|
Soviet Commubot posted:Just look at this. He just assumes that a fast food manager makes $5,000 per month. Just to be clear here, Jrode believes that a fast food manager makes $62,000+, more than the median household income and nearly twice the median personal income.
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:35 |
|
|
archangelwar posted:Just to be clear here, Jrode believes that a fast food manager makes $62,000+, more than the median household income and nearly twice the median personal income. It really is insane. I was talking to an old friend the other day who is a district manager for McD's. Covers the communication between franchises for two provinces in western Canada. His take home is just shy of $52,000/year after a decade and a half at the job. Also he got the job through nepotism which he freely admits. The idea that someone earns $60,000 usd working at McDonald's is hilarious and I am almost sad jrod is probated so I can't mock him as much. In a slight aside, I'm hoping to have a serious effort post for this thread before it gets locked on Sunday. Getting dragged to get 'krunked' on Saturday tho, so we will see.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
Your Dunkle Sans posted:Poor people can be safely ignored. It's when middle class jobs and functions like Law that start being automated and workers displaced and unemployed that the public will (might?) take notice and ask questions. Yeah poor people can't be completely ignored. If they get hungry and desperate enough they get increasingly unruly and eventually violent. This is one of the issues that's going to have to be dealt with sooner rather than later. Repetitive, menial tasks are the easiest to automate and are increasingly being done by machines. McDonald's now has machines that fill the drinks so that's fewer human hands you actually need in the place. How much stuff is ordered online instead of in a retail outlet? No need for a cashier. There's another job being destroyed. Self checkouts and ordering kiosks are crowding in on that, too. Tracking stock? Yup, increasingly computerized. Nobody needs to go out and count each individual thing anymore unless the computer fucks up but most of the time it doesn't. What happens when you can run an entire busy McDonald's with two people, total? Of course this is illustrating the entire point Marx was making. When the amount of effort required to feed everybody is almost none then why not feed everybody? fishmech posted:Uhhhhhh, are you posting from 1962 somehow? Web dev bubbled and is bubbling again. Far as I can tell the rest of tech is pretty safe and always has been. Excluding game development. That's a whole other ball game but that too is just plain growing. The dot com bubble was not all of tech. It was a specific part of it though the details of that don't have a ton to do with tech itself and rather the weirdness that happened in the nascent internet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Your Dunkle Sans posted:That's why I think it's kind of dumb to scream "STEM!! STEM!! STEM!!" at people because, in the long term, people who don't really have the mathematical/technical aptitudes or - more importantly - the passion to excel in engineering or programming would be really disserviced to force their round peg into a square hole I'm not aware of this actually happening in a consistent, systemic way. There might be parents who are doing this, but the college education system doesn't force anyone to go into STEM. There's the college debt motive, but that's only true in the US, and I think it's likely to go away in our lifetimes. STEM course failure rates are also high enough to preclude the idea that we're pushing people into STEM careers for which they don't have the aptitude. Nessus posted:Mostly, my objections are when it's either portrayed as the one important thing to teach in school Uhh, we're talking about computer science still, right? Where is this happening? Nessus posted:, or is valorized at the severe expense of other important elements of teaching small children. Programming is not somehow bad, but ideally it should not be at the expense of other subjects, or should be integrated with them (robotics could be a great way to do multi-disciplinary teaching, for instance). I agree with that. quote:You say "relevancy," too, which is its own set of value judgments. However, the argument of "why, exactly, do we have schools, and what are they supposed to be doing" is probably not one for the Jrode mock thread. "Relevancy" in the sense that school curricula should evolve like how the rest of society evolves. Schools in 1950 were teaching students how to use a card catalog, and it would be pretty silly if that was still in the curriculum today. Switching out entire courses does become a value judgment, but offering a course that conveys useful skills and gives the student some experience with basic logic (something sorely lacking in most K-12 educations) is practically a no-brainer. The question of whether or not it should be a mandatory course and whether or not it should knock other mandatory courses off of the list is out of scope
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Saying that this is all it boils down to is too simplistic but it's really not implausible that this is a part of it. Employers in all fields will collaborate to drive down the cost of labor. This is a fact that doesn't require believing in "conspiracy theories." Conspiracies are possible, but this kind of action can be completely out in the open, it can be bound up in other sincere motives, it just can be emergent from facts of hiring. The tech sector is absolutely not immune to this. A few years ago several tech companies were hit with an anti-trust suit because they agreed not to try to poach each other's workers. The possibility of tech workers leaving one company for another is part of what keeps their salaries high, so the motive for it was pretty obvious. When they explained their actions, the managers/execs in charge of the decision plainly explained it in terms of the security this would provide them to innovate cost-effective solutions for customers. Yes yes, we all agree that employers want cheaper STEM workers and that promoting STEM education leads to more + cheaper STEM workers. That's not being disputed. The question is whether offering computer science in the K-12 curriculum is a direct result of employers wanting cheaper STEM workers, or whether it's a combination of factors. I'd argue that it's the latter, and anyone taking a conspiratorial tone in order to suggest the crass option is just being silly. It's equivalent to arguing that classes offering basic home gardening instruction are just the result of Monsanto wanting cheaper field hands, that basic personal accounting instruction is just the result of Big Banks wanting cheaper accountants, or that history instruction is the result of universities deciding that they want to drive down the salaries of History professors. While it's definitely true that these groups want these things, it's ludicrous to suggest that they are the only groups wanting these courses to be offered, and it's laughable to suggest that changes in K-12 instruction are coming directly from these groups. It's basically an accusation of there being an Education Illuminati QuarkJets fucked around with this message at 20:27 on Feb 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Web dev bubbled and is bubbling again. Far as I can tell the rest of tech is pretty safe and always has been. Excluding game development. That's a whole other ball game but that too is just plain growing. This is utterly bullshit. There was a collapse in general electronics/computers during the 80s as just one example. I mean what you're doing is like saying there was no real estate bubble in the 2000s, because it mostly affected residential properties.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
Since when have the American poor gotten unruly and violent enough to effect lasting change? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
Still waiting for OP to explain why we should care about property rights.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
E-Tank posted:Still waiting for OP to explain why we should care about property rights. About that...
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Your Dunkle Sans posted:Since when have the American poor gotten unruly and violent enough to effect lasting change? The entirety of the labor movement in the 19th century into the early 20th. That and the civil rights movement of the 1960's. You know, just saying.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:The entirety of the labor movement in the 19th century into the early 20th. That and the civil rights movement of the 1960's. I'll concede that, but progress has been continuously rolled back with real wages flat lining since the 1970s, labor unions have been decimated, minorities and the poor have been increasingly oppressed due to Voter ID laws, increased police militarization and brutality, etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
Your Dunkle Sans posted:I'll concede that, but progress has been continuously rolled back with real wages flat lining since the 1970s, labor unions have been decimated, minorities and the poor have been increasingly oppressed due to Voter ID laws, increased police militarization and brutality, etc. And if it keeps happening expect a repeat of the 19th century but worse.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
Caros posted:About that... Somewhat ironically property rights allow a private forum to shut jrod up for a month. So that's one thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
spoon0042 posted:Somewhat ironically property rights allow a private forum to shut jrod up for a month. So that's one thing. So property rights do matter? Huh. Strange world when Jrode is right about something. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Yes yes, we all agree that employers want cheaper STEM workers and that promoting STEM education leads to more + cheaper STEM workers. That's not being disputed. The question is whether offering computer science in the K-12 curriculum is a direct result of employers wanting cheaper STEM workers, or whether it's a combination of factors. I'd argue that it's the latter, and anyone taking a conspiratorial tone in order to suggest the crass option is just being silly. I kinda feel like you're reading a whole lot into, and in the process distorting, some casual speculation about a moral hazard/conflict of interest. When Nessus clarified the point to: Nessus posted:I don't think it's some grand paranoid conspiracy but I would really be shocked if part of the calculation for "let's push computer programming skills to be widely available" is not "this will make it cheaper and easier to get people with those skills in the future." You brushed off the part in bold as also "a paranoid conspiracy," but it's not. There's no conspiratorial tone here that I can see, the tone I get from this is one of casual generalization. The claim is not about "direct results" but rather a "part of the calculation," which fits into an explanation of "a combination of factors," so unless you're saying the only reasonable assumption is that this is not part of the calculation such that it is not one of the combined factors, which honestly seems like a much stronger claim than the one you're addressing, it's not fair to act like this is tinfoil hat stuff. It's a hunch that for some of the groups or individuals who promote greater amounts of STEM education, their motive relates to improving the bargaining position of employers. This is something businesses actually do collaborate on. It's called "collusion" or "wage fixing" and it's not some X-Files bullshit, it was the subject of an actual federal case in the tech sector. Laws against it don't exist because legislatures had a sudden bout of mass paranoia. They exist because employers have a collective interest in depressing wages and will collaborate to do so. quote:It's equivalent to arguing that classes offering basic home gardening instruction are just the result of Monsanto wanting cheaper field hands, that basic personal accounting instruction is just the result of Big Banks wanting cheaper accountants, or that history instruction is the result of universities deciding that they want to drive down the salaries of History professors. While it's definitely true that these groups want these things, it's ludicrous to suggest that they are the only groups wanting these courses to be offered, and it's laughable to suggest that changes in K-12 instruction are coming directly from these groups. It's basically an accusation of there being an Education Illuminati As far as I can tell, no one has actually said that only business interests looking to depress wages promote STEM education so I am not sure why you're telling me that it's ludicrous to suggest that? That is not the suggestion. The suggestion is about "part of the calculation." Again, it looks to me like Nessus was being pretty causal about these claims, and I don't think failing to specify the exact dimensions of this speculation in a brief comment indicates what you seem to be taking it to indicate. But anyway, sure, that there is a shared interest in something does not automatically imply a conspiracy to pursue that interest, but it is relevant that we don't see home gardening or history as subjects of national economic concern which business leaders sound the alarm about on a national level. Neither of them are rare specialized skills which command good salaries. (And as for accounting, well, the "M" in "STEM" stands for something...) There is nothing ludicrous about suggesting that part of the reason for such a heavy emphasis is employer concern about wages and compensation, especially when it is not actually clear that there is a shortage of qualified persons (especially tricky given that what "qualified" means is relative to what employers say they are looking for, and, well...). And again, no one has suggested a direct link between these interests and K-12 curricula, this is another non-issue you're preemptively swatting down because (as far as I can tell) Nessus's brief "all this stuff/wouldn't be surprised" comments were not exact about their scope because they were casual generalizations of a complex process. Suggesting that part of the motive for some individuals or groups to promote greater STEM education relates to improving the bargaining position of employers does not amount to suggesting a direct level of control. But it is also a fact that business interests make great efforts, often successful efforts, to influence the priorities of public education. This is what drives the education reform movement. I guess if I start naming names like "The Gates Foundation" or "the Koch brothers," you can write this off as another paranoid conspiracy, but their interest in and influence on education are matters of public record. GunnerJ fucked around with this message at 21:37 on Feb 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
E-Tank posted:Still waiting for OP to explain why we should care about property rights. Caros posted:Mods, please change thread title to "Why Should We Care About Property Rights? Because I will fight you!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
Caros posted:Mods, please change thread title to "Why Should We Care About Property Rights? Because I will fight you!" The fact Caros said this makes me wonder if he is HBomberguy
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Twerkteam Pizza posted:The fact Caros said this makes me wonder if he is HBomberguy I don't even know what that is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
McDonald's has had machines that fill drinks to the appropriate level at the push of a button for years they're not about to go to an all robot staff
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
Caros posted:I don't even know what that is. A goon who makes great videos mocking Dork Enlightenment types. Look up A Measured Response to the Sarkeesian Effect on YouTube
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:McDonald's has had machines that fill drinks to the appropriate level at the push of a button for years they're not about to go to an all robot staff They'll do it within hours of it becoming cheaper and more efficient than human employees.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:They'll do it within hours of it becoming cheaper and more efficient than human employees. And that's a thing that will happen soon (it's not)
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:A goon who makes great videos mocking Dork Enlightenment types. Look up A Measured Response to the Sarkeesian Effect on YouTube I really should make videos or a blog or something making fun of Libertarians but... 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
^^^^^^ You did. I was in it. Or Paragon1 did, anyway. Caros posted:I don't even know what that is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYQo6LI3Y7c
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:I kinda feel like you're reading a whole lot into, and in the process distorting, some casual speculation about a moral hazard/conflict of interest. When Nessus clarified the point to: On rereading, I realize that Nessus was talking about employers pushing for more STEM education as opposed to educators. Employers using "cheaper labor in the future" as their own motivation makes sense. In the context of the original post, I assumed he meant that educators were using "cheaper labor in the future" as a motivator, which seemed paranoid and delusional. Influence of education by industry is apparent across many fields, and part of that influence is due to a desire to reduce labor costs, I agree. My contention was only with the idea that educators are colluding directly with industry to suppress wages, which I realize now may not have been the intention of Nessus' post and was probably just the result of me being too sensitive to conspiracy theorist cues.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:^^^^^^ Well that was more jrodefeld specific. For a while now I've been pondering a Shitmisesdotorgssays style blog. But again,
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
Increase corporate taxes, institute a mincome, and abolish the minimum wage. McDonalds replacing its entire staff with robots wouldn't matter at that point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
Caros posted:Well that was more jrodefeld specific. For a while now I've been pondering a Shitmisesdotorgssays style blog. But again, I think you should. I'd love to listen a podcast of yours at work. Actually, speaking of the podcast, would any goons be interested in doing one this coming Sunday?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:I think you should. I'd love to listen a podcast of yours at work. Sadly I am incommunicado on terms of audio for the foreseeable future on account of living off a couch. But if you do have it I'll probably listen in!
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:A goon who makes great videos mocking Dork Enlightenment types. Look up A Measured Response to the Sarkeesian Effect on YouTube He also did a really loving fantastic let's play of The Void, best art game, if I recall aright.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:And if it keeps happening expect a repeat of the 19th century but worse. As we've established, this is the implicit goal of American Libertarianism.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:On rereading, I realize that Nessus was talking about employers pushing for more STEM education as opposed to educators. Employers using "cheaper labor in the future" as their own motivation makes sense. In the context of the original post, I assumed he meant that educators were using "cheaper labor in the future" as a motivator, which seemed paranoid and delusional. Influence of education by industry is apparent across many fields, and part of that influence is due to a desire to reduce labor costs, I agree. My contention was only with the idea that educators are colluding directly with industry to suppress wages, which I realize now may not have been the intention of Nessus' post and was probably just the result of me being too sensitive to conspiracy theorist cues. Oh, that makes more sense. I honestly couldn't figure out what was so controversial about some of what you were calling out. I'd agree that suggesting a collusion of educators for that purpose would have been far-fetched.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
Caros posted:It really is insane. I was talking to an old friend the other day who is a district manager for McD's. Covers the communication between franchises for two provinces in western Canada. His take home is just shy of $52,000/year after a decade and a half at the job. This is a good point though, as there are many different types of managers especially at McDonald's because of their franchise agreement. Shift managers (depending on the size of staff you might have more than one around at a time) generally make a $1-$3/hour more than a standard employee, store managers (usually only a few per store, open the store and do the bank depositing) can be salaried but make something in the $30k range if they have been there 5+ years. Then you can get into managers that operate more as personal assistants to the franchisee and these can be per store or per store block (or regional). Ultimately these are bookeepers for the franchisee's business as well as coordinators for staff training, introducing new items, etc. They are not "store managers" in any real sense like shift or regular store managers, and these people can make a lot of money (they are to "manager" as accountant is to "cashier").
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
archangelwar posted:This is a good point though, as there are many different types of managers especially at McDonald's because of their franchise agreement. Shift managers (depending on the size of staff you might have more than one around at a time) generally make a $1-$3/hour more than a standard employee, store managers (usually only a few per store, open the store and do the bank depositing) can be salaried but make something in the $30k range if they have been there 5+ years. Then you can get into managers that operate more as personal assistants to the franchisee and these can be per store or per store block (or regional). Ultimately these are bookeepers for the franchisee's business as well as coordinators for staff training, introducing new items, etc. They are not "store managers" in any real sense like shift or regular store managers, and these people can make a lot of money (they are to "manager" as accountant is to "cashier"). A lot is still relative too. The guy I'm talking about makes decent money for no education, but there are maybe thirty people Canada wide with his job. So of the thousands of McDonald's employees Canada wide you have maybe thirty people who can make an upper middle class income based on the experience they earned at their job. Everyone else down the food chain tops out at about 15-17/hour, less than half of what jrod thought. Frankly it continues to baffle me how he could throw that number out at all. Clearly jrodefeld is disconnected from the life of your average American if he thinks that $30/hour is a middling wage rather than a frankly life changing amount. I know people who would more than double their income if they went to $30/hour, and they aren't even the poor ones.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:57
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:On rereading, I realize that Nessus was talking about employers pushing for more STEM education as opposed to educators. Employers using "cheaper labor in the future" as their own motivation makes sense. In the context of the original post, I assumed he meant that educators were using "cheaper labor in the future" as a motivator, which seemed paranoid and delusional. Influence of education by industry is apparent across many fields, and part of that influence is due to a desire to reduce labor costs, I agree. My contention was only with the idea that educators are colluding directly with industry to suppress wages, which I realize now may not have been the intention of Nessus' post and was probably just the result of me being too sensitive to conspiracy theorist cues. QuarkJets posted:Increase corporate taxes, institute a mincome, and abolish the minimum wage. McDonalds replacing its entire staff with robots wouldn't matter at that point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Yeah poor people can't be completely ignored. If they get hungry and desperate enough they get increasingly unruly and eventually violent. This is one of the issues that's going to have to be dealt with sooner rather than later. Repetitive, menial tasks are the easiest to automate and are increasingly being done by machines. McDonald's now has machines that fill the drinks so that's fewer human hands you actually need in the place. How much stuff is ordered online instead of in a retail outlet? No need for a cashier. There's another job being destroyed. Self checkouts and ordering kiosks are crowding in on that, too. Tracking stock? Yup, increasingly computerized. Nobody needs to go out and count each individual thing anymore unless the computer fucks up but most of the time it doesn't. And with all that, the prices of goods don't drop relative to consumer incomes because we're already accustomed to paying a certain amount. But totally, supply and demand curves are real because Nature is two linear functions intersecting in a 2D plane and it'll all work itself out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:07
|
|
|
Your Dunkle Sans posted:That's why I think it's kind of dumb to scream "STEM!! STEM!! STEM!!" at people because, in the long term, people who don't really have the mathematical/technical aptitudes or - more importantly - the passion to excel in engineering or programming would be really disserviced to force their round peg into a square hole, collecting a paycheck for several decades while wearily looking forward to when (if) they can retire and die. It's understandable of course given current realities but still short-sighted. I am not familiar with this contingent that believes every job should be related to the design of technical systems. fishmech posted:This is utterly bullshit. There was a collapse in general electronics/computers during the 80s as just one example. I think that many of us are just sick of people equating "tech" with dime-a-dozen web developers. Stinky_Pete fucked around with this message at 00:51 on Feb 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:17
|
|
|
Why do all you dorks talk about Mincome without talking about the idea of a maximum income? I mean this QuarkJets posted:Increase corporate taxes, institute a mincome, and abolish the minimum wage. McDonalds replacing its entire staff with robots wouldn't matter at that point. Is only half the freaking solution. Mincome will become as diluted as the Minimum Wage has become today.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:He also did a really loving fantastic let's play of The Void, best art game, if I recall aright. There's a bunch of outtakes from that if you subscribe to his Patreon. Is hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:35 |
|
|
Who What Now posted:I think you should. I'd love to listen a podcast of yours at work. I want to, but I'm crazy busy this Sunday.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 03:52
|
|
