[pixl97]

Hmmm, what you are saying doesn't make sense.

Lets say there is an industrial machine that TCO is $50,000 per year to operate.

Lets say a human doing the same task, same quantity, and same outcome, for low pay only costs $20,000.

It would be crazy not to use humans. Trying to drop the cost of the machine is likely going to be very difficult because there will be no demand.

Now, give the humans a raise and insurance. Lets say that brings up the total human cost to $48,000. We'll, it is actually worth getting the machines now. Seems counter intuitive even when the machine is $2000 more. But it is almost granted the cost of the machines will drop now there is a mass market for them.

[maym86]

Raising the wages of humans so they are the same cost as machines doesn't make the machines cheaper. Amazon could keep workers wages low and still buy machines and create the market. One doesn't necessitate the other.

[pixl97]

>Raising the wages of humans so they are the same cost as machines doesn't make the machines cheaper.

And again, that is where you are wrong.

Economies of scale. Building one machine is expensive. Building 10 is slightly cheaper. Building a thousand lowers the price. A million makes them a commodity.

[maym86]

I understand economics of scale. Amazon could order a million machines without raising workers wages.

[pixl97]

Amazon doesn't control worker wages, for the most part.

If the politicians and employees were not complaining they would not have raised wages.