![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
low-end jobs
More recently, I've interacted with automation that is designed to specifically replace humans rather than broadening service. The automated check-out at grocery stores is the big example here. Instead of one cashier per line, stores now need one employee per 4 or so lines. This isn't making things more convenient for customers; unlike ATMs, the scanners are only available when the store is open anyway.
There are practical reasons I tend to avoid the automated checkouts, mostly related to speed. The line for the human has to be about three times as long as the line for the machine before the machine looks like a time-saver. People may get more proficient at scanning and packing over time, of course.
But I find that even absent that consideration, I'm reluctant to use the machine. Doing so helps to eliminate a low-end job that might be the only job the job-holder is capable of doing. Most of the cashiers I see at the grocery store aren't college-age kids looking for spending money; they're middle-aged and sometimes visibly handicapped.
This is not wholly a compassion-based argument; it's also one of expedience. I think we as a society are better off if almost everyone has a productive job. And some people are only capable of the lower-end jobs that are most in danger of being automated away. (Aside: for this reason, requirements for high minimum wages are also a bad idea -- don't make it cost-ineffective to hire people at prices they're willing to work for!)
We cannot avoid automation, of course, and in many cases it's a good thing. I'm no Luddite (she says, typing on her computer :-) ). But I kind of wish that we could focus it a little differently sometimes.
And yes, sometimes the humans are annoying to deal with. Last night I lost close to ten minutes to an inept cashier, and there is one (mentally challenged) bagger who I will never again allow to touch my groceries because he seems utterly bewildered by ideas like "the bread goes on top" (multiple failures). People who aren't capable of doing the job shouldn't hold the job anyway just out of pity. (Giant Eagle was right to fire the guy who was partially eating food and then putting the package back on the shelf, and I don't care that he didn't understand that this was wrong.) But y'know, the machines aren't painless either -- just try to get a scanning error fixed. And for the most part, the people holding these jobs are quite capable and willing to work, and I find I'm rooting for the people over the machines.
Re: Humans
1. I don't have to worry which doctor I go see.
2. I can choose my doctor without being penalized financially for using the PPO option
3. When I am sick, I go to the doctor without worrying about the headache of paying and being reimbursed. Since I am back in Canada, I am much more able to get the care I need instead of coming up to limits and unapproved treatment options. All the doctors know the system out here!
4. Cobra - yeah I had to pay 300$/month for about a year. Enough said
5. So you hear about Canadian waiting times and surgery. Well yes non-urgent stuff takes months but if you need to be seen ahead of the queue you are critical. My aunt had cancer related surgery - she waited days. My grandmother had excellent care before she died. It's not as bleak as the media puts it.
6. There was a cancer study a couple of years ago comparing Detroit and Windsor, ON. Upper and middle class had the same death rates. Lower class fared much worse in the US.
7. I walk out of the doctor without paying anything at all.*
*Ok in some provinces there is a monthly fee that is usually paid by your employer. There are subsidies readily available. When I moved back to Canada, I had to pay 50$ CDN/month for full coverage until my spouse's insurance started to cover me.
Re: Humans