Amazon rolls out machines that pack orders and replace jobs

Post by skybrian » Mon, May 13, 2019, 5:55 PM UTC

o_p wrote: post #312

elamje wrote: post #301

Articles about Amazon are quick to mention the workplace conditions or robots automating something. Rarely do they mention that machines equal lower prices for the consumers 9 times out of 10. You can think what you want about Amazon but I’m not complaining that I have 100’s of options for my phone case, all for 1/5 the price of the previous days buying them at Verizon or Apple. Edit: would be awesome to hear about A…

>machines bring lower prices Do you have any source about this? If the costumer is already willing to pay a price there would be no point in lowering the price just because you automated the process. Or better said, theres no point in investing in machines if your profit margin is not going to get wider.

Post by zwily » Mon, May 13, 2019, 5:55 PM UTC

edanm wrote: post #320

o_p wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>machines bring lower prices Do you have any source about this? If the costumer is already willing to pay a price there would be no point in lowering the price just because you automated the process. Or better said, theres no point in investing in machines if your profit margin is not going to get wider.

Sure there is. If they don't do it, someone else will be able to outcompete on price, eventually at least. And yes, most of our history is full of examples of newer technologies lowering cost, that's kind of the whole reason that or civilization is more advanced (materially) than it was in the past.

Post by discreteevent » Mon, May 13, 2019, 5:58 PM UTC

smpetrey wrote: post #303

Anyone parading around like this is bad news has never worked in an assembly line or warehouse job. This might reduce the workforce overall long-term, but honestly this is hard back-breaking long-workday labor. Anything that improves the livelihood of the warehouse workers is a win in my book.

Post by lb1lf » Mon, May 13, 2019, 6:00 PM UTC

abakker wrote: post #305

tomc1985 wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such a shame that this is the top comment here. People at that level are watching their job options shrink at an incredible place. Qualify your statement; robots are only "better" because they are cheaper.

Well, Robots may be cheaper, but they may also be more accurate. In my 20 years shopping with Amazon, I have very occasionally received the wrong items, so maybe robots will combat that, or reduce the need to double check, etc. I agree, low-skill jobs are shrinking, but we should not expect companies to solve that. We have a government and we vote. Ideally, we should all be asking the government to propose solutions…

Post by tomc1985 » Mon, May 13, 2019, 6:02 PM UTC

slphil wrote: post #329

tomc1985 wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the current political gridlock voting is not enough. Workplaces -- the very entities that provide the jobs we need to earn a living -- need to shoulder more of the burden they inflict from the zero-sum game that they're paying. They hold a disproportionate amount of the world's wealth and they need to take responsibility for it.

The economy is not a zero-sum game, nor are corporate profits. Increases in productive efficiency create objectively more wealth overall, and those benefits diffuse out to every socioeconomic class (the classic conservative snark that even poor people have cars, refrigerators, and air conditioning, living better than medieval kings in many ways, is not inaccurate). We are living in an era where megacorporations and t…