Carl’s Jr. CEO looks to automation


The CEO of Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s has visited the fully automated restaurant Eatsa — and it’s given him some ideas on how to deal with rising minimum wages.
“I want to try it,” CEO Andy Puzder told Business Insider of his automated restaurant plans. “We could have a restaurant that’s focused on all-natural products and is much like an Eatsa, where you order on a kiosk, you pay with a credit or debit card, your order pops up, and you never see a person.”
Puzder’s interest in an employee-free restaurant, which he says would be possible only if the company found time as Hardee’s works on its northeastern expansion, has been driven by rising minimum wages across the US.

Carl’s Jr. CEO looks to automation as minimum wage hikes drive up labor costs « Hot Air

Another story about businesses trying to adapt to rising minimum wage demands. I believe there was a MCDonalds that worked out some kind of automation with touch screens in a pilot program.

McDonald’s orders 7,000 touchscreen kiosks to replace cashiers


Employers talking about the minimum wage thing as the reason for replacing workers with automation is just an excuse. Automation will soon make most jobs cost pennies in electricity. The real question is… when that happens, what happens to all those jobs the automation replaces?


I’m not convinced that it’ll be that sweeping. It’s not cost-effective if the labor force is laid off and can’t afford their products or services.

I also question whether or not it’s an excuse. Wal-Mart was already doing self-checkout lines long before this $15 an hour crap came up. If it’s cost effective, that’s all the excuse they need, unless the socialists and unions get legislation against it.


If automation takes over some jobs, other jobs will pop up to take their place - it’s always happened that way. Or, as FC said, companies will go out of business because no one can afford to buy their products.

I’ve heard this as an anti-prohibition argument - if prohibition is enforced, what will all those bartenders do for a job? Well, if people aren’t frequenting bars, they’ll be spending their money elsewhere, opening up other jobs. I’m not saying this as a call for prohibition, just an argument I have heard a number of times. There was still a Prohibition party in my younger days. If I remember correctly, a friend of our family took a big chunk of the vote in PA for the governorship under the Prohibition Party.


The problem with the idea of jobs popping up in place of jobs replaced by automation is, will the job that “pops up” be able to be automated?


SOMEBODY still has to build those automated machines! They are complicated enough that one cannot be built accurately by “automation.”


Yes, that is true, there will be lots of work in the creation of those machines that will be built largely where they are today (China, Germany, South Korea and Japan). Then there is the maintenance of those machines, most of which will be in a device the size of a tablet, when they break, they will simply be replaced, not serviced.

And even if there is work that automation provides that wasn’t there prior to it, your forgetting that the reason for going to automation is to increase efficiency. Do more with less. If the workers were simply able to slide into positions fixing, delivering, selling automation systems (which is doubtful as the jobs needed would be of a higher level than most cashiers are trained for), than there would be no increase in efficiency and the costs would reflect that. If automation replaces 3 million fast food workers, it won’t create 3 million jobs related to the support of automation systems. Even if it made a million new jobs (which I doubt), and those jobs could be done by cashiers (which I doubt), the other 2 million people would then move on to compete in other low wages jobs, at best, and 3 million people at worst, of which there is already too much competition.


Remember when computers were going to do away with all paperwork?


No, I don’t. Anyone who said that, didn’t know what they were talking about.

I mean, the spreadsheet was the “killer app” that took computers mainstream. One trained person and laptop and Excel can to the work of an entire office of people back in the 60’s…So in that sense, computers did away with the jobs of millions of people, not paperwork.


For some, sure, but that’s both down the line, and likely not a total conversion.

ATMs automated much of what bank tellers did, but not everything they did, hence why there’s more bank tellers employed today than when the ATM was introduced.


If the automation is truly efficient, then it’s doing something productive; that will add real wealth to the economy.


It’s low wages or no wages.

Fast food, I’m assuming, doesn’t have the best margins.


To be honest, the only reason I even talk to bank tellers at all is when a human at the bank screws up. The stuff run and done by the atms always seem to work fine. It’s the humans that mess stuff up.

And I know a lot of the robot parts are put together by other robots now.

Another video to chew on.

People that think robots won’t be able to do “x” or “y” in the near future don’t understand where we are when it comes to technology now, or the new developments being pushed.

It used to be non-technologists that warned about machines replacing people, and technologists were pointing out the new jobs that were being produced. The luddites were wrong, and technology benefited all.

But the latest call to the problem isn’t being raised now by the non-technologists. In fact, the non-technologists/non-transhumanists are the ones in denial now about what we are building, what we are creating. You think you’re job can’t be replaced by a machine… yea, I remember many people at my last job were saying the same thing. I was tasked with writing a system that would improve the system… and it worked so well, 20 people were fired. You know what I got from the big wigs upstairs for that? “Good job, you get to keep your job.” No raise, no real advancement… just 20 people gone and I get to stay where I was.

You want to know why I am the technologist/transhumanist I am? Because I think the programming/engineering of these machines/ai will be the last holdout of human jobs… until my own position is replaced by AI. By that time, I’ll have invested in transhumanists technologies and doing work that is beyond normal people.


The whole issue with this minimum wage thingy, is not whether I need to pay a worker $15.00 dollars an hour to push a button, but the fact the federal government sets wages to begin with. That is not their job, never has been, and should never be. This is plain and simple government interference in the public workplace. Part of the socialist movement here in America.
Fast food work was initially a place for entry level and High school students to work part time for date money and college savings money, nothing more. It taught work ethic, and labor responsibility. But ensuing labor laws quelled much of that and some places kids just had bad work ethic. Now most of them seem to do.
I do not see the advantage of paying someone to push a broom, punch buttons on a cash register, put stock on a shelf, dig a ditch or any other entry level position any $15.99 per hour. With union influence over the Democrat party pushing for federal mandated wage levels, only leads to greater costs, greater costs leads to higher product cost, with leads to higher wages to counter higher product costs and the cycle goes on.


The evidence on production costs are in. a $15 an our minimum wage would raise the cost of a ~$5 burger about .17 cents, but the other side of this is that as people become poorer they are increasingly eligible for assistance. Any losses spent on paying higher wages will be made up fr in decreased assistance, will it not? Why should you or I pay our taxes to subsidies companies who underpay workers who then get government benefits. Seems to me, you can pay into the bureaucracy and pay people beanies, or you can simply force companies to pay a minimum amount and remove may people from the government rolls and let “capitalism” do it’s job. Where people have money and choices and those free choices dictate the market.

I can’t believe that higher minimum wage isn’t a Conservative value. WEll, that is, unless you think that poor people and their children should go without any assistance and have no food, shelter or access to emergency medical care…

And look at this, even Fox has picked up on an AP story showing that places where the minimum wage was increased we’re seeing job growth…

Job growth picks up in states that raised minimum wage | Fox News


You are not paying attention! I said nothing about the legitimacy of minimum wage, but the idea of government declaring what minimum wage is to be. Government HAS NO BUSINESS being in the private sector.
But I will say, a jump of double the wage is idiocy. And your numbers are a bit bogus.

  1. According to one study from a school I’ve never heard of.
  2. No, because you’re giving the enabled more ammunition to hold us hostage for more wages lest they go to the government teat. How about taking away both.
  3. False. Any system to enable capitalism is an oxymoron. As others on this site have shown in years gone by, capitalism is what happens in the absence of a system. When the government tries (or pretends to try) to plug the leaks in capitalism, they drive the Titanic into the iceberg.
  4. Opportunity is a conservative value; and it’s stifled by government interference.
  5. Enabling is a poor way to assist. As conservatives, we’re all for helping the legitimate needy who truly cannot help themselves. But not through the government, who enable the lazy in the process.
  6. And let’s reiterate the fact that it’s actually an AP article. But as long as I have it up, even it says this:

Some economists argue that six months of data isn’t enough to draw conclusions.

“It’s too early to tell,” said Stan Veuger, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. “These states are very different along all kinds of dimensions.”

In the past on a variety of issues (mainly economic), I’ve made the comparison with sprinting in a marathon; you get temporarily ahead, and then you’re toast.


It doesn’t work.

Minimum wage is what turned Thomas Sowell from a communist, to a Free marketeer, and he himself is a witness to the effect the minimum wage has had on black youth unemployment.

It hurts the most vulnerable workers, and creates systemic unemployment. We know this (in part), because we can compare the European nations with minimum wage laws, to those who don’t:

And it speaks volumes.

WEll, that is, unless you think that poor people and their children should go without any assistance and have no food, shelter or access to emergency medical care…

It’s precisely because I don’t want people to be hurt, that I stand against this foolishness. What you want, creates ruin.

What you want, is superficial.


What are ya talking about Maylar!? Libraries will be he last job on earth. When all is said an done I will still be here in my chair waiting for your inevitable visit.


I remember going to a fully automated burger place in California, back in the 90s. Rather than a touch screen, it had a button driven menu. You could order things standard, or make adjustments, like no mustard, or add tomatoes. Novel, but the food was not good. I remember people talking about it being like that everywhere in a few years. This was back when minimum wage was 4.25 an hour. It didn’t happen because it’s a crap idea.

We still don’t have the ability to make fresh food via machines at this time. We technically have the type of robotics needed to do it, and making the software to operate it would be trivial. But these machines are both expensive, and not especially durable.