[quanto]

> Job losses could shave 30 cents off each item purchased by 2027.

This is incredible. It's far less than I would imagine. It represents how well optimized the warehouses are. If we roughly estimate a median product price to be $20, then the automation represents less than 2% cost saving. Of course, Amazon is at a scale that this is still net positive despite all the R&D cost. But if automation was to reduce the cost of living, there are probably better areas to focus on.

[rob74]

It represents how well optimized the exploitation of the warehouse workers is - extract maximum amount of work from employee while paying them as little as possible. And once the "cobots" (robots that work alongside humans) come along, they will feel even more like a cog in the great Amazon machine, until they probably quit on their own rather than waiting for their turn to be replaced...

[hello_moto]

Automation (and AI) was sold to reduce cost of living but in reality it's all about maximizing profits.

[mhuffman]

There is no possible way that the board would let the 30 cents that was saved be freely "given" to the customer.

[apothegm]

How many people are we willing to leave destitute to save 30c (or less after Amazon takes their cut of the increased margin) a few times a month?

[polski-g]

They won't be destitute. Population collapse is coming, it's imperative we automate anything we can, so those workers are freed up to work in non-automatable jobs. 94% population loss in South Korea over the next three generations. Similar numbers in South America as well.

[apothegm]

Maybe, in three generations. That’s a long time from now. And these job losses are happening in the next decade, during a population peak, at least in the US.