wrote in message
...
On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 23:23:25 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The guys who operate them don't need near as much skill as the worker
they replaced and the robot does a more consistent job.

Not necessarily. The person who now controls a whole production line from
a
control room has to be highly skilled.


That is said by a person who doesn't understand how long it takes to
learn to be a machinist or even a good welder.
The computer operator can learn his job in a week. Most of the
processes are actually monitored by another computer. There are
usually a couple of techs around who have a bit of training but not as
much as you would suspect. These machines are like most of the
computer industry. It is cheaper to replace whole assemblies than to
fix them.
We called it "cut open the box" technology.

I don't think you know me well enough to make such a statement. There is
extensive training for many, many professions, including computer "operator"
(sounds like you're not to familiar with those requirements).



so you tell me: how does the middle class spend money it does not
have?

You are starting to see why I fear for out future.
The idea that you can get employers to pay workers more when the
product cost can't go up is not going to happen.

Well, fear is the operative word. Product cost can go up if the quality is
better and/or it has better features/functionality.


That has not been the trend. The American public does not appreciate
quality, nor demand service. In the late 80s, IBM and most other
industries started a "quality quest" with quality circles, Six Sigma
and ISO 9000. The holy grail was to emulate Sony.

Actually, that has been the trend, whatever that means. There are lots of
American made, high quality products that sell fine.

That was quickly replaced with a philosophy of "market driven quality"
and the model became WalMart. We were all marched into a room, given a
bag of M&Ms and told to evaluate them. It turned out there were not
even the same number in each bag and there were defects in at least
half of them,. (true story) Everyone was still happy with the quality
and was not interested in paying more for better quality control.
The whole company was moving in that direction. We even got new hats
http://gfretwell.com/electrical/mdq.jpg

It's easy to id an anecdote and claim that is the general case, but that
doesn't make it so.

The lesson was clear. The American public values a lower price more
than quality, service or even saving American jobs.
I ask you, do you go to Sam's/BJs/Costco? It is certainly not for the
service or even the quality. It is for the price.

Actually, I go to Costco because of the customer service. If something
breaks, they don't hassle you at all. The quality is pretty much the same as
you would find elsewhere, especially for things like cameras/computers, even
some clothing. Most people go there for the wholesale quantities.