[reso]

There's a lot of work that hasn't been done yet in studying what causes automation from an economics point of view.

A common thought experiment is "Why hasn't fast food been automated?" We certainly have the technology to make burgers automatically, to the same quality that MacDonalds does. This technology is at least 40 years old. Yet we still have kids running these stores. The reason seems to be: kids are cheaper than machines. This seems to suggest that it is low wages and economic precarity which is preventing automation, rather than that these are the jobs most threatened by it.

[andrewstuart2]

Fast food is significantly automated, though. Depending on the chain, you get various different parts of the process centrally automated, and standardized food components and ingredients are shipped out to restaurant locations or franchisees. Only prep and assembly are deferred to the very end, from the various standard components. The reason fast food works, and is consistent enough that you can expect the same Chalupa in California and New York City, is absolutely automation and centralization.

I think the bigger likelihood here is that JIT assembly of a few components into many distinct products with differences in technique or ratio is still cheaper to do with manual labor.

[WheelsAtLarge]

"few components into many distinct products with differences in technique or ratio is still cheaper to do with manual labor."

True, the more specialized the final product is the less likely it is that it will get automated.

Our current wave of automation will have its greatest impact on white collar jobs. Many of the jobs will get redefined into simpler functions and the very simple functions will be automated by software. Two I can quickly think of are Medical and legal services. These services will be greatly impacted in a few decades. The professionals won't go away but there will be a few elite ones that will have many assistants who will use information services to help them do their job.

I've started to see it. The medical offices I use have many more physician's assistants now than a few years ago to name one impact.

The idea of complete automation is unlikely to happen any time soon. I don't even think it will even happen in our grandchildren's lifetime but limited automation will have a great impact on our society.

We have to be careful with the word "Myth" since automation will have and is having a great impact on us.

[SahAssar]

> The reason seems to be: kids are cheaper than machines

I'd rephrase that as kids are cheaper to fix than machines. A burger flipper machine is almost definitely more efficient and cheaper per burger, but when it breaks its probably a lot more expensive to fix or replace than a kid.

It's the same idea, but I think that you need to separate the "cost per burger per hour per hour" and the "cost per burger per hour per year" since only one of those will consider the cost of unexpected costs.

[tinybrotosaurus]

It is a race to the bottom nevertheless. While on one side minimum wage is pushed higher, on the other technology gets cheaper. Eventually even burger flippers will find themselves out of a job.

[beepbooptheory]

Is your conclusion here not something that is already established? (Outside of Marxist theory, which would quite emphatically affirm the point, with the addendum that it is a fundamental "contradiction" within capitalism).

I think it seems obvious though, not only the fact that profit seeking would override productivity when they are at odds, but also that the economy needs to sustain unskilled worker reserves.

Also, I bet even teenagers still do a better job than robots for kitchen work, but your point still stands.

[wbsss4412]

Productivity is defined as output ($$) per unit of input ($$), you seem to be confusing output maximization with productivity. If it’s cheaper to pay laborers to produce instead of machines, then it is both more productive as well as profit maximizing.

And yes, this is already well established theory within mainstream economics.