so highly advanced.

Pity the people that don't have the skill set I do. It's not just the particular skills that I have, it's the ability to fix any machine made; the ability to figure out anything mechanical, electrical, or electronic. Pretty heavy duty skills there. Get ready for this little enigma: Technology destroyed the technology business. Give that one to your wind bag professor to figure out. I'm sure he'll be able to expound on it for hours, complete with charts and graphs up the wahzoo.

Of course, there are advantages. The computer I am using right now is state of the art. I have a printer that can print, copy, scan, and fax. This printer cost me less than $200, and it vastly outperforms machines that used to cost over TEN times as much. All good right?

Nope.

When everything goes on-line, then we'll all know, and see how few jobs there are, and the ones that remain will be menial. Someone has to refill the Coca-Cola syrup at McDonalds!

But, we can all get better jobs! The world will be a better place. Okay - let's look at the better jobs.

Lawyers are already being replaced with pre-paid legal services that you pay a monthly fee for. Travel agents, banks, mortgages, stock brokers, accountants - all automated; online somewhere way up in the cloud.

Even your own video of an automated lawn mower is a good example of what technology can do. I was also in the spa/pool business for a short time too - it had automatic pool cleaners. Of course. No surprise.

Instead of telling us how great everything is going to be, how about some real answers on how that's going to happen?

I don't see it turning out to be good, and I'm an expert. What makes me an expert? I was there. I lived it. Nobody was more engrossed into the evolution of technology than I was. And I saw it all crumble right before my eyes. Can't argue with facts of what actually happened. But I have a feeling you will anyway.

You can pull out a half a dozen graphs to prove macro trends. That's not of any help whatsoever to anyone in the here and now. Maybe people can be graph makers, and survey takers that get the information to make the graphs? Ooooops - nope. That's automated too.

There is some good news. Nothing will replace the trades. We will always need plumbers, electricians, and builders. But even those are being converted to a commodity market. I work with builders. They don't hire union workers that are paid well. They hire companies that source the work out to untrained people. Any job can be reduced to a list of how to do it, and that's exactly what they do. One week someone is asking if you want to super size your meal, and the next week they're painting, wiring, or shingling a half million dollar home, for two dollars more an hour!

I'll take on your academia staff that you so dearly love, any day. They better have a lot more than generic graphs and studies though.

They wouldn’t even allow you in the same town.

Your reply doesn’t even answer the question. Something happened around 1975 that destroyed the poverty rate globally. I really don’t care about your anecdotal experiences. You’re like the guy who swears that smoking doesnt kill because you ‘have an uncle who lived to be 95 and he 3 packs a day!’

One single data point doesn’t prove shit.

Dude, I get paid way to much to sit here and educate you on this stuff.

You are living proof as to why education is so important. You answered literally every question except for “What happened around 1975” that eradicated poverty globally including 6 brief histories of the world. And I use the term ‘brief’ loosely.

Conversations with you are like getting attacked by persistent little ankle dog.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Real Deal Denver]

You are living proof as to why education is so important. You answered literally every question except for “What happened around 1975” that eradicated poverty globally including 6 brief histories of the world. And I use the term ‘brief’ loosely.

You're right. I didn't answer the question.

I was looking at the big picture of what the consequences were/are of the advancement of AI. My "one single data point" covered the evolution of machine technology as we know it

Did all of that go over your head?

Like most over educated people, you are fixated on finding "the one answer" and cannot comprehend anything else. I thought education taught people to think, not just memorize stuff from a book or lecture. Someday you'll experience the next level, which is *living* it. But for now, we'll have to settle for what you've heard in lectures. They sure did make you smart.

If you don't know what happened in 1975, then good luck with anything else. I do, but I'm not about to open that debate with you. I get paid way too much to go down that rabbit hole. Google was invented for people like you. Look it up if you're so educated. I realize nobody can know everything, but you should at least be able to research things. Or do you only listen to what your professors tell you? Spoon fed much? And then there's YouTube for even more sessions! In a few years you can know everything! Come on - impress us! We're easy!

You'd think I'd get tired of arguing with these educated types, but I don't. It's kind of a sport. Just be sure to catch and release without harming them, so the next person can have their fun with em too.

Take another shot. I can handle your professors (pffffff) so I can sure handle their entitled self righteous little students.

By the way, off on a slightly different tangent... what have your professors ever contributed, except the regurgitated success stories of those that actually did accomplish something. Must be nice to be the one that sits back, analyzes, and discusses things - instead of actually doing something. Yeah - those that can, do.

And if you really want to be bold, step out from behind your keyboard and tell us something that you've done that was productive. Anything. Besides going to school forever and getting really smart. I'm talking about accomplishments.

 

[ChrisV]

You’re failing to realize that I literally don’t care about anything you have to say. I honestly think that you’re mildly clinically insane or have dementia, and I’m not kidding.

Professors are necessary because otherwise people become retards. Like you.

Putting you on my block list. Stop talking to me you delusional little troll.


But anyway for everyone else.. I follow this YouTube channel that digests the latest scientific papers, and holy shit:

View: https://youtu.be/txHQoYKaSUk



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GoGetter24]

@GoGetter24 sorry I forgot to give you sh*t on your love for labor unions. Evidently you were on my ignore list for some other “stroke of brilliance.”

Who gives a shit, enjoy your highhorse. Your's is a self-serving self-indulgent unintellectual stream of crap text valued only by those who respect your longevity here. So I'll return the ignorant favor.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Real Deal Denver]

You’re failing to realize that I literally don’t care about anything you have to say. I honestly think that you’re mildly clinically insane or have dementia, and I’m not kidding.

Professors are necessary because otherwise people become retards. Like you.

Putting you on my block list. Stop talking to me you delusional little troll.


But anyway for everyone else.. I follow this YouTube channel that digests the latest scientific papers, and holy sh*t:

View: https://youtu.be/txHQoYKaSUk



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Uh huh.

And if you really want to be bold, step out from behind your keyboard and tell us something that you've done that was productive. Anything. Besides going to school forever and getting really smart. I'm talking about accomplishments.

Nothing to say.

Where do these fresh outa school know it alls come from even being on a forum like this? They come here and regurgitate the lectures that nobody wants to hear, and attempt to put themselves in a position of authority to discuss them. This is what I learned in school today people!

And when we pull back the covers to see what the hell they have done that mildly qualifies as an accomplishment, they attempt a side step to avoid the issue.

Uh huh. Weak attempt school boy.

This seems like a scene out of a movie somewhere.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. He is the great and powerful Oz!

Someday they all grow up and realize that they were talking to giants. And that's the reason they didn't get the respect they thought they deserved.

Well enough of that. I'm off to find a good lecture on YouTube! {mic drip}

And then I'll get some actual work done. You know - the kind of productive activity that accomplishes something instead of just blathering about it.

 

[Powshock]

Yes, but they lost the stock option. It was paid at the end of the year and you received 1 share per year at the company. $2000 stock per year is almost $1 extra per hour. That $15 will be good for new employees, but not good for veteran workers.

 

[Mr.Brandtastic]

People miss the grander picture, why is Amazon doing this? To ruthlessly crush their competition? A nice theory but unnecessary, they already have crushed it. They are creating three things: Loyalty, Admiration, and Good Will.

Henry Ford raised his wages up to 5 dollars a day back in the day. Now it's seen as a hero move. You know how many people changed their middle names to Ford as a sheer sign of gratitude for this? Thousands. Many were lifted out of poverty virtually overnight. They were seen as national heroes for doing this move. The turnover rate for Ford was ridiculous (as I'm sure it is for Amazon as well), so this will reduce it dramatically, leading to more qualified people over time.

Will they advocate for minimum wages raises nationally? I'm sure they will and it will hurt but take a step back and do appreciate this tactical move for what it is.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Real Deal Denver]

People miss the grander picture, why is Amazon doing this? To ruthlessly crush their competition? A nice theory but unnecessary, they already have crushed it. They are creating three things: Loyalty, Admiration, and Good Will.

Henry Ford raised his wages up to 5 dollars a day back in the day. Now it's seen as a hero move. You know how many people changed their middle names to Ford as a sheer sign of gratitude for this? Thousands. Many were lifted out of poverty virtually overnight. They were seen as national heroes for doing this move. The turnover rate for Ford was ridiculous (as I'm sure it is for Amazon as well), so this will reduce it dramatically, leading to more qualified people over time.

Will they advocate for minimum wages raises nationally? I'm sure they will and it will hurt but take a step back and do appreciate this tactical move for what it is.

A great post! "They already have crushed it" - love it. I was in Wal-Mart today. I left without buying the things I went there for and went somewhere else. It's like an overcrowded third world country in there. Amazon is looking better all the time.

I did not know that about Ford. I always have admired him. The world certainly needs a lot more people that can do something, rather than just talk talk talk. Those that can, do; as the saying goes. And the world becomes a far better place because of them.

Now I admire him even more!

 

[biophase]

The traditional solution to all of this was unions, for the same reason absolutely monarchs were checked by democracy. They have more power because of their size and their money, you counter-balance that with your power in numbers. If you work somebody to death, the union will make you pay. If you reduce someone to pissing in bottles to guarantee they'll feed their kid this month, the union will make you pay. If you work someone until they collapse, and then fire them because "they're not meeting KPIs" the union will make you pay. You can jam your boot in one poor clueless wretches neck, but not if the other 100,000 wretches respond accordingly in unison. One worker standing alone has zero bargaining power against a massive organization. But "we'll all take you down with us" makes the power-hungry think twice.

My experience with unions.

One day I was at work and the light above my cubicle went out. I stepped on my desk to change it and my boss said, you can't do that, it has to be a union person. If you change that light bulb, you took away a job from a union person, we can get fined and we have to pay the union person the amount he would have gotten for changing that bulb. So I had to wait a day in my dark cubicle to wait for that bulb to be changed. From that day on, I'm was on the f!ck union train.

I've worked in many places that were union only. One day we were in a data center in downtown Chicago taking measurements, got kicked out by some union contractors working next door. We were down there doing cabinet layout so we could finish our RFP on hiring out the data center build. Later they found out that we were bidding out this job to a bunch of union companies, including theirs, and they came back to apologize. They wanted a chance at winning the $100k contract. LOL, like they had a chance after that.

 

[biophase]

Well, here goes.

I lived the technology age. I was in the office machine business for over 20 years. I started out when manual typewriters were common, and I ended when personal computers were common. I sold and fixed every office machine made within those eras. That's a lot of technology. I witnessed the evolution first hand, in fact, I did more than witness it - I lived it. It didn't end well.

Here's the truth of what happened - not just a graph or a study.

I'll explain the technical side, which will meet up with the sale side in the end. I was a component level electronic technician. You don't know what that means probably, because there is not a need for them anymore. It means I repaired a circuit board, instead of replacing it. That required a very highly specialized and advanced skill set. Eventually the manufacturers started using their own custom components, which I could not buy. These were mostly IC chips that consolidated many individual circuits into one chip. Then, to make things more complex, they invented multi layered circuit boards and surface mount components. That's rather complicated to explain here, so google it if you want details. The end result was that now we had major components that were UNABLE to be repaired. The only option was to replace them. Shooooo - hear that sound? That's the entire service department becoming obsolete and losing its income stream which supported the business. Not good. There might be a graph for that somewhere.

Then it became even worse. Soon afterwards, the entire MACHINE sold for a price point that make it replaceable, instead of serviceable. Now the Wal-Marts and the K-marts could sell computers right off the shelf. No need for dealers that offered repair and support anymore. The business became a commodity market.

What was the end result? MANY manufacturers went out of business because their dealer network dried up and went away. Of course the dealers all died. The business became completely automated and machines were punched out on an assembly line in China and were sold through department stores and by mail order (Amazon, NewEgg, etc.) An entire industry was wiped out. Soon after, software followed, and it too became a commodity. Today software has evolved further and there are free versions of software that are just as good as the premier programs. I know because I use a few of them. Any technical support is farmed out to India and they have a checklist to help you. Is your computer plugged in? Do you have a display? Do you have a keyboard hooked up? Still doesn't work? Your machine needs repair. Well, that was certainly useful information! Thank goodness for those highly trained "technicians." Ad nauseum.

So what we have is the service sector being destroyed first, which led to the eventual slaughter of the sales sector by becoming a commodity market. All in the name of progress. Another industry absorbed into the Wal-Mart consortium. Now Wal-Mart is fighting Amazon. Soon, retail may consist mainly of the mega-factories in China shipping their products here, with someone stocking shelves, and someone packing and shipping the goods. Oh wait - we have that already, don't we? I don't see any good paying jobs in that marketing chain. Everyone makes pennies on the products, and works on scale.

So I, and the entire industry, took our highly refined skills of troubleshooting the most complex machines ever built, and we are now free to "do whatever we want to" because technology has replaced our jobs. I want to paint pictures of flowers. Oh, but I need a job still. Too bad my skills are no longer in demand, in spite of them being so highly advanced.

Pity the people that don't have the skill set I do. It's not just the particular skills that I have, it's the ability to fix any machine made; the ability to figure out anything mechanical, electrical, or electronic. Pretty heavy duty skills there. Get ready for this little enigma: Technology destroyed the technology business. Give that one to your wind bag professor to figure out. I'm sure he'll be able to expound on it for hours, complete with charts and graphs up the wahzoo.

Of course, there are advantages. The computer I am using right now is state of the art. I have a printer that can print, copy, scan, and fax. This printer cost me less than $200, and it vastly outperforms machines that used to cost over TEN times as much. All good right?

Nope.

When everything goes on-line, then we'll all know, and see how few jobs there are, and the ones that remain will be menial. Someone has to refill the Coca-Cola syrup at McDonalds!

But, we can all get better jobs! The world will be a better place. Okay - let's look at the better jobs.

Lawyers are already being replaced with pre-paid legal services that you pay a monthly fee for. Travel agents, banks, mortgages, stock brokers, accountants - all automated; online somewhere way up in the cloud.

Even your own video of an automated lawn mower is a good example of what technology can do. I was also in the spa/pool business for a short time too - it had automatic pool cleaners. Of course. No surprise.

Instead of telling us how great everything is going to be, how about some real answers on how that's going to happen?

I don't see it turning out to be good, and I'm an expert. What makes me an expert? I was there. I lived it. Nobody was more engrossed into the evolution of technology than I was. And I saw it all crumble right before my eyes. Can't argue with facts of what actually happened. But I have a feeling you will anyway.

You can pull out a half a dozen graphs to prove macro trends. That's not of any help whatsoever to anyone in the here and now. Maybe people can be graph makers, and survey takers that get the information to make the graphs? Ooooops - nope. That's automated too.

There is some good news. Nothing will replace the trades. We will always need plumbers, electricians, and builders. But even those are being converted to a commodity market. I work with builders. They don't hire union workers that are paid well. They hire companies that source the work out to untrained people. Any job can be reduced to a list of how to do it, and that's exactly what they do. One week someone is asking if you want to super size your meal, and the next week they're painting, wiring, or shingling a half million dollar home, for two dollars more an hour!

I'll take on your academia staff that you so dearly love, any day. They better have a lot more than generic graphs and studies though.

What I get from your story is that these things are going to happen. We can't control or predict what the demand for our skills will be in the future. I think that's the problem with the work force that is afraid of losing its jobs to technology.

Your mistake, which you would not have even known, was becoming too specialized in something that could go away. But there's no way you would have been thinking about that while working your job. Before I left the corporate world all I knew were skills of my specific job. I thought I knew alot. It wasn't until I started a business that I saw that my little corporate world knowledge was sooooo tiny and soooo specific. In fact, my friends are realizing that now as they are now 15-20 years into their careers. Go from a xyz specialist to running a company and you've just opened yourself up to a huge influx of knowledge and skills that you didn't know you needed before.

I certainly don't believe that my current knowledge in 2018 will be enough to keep my business afloat in 2030. There's just no way that can be true. But I also have no idea what I should be learning now. So what I do is keep up with everything and read and learn. That's my current job.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Real Deal Denver]

What I get from your story is that these things are going to happen. We can't control or predict what the demand for our skills will be in the future. I think that's the problem with the work force that is afraid of losing its jobs to technology.

Your mistake, which you would not have even known, was becoming too specialized in something that could go away. But there's no way you would have been thinking about that while working your job. Before I left the corporate world all I knew were skills of my specific job. I thought I knew alot. It wasn't until I started a business that I saw that my little corporate world knowledge was sooooo tiny and soooo specific. In fact, my friends are realizing that now as they are now 15-20 years into their careers. Go from a xyz specialist to running a company and you've just opened yourself up to a huge influx of knowledge and skills that you didn't know you needed before.

I certainly don't believe that my current knowledge in 2018 will be enough to keep my business afloat in 2030. There's just no way that can be true. But I also have no idea what I should be learning now. So what I do is keep up with everything and read and learn. That's my current job.

What a great post @biophase - you hit the nail right on the head!

You really have given me great insight with this very small post. I am at a crossroads right now, and I am wrestling with how to merge my present skills with the world as it exists today. I think I have a handle on it, but your insight turned on a few more switches.

Although my once highly prized skills are now obsolete, they have molded my thought process, as well as my work habits. I can't believe what I'm doing right now in my current project. A few months ago I would not have had the will or confidence to undertake what I am doing. It is turning out even better than I imagined at first. As you stated, all we can do is try to keep up and evolve. My prior experiences have come into play and are of great benefit.

But even still - it's lonely and a little scary doing it *all* by myself. I don't enjoy operating like this, but I'm a one man company - like it or not (most of the time I don't). Even with all the advantages of technology at my fingertips, I'm still working like a madman - it's 2:00 am - and the reason I'm here is to refresh my tired brain.

Thanks again for your post. You can't realize it, but it was indeed a perfect guiding light in the storm I am now in.

 

[Raoul Duke]

Yep. Now that they’ve done it, how much do you want to bet that they start lobbying for it to be mandatory to hurt the competition? They already ride out selling a lot of items below cost, they’ve pushed the razor thin margins on to the smaller proprietors, and now they want to go a step further to crush competition.

The other thread talking about Amazon being a monopoly, I’d say this is one of those counter intuitive, crony capitalist, moves that will shake out better for them despite doubling their cost of their workforce. It is looking more like a monopoly today, than when that thread started. Is a monopoly necessarily bad? No. But the government, ignorantly playing that game, is wildly bad business policy. It’s all desssed up in a pretty bow. “Higher minimum wage, workers rights, YAY!”

Honestly, in this business environment, it’s what I would do.

I’m interested in what @Vigilante thinks about this.

 

[ChrisV]

What I notice is... whenever there’s a debate, both sides have valid points. So essentially this is the age old left vs right shit you see al the time. In this case, the right is closer to correct, but they’re not 100%.

This stuff is complicated... they did some studies at MIT about this exact topic. The question is: if you pay more, will employees perform better. The answer is: sometimes. If the skill is mechanical and there are set rules, then yes, employees perform better. But if it’s a job that requires that you figure things out, higher pay actually lead to worse performance. This is a good summary of Daniel Pink's Drive The surprising Truth of what Motivates Us. So will this be a benefit? It depends on what types of jobs they’re boosting the wage for.

I mean the ‘minimum wage is harmful’ stuff is as old as time.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca8Z__o52sk


I love Milton Friedman but the argument is even more complicated than he makes it because when it comes to mechanical skill (jobs where there are clearly defined rules, which is the category that most minimum wage jobs fall under) it actually does increase performance. But then when it comes to complex jobs, it doesn’t. But complex jobs are higher paying so it really doesnt matter.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[The Abundant Man]

What I notice is... whenever there’s a debate, both sides have valid points. So essentially this is the age old left vs right sh*t you see al the time. In this case, the right is closer to correct, but they’re not 100%.

This stuff is complicated... they did some studies at MIT about this exact topic. The question is: if you pay more, will employees perform better. The answer is: sometimes. If the skill is mechanical and there are set rules, then yes, employees perform better. But if it’s a job that requires that you figure things out, higher pay actually lead to worse performance. This is a good summary of Daniel Pink's Drive The surprising Truth of what Motivates Us. So will this be a benefit? It depends on what types of jobs they’re boosting the wage for.

I mean the ‘minimum wage is harmful’ stuff is as old as time.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca8Z__o52sk


I love Milton Friedman but the argument is even more complicated than he makes it because when it comes to mechanical skill (jobs where there are clearly defined rules, which is the category that most minimum wage jobs fall under) it actually does increase performance. But then when it comes to complex jobs, it doesn’t. But complex jobs are higher paying so it really doesn't matter.

It's not just about performance. The left's idea is that we need to take care of everyone: the poor, the needy, etc. $11/hour barely affords basic necessities. So the left wants to raise the minimum wage to help the poor out. But, there are a multitude of problems with this way of thinking.

 

[Seth G.]

Bummer! I accidentally deleted a big long thing I wrote. Crap. May re-write all of it.

 

[Seth G.]

Preface: I'm a staunch lover of capitalism

tl;dr: we're framing the question incorrectly

Now, instead of pussy footing about and complaining about "the government" and "the taxes" and the "leftist socialist programs" why don't we address these squarely as the challenges and opportunities they are?

Socialist movements are giant societal echoes (read: pain points read: opportunities). But instead of hearing these echoes, perceiving a problem, and creating a solution, we readily stick our heads in the sands of 'free markets' and 'pure capitalism'. It's the one place I see societal producers turn cloak and into absolute wussies who don't want to try and solve a problem and would rather b*tch about problems.

Instead of crying foul and trying to run from these 'problems', we as producers need to face them and engage them with creativity.

Just what is a living wage and does it change in time and space?

What basic human necessities should be in place to create the minimum viable environment for human potential?

What laws and systems need to be in place to keep people from harming themselves through their own will or lack thereof (i.e. minimum wage)

What market opportunities could exist here?

What should the tax rates be and why?

Can programs be put in place that might enable self-reliance and therefore self-actualization thereby reducing the toll on the system (and thus subsequent taxation?)


@MJ DeMarco mentioned in one of this books something along the lines of

"Your perceptions do not affect my reality" and that's great. That's why we have the mindsets we do and can create the value that we do.

I'd add that that as producers, our perceptions do affect their reality.

Therefore, we have an obligation to bend reality by way of our perception in a way that is beneficial. We should be owning these conversations. Not hiding from them or just complaining. But actively engaging and solving for.

An Argument for Minimum Wage (and other social programs):

Such social programs exist to enable, stabilize, and therefore maximize the growth and potential of a capitalist society

My argument for a minimum wage is simple: it exists to protect people from themselves.

*holds up hands* hear me out for a moment.
In an open free market (labor and all) you and I would do just fine because we are already wired to capitalize (hahaha) on opportunities. We would be unaffected by that kind of thing. In fact, if anything, we thrive under competition.

But 99% of society does not share that self-actualized perception that we so easily wield. It gives us a massive blindspot. A survivorship bias. A curse of knowledge. To you and me and most people on this forum, we would be fine. But I pose that most wouldn't.

Many many people accept shit/starved wages (the market bears it) because they literally believe that they can't have anything more. They see that as a truth as readily as you and I see the opposite. And, as a company, you would absolutely (and correctly) choose the cheaper of two equally skilled laborers. Duh.

And human suffering ensues by their own will (or lackthereof?) .

Minimum wage exists to lessen human suffering by putting in an artificial safety net so that people (unlike you and me) don't short change themselves into destitution (because millions readily would).

We (capitalists, entrepreneurs, libertarians) look on these things with disdain from a high-horse that assumes all people operate (or theoretically could) with the same level of self ownership that we do. But most people don't. Most people never would. The overwhelming majority of people have external loci of control. They would readily sell themselves into slavery from a lack of self-actualization, self-determination, and self-belief.

As the movers and shakers of the world, we shouldn't cry afoul when 'the leftists just want to raise taxes. wahhhh'. We should be listening to a societal echo, finding the source, and fixing the problems like we do with everything else.

We should be looking at the metasystem of business and society, of human potential and wellbeing and owning the conversation on taxes, welfare, minimum wage, and other social programs by way of creativity, problem solving, and determination. Just like we would any other societal pain point (read: opportunity).

So fellow capitalists, instead of:

Whining.
Complaining.
Pointing Fingers.
Blaming Others.
Blaming Circumstances.
Yelling from our armchairs about the taxes, leftists, and gubberment.

Why don't we start owning and engaging those conversations?
Why don't we start thinking of legitimate solutions?
Why don't we start objectively looking at the data?
Why don't we start listening to a big societal pain point and start thinking of creative ways to solve for it?

~

This is the one topic that takes your average societal producers and turn him/her into a wussy who doesn't want to confront a problem rationally and from a place of value generation.

So, I say, let's put on our grown up pants.
Quit b*tching. And start thinking. Start talking and researching and testing.

What is the actual issue here?
What is a potential solution here?
What can we do right now to try and solve that?

I think the first step is trying to understand the customer... to start talking with people we disagree fervently with to expand our own understanding and hopefully our reach.

I'd challenge you to not take humans wanting minimum wage, social programs, and taxes so personally and instead go try and talk with someone who believes the opposite of what you do and try to figure out why they think that way.

Find the actual issues. Start fiddling on solutions. It's what we do best. It's what we should do when it comes to societal movements as a whole.

Quit your complaining.
It sounds as ear piercing as lazy people complaining about the effect of their laziness. Nothing drives me up a wall so fast.

It's an actual problem.
People are in actual pain.
There is actual opportunity and need for solutions

La la land fairytales like a perfect free market don't exist. We live in an in-between and we always will. So, be a societal mover (like ya'll are in everything else) and start engaging the problem directly. From a place of empathy like you would approaching a common series of customer complaints.

The market doesn't give two shits about how we personally feel about taxes and socialist movements.

Our job is the scientific method (Observe, Question, Hypothesize, Experiment, Analyze, Repeat). And we ought to apply it here too.

And to anyone reading this, I mean this from a place of genuine grounded respect and admiration. Disagree or agree, I mean all of this from a place of respect.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[ChrisV]

It's not just about performance. The left's idea is that we need to take care of everyone: the poor, the needy, etc. $11/hour barely affords basic necessities. So the left wants to raise the minimum wage to help the poor out. But, there are a multitude of problems with this way of thinking.

Well if we can ‘take care of the poor’ in a way that encourages them to provide value, the there’s nothing wrong with it. It’s the idea of ‘something for nothing’ that’s the issue. But if you can improve performance by throwing them a dog bone, F*ck it. The ideology behind it is less important than the outcome.

 

[lowtek]

What I notice is... whenever there’s a debate, both sides have valid points. So essentially this is the age old left vs right sh*t you see al the time. In this case, the right is closer to correct, but they’re not 100%.

This stuff is complicated... they did some studies at MIT about this exact topic. The question is: if you pay more, will employees perform better. The answer is: sometimes. If the skill is mechanical and there are set rules, then yes, employees perform better. But if it’s a job that requires that you figure things out, higher pay actually lead to worse performance. This is a good summary of Daniel Pink's Drive The surprising Truth of what Motivates Us. So will this be a benefit? It depends on what types of jobs they’re boosting the wage for.

I mean the ‘minimum wage is harmful’ stuff is as old as time.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca8Z__o52sk


I love Milton Friedman but the argument is even more complicated than he makes it because when it comes to mechanical skill (jobs where there are clearly defined rules, which is the category that most minimum wage jobs fall under) it actually does increase performance. But then when it comes to complex jobs, it doesn’t. But complex jobs are higher paying so it really doesnt matter.

In one sense, you hit the nail on the head, and yet I think the overall point eludes you. As I understand it, the argument isn't centered around "will paying people more result in higher performance".

The argument is more that by pricing labor higher than its value, you inevitably reduce demand. No matter how good you are at it, flipping burgers (a proxy for min. wage jobs) isn't worth $15 an hour. Yes, you may flip burgers more conscientiously at $15 an hour than at $7 an hour, but it's not going to add enough extra value to the burger to justify a sufficient hike in the price to offset the increased costs.

For slightly more complicated, though not skilled trades, it doesn't matter if the product (the labor) is going to age like a fine wine, if it costs you 2x or 3x its value to get there, and there' s a chance it spoils (i.e. leaves) when it finally reaches parity with cost. It's simply too much risk to the employer.

Smart employers (i.e. Amazon) will be looking for ways to automate as much as possible, and to extract more out of current employees. This doesn't end well for anybody, especially the poor. They're about to be priced out of the market and replaced en masse with machines and software.