I guess Judge Dredd really is an accurate forecast of our future. Hello 80% unemployment!
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/12/03/tablets_at_restaurants_applebee_s_chili_s_race_to_eliminate_human_interaction.html
QuoteOf Course Applebee's Is Going to Replace Waiters With Tablets
By Will Oremus
Score one for the machines. On Tuesday, Applebee's announced plans to install a tablet at every table in its 1,860 restaurants across the United States. Customers will be able to use the devices to order food, pay the bill, and ignore their dining companions by playing video games.
Chili's unveiled basically the same plan three months ago. But that doesn't mean Applebee's hasn't been plotting this move for years. In fact, Applebee's was the name that came up when my former Slate colleague Annie Lowrey first wrote about the tablets-for-restaurants idea in April 2011. Her story focused on Palo Alto-based startup E La Carte, which is in fact Applebee's partner on the just-announced deal. Chili's opted for a rival vendor, Ziosk. Applebee's went light on details in announcing the terms of its deal, but here's how the economics of the proposition looked when Lowrey wrote about it in 2011:
The Presto [E La Carte's tablet] aspires to be the food-services version of the airline check-in kiosk or the ATM or the self-checkout at your local pharmacy. It makes a person's job a computer's job, and that cuts costs. Each console goes for $100 per month. If a restaurant serves meals eight hours a day, seven days a week, it works out to 42 cents per hour per table—making the Presto cheaper than even the very cheapest waiter. Moreover, no manager needs to train it, replace it if it quits, or offer it sick days. And it doesn't forget to take off the cheese, walk off for 20 minutes, or accidentally offend with small talk, either.
The restaurants deny that the tablets represent an attempt to replace human employees with computers. Applebee's is saying that it won't change its staffing levels when the devices come online next year. And Chili's is optimistic that the tablets will pay for themselves by bringing in extra revenue from impulse orders and at-the-table gaming. Not only will you not have to talk to a waiter when you want to order something, you won't have to talk to your kids, either!
Then again, of course these businesses are saying they won't use the tablets to replace employees. Announcing layoffs along with the tablet move would be begging for a backlash. The fact is, if the tablets work, they'll make the ordering process more efficient and cut the amount of human labor that these restaurants require. At that point, do you suppose they'll keep the extra waiters around out of charity?
I hope they enjoy it when the only people who can afford to go out to eat wouldn't be caught dead at a fucking Applebee's.
Bleh. I also despise Applebee's calling appetizers 'Apps'.
What sane person eats at Applebee's? :blink:
Quote from: garbon on December 04, 2013, 10:19:04 PM
What sane person eats at Applebee's? :blink:
Folks in suburbs and exurbs.
I mentioned before the epiphany I had on my road trip this summer: whenever i saw one of the ubiquitous Buffalo Wild Wings commercials I wondered to myself who the hell goes to these places? But there are thousands of identical communities across the US, next to the interstate, with a big mall and cookie-cutter subdivisions, where THERE IS NO PLACE TO GET A DRINK. So Buffalo Wild Wings.
I think Applebee's is one of the worst of the lot of those chains. Actually was at one this year and don't I regret it. -_-
I've also yet to be in a suburb that didn't have a better alternative.
Your idea of a suburb is Palm Springs and West Hampton.
What? I grew up split between Central Mass and essentially that suburb they used for exterior shots in the first few seasons of Weeds (though are house was nowhere near as polished - we weren't in a housing tract).
Besides places like Cathedral City, La Quinta and Indio aren't known for their glamour. :D
Republican scions of the upper class turn up their nose at middle income establishment, news at 11.
Garbon is way right (I mean way correct) about it, though. Applebee's blows, and there are many similarly priced, superior restaurants wherever one is to be found. Hell, you can go under its price range and find better options: Waffle House is a significantly better place to eat.
Applebees is a horrible place anyways.
Still...I remember reading a book maybe 10 years ago, and in it the writer suggested that the only safe jobs in the future are service industry jobs...ie. jobs you couldn't farm out to some kid in India. Well, that theory goes out the window.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 04, 2013, 10:53:15 PM
Garbon is way right (I mean way correct) about it, though. Applebee's blows, and there are many similarly priced, superior restaurants wherever one is to be found. Hell, you can go under its price range and find better options: Waffle House is a significantly better place to eat.
Now wait a cotton pickin' minute. awful waffle?
Weirdo.
I miss Sambo's. :(
The only possible upside to the new automation revolution is that reshoring will happen, either before or after we establish a Permanent Democratic Hegemony in the U.S., and we move to a vast redistribution of the wealth provided by our robots.
...although someone still has to bring you the food; but I guess one person can do the work of three or four.
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 04, 2013, 10:54:42 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on December 04, 2013, 10:53:15 PM
Garbon is way right (I mean way correct) about it, though. Applebee's blows, and there are many similarly priced, superior restaurants wherever one is to be found. Hell, you can go under its price range and find better options: Waffle House is a significantly better place to eat.
Now wait a cotton pickin' minute. awful waffle?
Weirdo.
Over Applebee's? Hell yeah. :huh:
For one, a lot more vegetarian options. For two, just generally better food. Applebee's is pretty pitiful.
Quote from: Josephus on December 04, 2013, 10:56:14 PM
...although someone still has to bring you the food; but I guess one person can do the work of three or four.
Yep.
Although being a food runner was probably the best job I ever had. Absolutely stressless, great exercise, free food, reasonable hours, and paid almost as much as FakeLaw does with no student debt and with no furloughs.
Applebee's and Chili's are both craptacular to me, and my standards aren't exactly high. Also, Applebee's waters down their drinks so badly that they might as well market them as virgin.
I'd take you all to Golden Corral. Ide would likely insert his penis into the Chocolate wonderfall.
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 04, 2013, 10:59:26 PM
I'd take you all to Golden Corral. Ide would likely insert his penis into the Chocolate wonderfall.
You better be taking us somewhere nicer, moneybags. <_<
Quote from: garbon on December 04, 2013, 11:00:20 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 04, 2013, 10:59:26 PM
I'd take you all to Golden Corral. Ide would likely insert his penis into the Chocolate wonderfall.
You better be taking us somewhere nicer, moneybags. <_<
Denny's then.
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 04, 2013, 10:59:26 PM
I'd take you all to Golden Corral. Ide would likely insert his penis into the Chocolate wonderfall.
:x No way. They opened up a Golden Showers down here a year or two ago (that's how memorable it is), and the place has been a never-ending feeding trough for A) broke students at the county college, and B) pretty much all of the Vineland Police Department. It's kinda disgusting to watch in action, which is why I've only been twice (silly me, thought I'd give it another shot since the first time was close to when it opened).
I've been to the Golden Corrall. It's okay.
You know what I need to go to, that I haven't been in a while? Obviously after I get back into the 160s, obviously? A CiCi's Pizza (a pizza buffet in case you don't know). That's called specialization. :mmm:
Are there P.F. Chang's where you guys live? That's where I used to work and I found their heavily-American adaptation of Chinese dishes to be delightful. As I was leaving, they were downscaling though, cutting corners with a lot of cheaper crap and reducing portions and such. They took their Tam's noodles, one of the best things I've ever eaten, off the menu. You can't even get those noodles at a regular grocery store. You've got to go to Koreatown and try to remember what Koreans call 'em. <_< They still have shrimp and candied walnuts (YES) though.
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 04, 2013, 11:02:06 PM
Quote from: garbon on December 04, 2013, 11:00:20 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 04, 2013, 10:59:26 PM
I'd take you all to Golden Corral. Ide would likely insert his penis into the Chocolate wonderfall.
You better be taking us somewhere nicer, moneybags. <_<
Denny's then.
<_< <_<
Denny's is only good if you want flies and crying babies.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 04, 2013, 11:05:02 PM
Are there P.F. Chang's where you guys live? That's where I used to work and I found their heavily-American adaptation of Chinese dishes to be delightful. As I was leaving, they were downscaling though, cutting corners with a lot of cheaper crap and reducing portions and such. They took their Tam's noodles, one of the best things I've ever eaten, off the menu. You can't even get those noodles at a regular grocery store. You've got to go to Koreatown and try to remember what Koreans call 'em. <_<
Never was much of a fan. They've actually one at Stanford near the outdoor shopping mall.
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 04, 2013, 11:02:06 PM
Quote from: garbon on December 04, 2013, 11:00:20 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 04, 2013, 10:59:26 PM
I'd take you all to Golden Corral. Ide would likely insert his penis into the Chocolate wonderfall.
You better be taking us somewhere nicer, moneybags. <_<
Denny's then.
Not sure they'd let garbon through the door.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 04, 2013, 09:59:39 PM
I hope they enjoy it when the only people who can afford to go out to eat wouldn't be caught dead at a fucking Applebee's.
Not having to tip would make it more competitive against fast food joints.
Truly the world is fucked with no way out.
Quote from: Josephus on December 04, 2013, 10:56:14 PM
...although someone still has to bring you the food; but I guess one person can do the work of three or four.
For now. Strikes me that one is pretty easy to replicate with robots. The trouble is the current stores are built for human delivery. If they really wanted to get rid of waiters though then all it would take would be a refit...
Hell, with these mass production chain restaurants even the cooking can be automated. I recall reading not too long ago about McDonalds looking into that.
Quote from: Razgovory on December 04, 2013, 11:14:36 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 04, 2013, 11:02:06 PM
Quote from: garbon on December 04, 2013, 11:00:20 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 04, 2013, 10:59:26 PM
I'd take you all to Golden Corral. Ide would likely insert his penis into the Chocolate wonderfall.
You better be taking us somewhere nicer, moneybags. <_<
Denny's then.
Not sure they'd let garbon through the door.
I hear they are retard friendly, however.
Quote from: Josephus on December 04, 2013, 10:56:14 PM
...although someone still has to bring you the food
And bus the table. And cook.
But given the ridiculous pay structure wait staff has to endure (LOL U MAKE 3 PIECES OF LINT AND A PAPER CLIP, NOW GO DANCE A JIG FOR TIPS) maybe they are better off in other service jobs where they still make at least minimum wage when business is slow.
Quote from: Razgovory on December 04, 2013, 11:14:36 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 04, 2013, 11:02:06 PM
Quote from: garbon on December 04, 2013, 11:00:20 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 04, 2013, 10:59:26 PM
I'd take you all to Golden Corral. Ide would likely insert his penis into the Chocolate wonderfall.
You better be taking us somewhere nicer, moneybags. <_<
Denny's then.
Not sure they'd let garbon through the door.
I thought that was Cracker Barrel? I suppose it could be both.
The Denny's thing happened like 20 years ago. Funny how you remember stories like that long, long afterword. Hard to make up bad press I suppose.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 05, 2013, 01:47:39 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 04, 2013, 11:14:36 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 04, 2013, 11:02:06 PM
Quote from: garbon on December 04, 2013, 11:00:20 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 04, 2013, 10:59:26 PM
I'd take you all to Golden Corral. Ide would likely insert his penis into the Chocolate wonderfall.
You better be taking us somewhere nicer, moneybags. <_<
Denny's then.
Not sure they'd let garbon through the door.
I thought that was Cracker Barrel? I suppose it could be both.
I love Cracker Barrel. Chicken and dumplings. :)
Some McD's here have started introducing those consoles where you can order (and pay? not sure, haven't tried them) your "food" and then only get in line to pick it up.
I find it really troublesome to have to go through a waiter for anything. Most of the time, the customers wait for the waiters. And I can read the menu myself. Tablets for ordering are long overdue. Heck, I don't mind picking up food from the kitchen myself. Waiters are for people who are too lazy to read the menu or can't decide anything for themselves.
I hate having to crane my neck at restaurants looking around for someone, *anyone*, to get me another beer. So yeah, this approach will have some advantages.
For the last few years, two of my favorite restaurants in Ann Arbor have used tablets rather than menus. I rather suspect that Will Oremus (who is already so far into his career decline that he is reduced to writing for Slate) has simply mistaken the replacement of menus with the replacement of waiters (even though his sources told him that that was the case). The menu replacement actually works pretty well; you can get all kinds of additional information about each item offered, if you have special dietary needs or hazards, and you can order when you are ready, rather than when the waiter is ready (though the order doesn't go to the kitchen until everyone at the table has ordered).
It is a win-win that only Slate, and the losers that quote from it, would see as a lose-lose.
Quote from: Camerus on December 05, 2013, 06:47:01 AM
I hate having to crane my neck at restaurants looking around for someone, *anyone*, to get me another beer. So yeah, this approach will have some advantages.
In Korea every table in a restaurant has a red button you can push to summon a waitress.
Applebees is disgusting. This won't make it any less so.
Quote from: Tyr on December 05, 2013, 01:06:37 AM
Truly the world is fucked with no way out.
Quote from: Josephus on December 04, 2013, 10:56:14 PM
...although someone still has to bring you the food; but I guess one person can do the work of three or four.
For now. Strikes me that one is pretty easy to replicate with robots. The trouble is the current stores are built for human delivery. If they really wanted to get rid of waiters though then all it would take would be a refit...
Hell, with these mass production chain restaurants even the cooking can be automated. I recall reading not too long ago about McDonalds looking into that.
Aside from Applebee's and Chili's and the discussion of the quality of their food, the issue is that they and likely more restaurants, could be going the same way with automation, with lots of lost jobs. Lately there's a lot of protests from fast food workers for higher pay, or calls to unionize. But the reason for being for MacDonalds and other fast food places are to sell cheap food, not to compete with more expensive restaurants. To do that they need cheap overhead, salaries, etc. So it stands to reason that eventually fast food places will also go with some kind of automated devices, same as these other two restaurants, if it keeps costs down even if they pay higher wages to remaining workers.
Quote from: grumbler on December 05, 2013, 07:04:43 AM
For the last few years, two of my favorite restaurants in Ann Arbor have used tablets rather than menus. I rather suspect that Will Oremus (who is already so far into his career decline that he is reduced to writing for Slate) has simply mistaken the replacement of menus with the replacement of waiters (even though his sources told him that that was the case). The menu replacement actually works pretty well; you can get all kinds of additional information about each item offered, if you have special dietary needs or hazards, and you can order when you are ready, rather than when the waiter is ready (though the order doesn't go to the kitchen until everyone at the table has ordered).
It is a win-win that only Slate, and the losers that quote from it, would see as a lose-lose.
I've only been to one restaurant lately that had made the switch. I could see how it would be useful but at this restaurant it mostly felt gimmicky as the menus weren't intuitive / it had a system for everyone to mark their order on the same tablet but still had to be taken away by the waiter. I was like let me just tell the waiter what I want.
I for one applaud the initiative, foresight and true effort to reduce the work force.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 04, 2013, 10:28:45 PM
Quote from: garbon on December 04, 2013, 10:19:04 PM
What sane person eats at Applebee's? :blink:
Folks in suburbs and exurbs.
I mentioned before the epiphany I had on my road trip this summer: whenever i saw one of the ubiquitous Buffalo Wild Wings commercials I wondered to myself who the hell goes to these places? But there are thousands of identical communities across the US, next to the interstate, with a big mall and cookie-cutter subdivisions, where THERE IS NO PLACE TO GET A DRINK. So Buffalo Wild Wings.
Buffalo Wild Wings has one major difference from Crapplebees and Chili's. They sell local craft beer on draft. In most communities, they can be the cheapest place to get local craft beer.
Quote from: Syt on December 05, 2013, 04:21:07 AM
Some McD's here have started introducing those consoles where you can order (and pay? not sure, haven't tried them) your "food" and then only get in line to pick it up.
Did that at a new burrrito place yesterday. First time I'd seen it. Woorked well I thought.
Quote from: Syt on December 05, 2013, 04:21:07 AM
Some McD's here have started introducing those consoles where you can order (and pay? not sure, haven't tried them) your "food" and then only get in line to pick it up.
Yup...not too much longer, and before you know it, technology and profit maximization will ensure that the entire McDonald's corporate landscape will be reduced to the point that it will only be CEO Donald Thompson and a single employee at each restaurant. Subcontractor, of course.
Quote from: Gups on December 05, 2013, 09:20:46 AM
Woorked well I thought.
Is this really the appropriate place to do your Northerner impression? :hmm:
Quote from: grumbler on December 05, 2013, 07:04:43 AM
For the last few years, two of my favorite restaurants in Ann Arbor have used tablets rather than menus.
Did you notice whether their wait staff levels stayed the same, declined slightly, or declined significantly?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 08:58:09 AM
I for one applaud the initiative, foresight and true effort to reduce the work force.
Actually, I have a question for you. If a company can adopt a system that is more efficient and has better results for its consumers - should it refuse to adopt those measures because it will mean a loss of jobs?
Perhaps we should drop email and the net so that we can gain back those messenger and newspaper jobs.
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 10:05:18 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 08:58:09 AM
I for one applaud the initiative, foresight and true effort to reduce the work force.
Actually, I have a question for you. If a company can adopt a system that is more efficient and has better results for its consumers - should it refuse to adopt those measures because it will mean a loss of jobs?
Perhaps we should drop email and the net so that we can gain back those messenger and newspaper jobs.
One day, they're find automated systems to do what you do for a living. Or worse yet, an intern.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 10:18:25 AM
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 10:05:18 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 08:58:09 AM
I for one applaud the initiative, foresight and true effort to reduce the work force.
Actually, I have a question for you. If a company can adopt a system that is more efficient and has better results for its consumers - should it refuse to adopt those measures because it will mean a loss of jobs?
Perhaps we should drop email and the net so that we can gain back those messenger and newspaper jobs.
One day, they're find automated systems to do what you do for a living. Or worse yet, an intern.
I don't see how that answers my question.
At any rate, I've pushed for interns at every company I've been at. Now I've project managers to do so but most aren't so eager to please. :(
Also, Seeds, automation has been seen in this industry. In the past, there would have been much more staff to help with mailing of surveys / on site pen & paper surveys. That's all but disappeared with the advent of online surveys. (And similarly with our programs to crunch stats.)
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 08:41:03 AM
the menus weren't intuitive... ...I was like let me just tell the waiter what I want.
Yeah, I can see that this could be a problem, even moreso if it's used at a fast food place. Just watch people in the checkout line at supermarkets and retail stores, and see how much trouble some of them have using the debit card reader. Now imagine standing in line at a fast food restaurant behind them waiting on them to try and figure out how to order their food. And keep in mind that some of them have trouble just telling the order taker what they want.
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 10:24:58 AM
Actually, I have a question for you. If a company can adopt a system that is more efficient and has better results for its consumers - should it refuse to adopt those measures because it will mean a loss of jobs?
As the ultimate goal of any business is the maximization of profits (or your fave-rave, increasing shareholder value) the loss of jobs is a necessary and inevitable requirement, so whether or not they disappear is incidental.
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on December 05, 2013, 07:27:13 AM
Applebees is disgusting. This won't make it any less so.
My two year old always wants to go there because she likes the apple in the sign (and she definitely loves apples). I generaly try to avoid Applebees, but the worst by far in that class of food joints IMO is Max & Erma's. I have never eaten anything remotely appetizing there.
Quote from: fhdz on December 05, 2013, 10:01:08 AM
Quote from: grumbler on December 05, 2013, 07:04:43 AM
For the last few years, two of my favorite restaurants in Ann Arbor have used tablets rather than menus.
Did you notice whether their wait staff levels stayed the same, declined slightly, or declined significantly?
They stayed pretty much the same, since they were pretty much doing the same job.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 10:37:11 AM
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 10:24:58 AM
Actually, I have a question for you. If a company can adopt a system that is more efficient and has better results for its consumers - should it refuse to adopt those measures because it will mean a loss of jobs?
As the ultimate goal of any business is the maximization of profits (or your fave-rave, increasing shareholder value) the loss of jobs is a necessary and inevitable requirement, so whether or not they disappear is incidental.
Could you answer my question and stop dancing around the issue? Do you think businesses should not embrace technology that makes end result better for their consumers, if it will result in the need for fewer employees?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 10:37:11 AM
As the ultimate goal of any business is the maximization of profits (or your fave-rave, increasing shareholder value) the loss of jobs is a necessary and inevitable requirement
No it's not.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2013, 10:49:35 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 10:37:11 AM
As the ultimate goal of any business is the maximization of profits (or your fave-rave, increasing shareholder value) the loss of jobs is a necessary and inevitable requirement
No it's not.
Yes, yes it is. A businessman not in the business of maximizing profits is not a good businessman.
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 10:47:25 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 10:37:11 AM
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 10:24:58 AM
Actually, I have a question for you. If a company can adopt a system that is more efficient and has better results for its consumers - should it refuse to adopt those measures because it will mean a loss of jobs?
As the ultimate goal of any business is the maximization of profits (or your fave-rave, increasing shareholder value) the loss of jobs is a necessary and inevitable requirement, so whether or not they disappear is incidental.
Could you answer my question and stop dancing around the issue? Do you think businesses should not embrace technology that makes end result better for their consumers, if it will result in the need for fewer employees?
You know he does.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 10:50:53 AM
Yes, yes it is. A businessman not in the business of maximizing profits is not a good businessman.
Not that part, the other part.
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 10:47:25 AM
Do you think businesses should not embrace technology that makes end result better for their consumers, if it will result in the need for fewer employees?
Actually, that wholly depends on whether I'm one of their employees or one of their consumers.
For the sake of credibility let's say consumer.
:face:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2013, 10:55:15 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 10:50:53 AM
Yes, yes it is. A businessman not in the business of maximizing profits is not a good businessman.
Not that part, the other part.
Jobs cost money and negatively impact the potential of profits. Therefore, in order to maximize profits, jobs have to go. Maybe not until every other alternative is exhausted, but in the end, they need to go.
I'm surprised you didn't know that.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 10:59:31 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2013, 10:55:15 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 10:50:53 AM
Yes, yes it is. A businessman not in the business of maximizing profits is not a good businessman.
Not that part, the other part.
Jobs cost money and negatively impact the potential of profits. Therefore, in order to maximize profits, jobs have to go. Maybe not until every other alternative is exhausted, but in the end, they need to go.
I'm surprised you didn't know that.
Obama is weeping.
Quote from: 11B4V on December 05, 2013, 11:01:40 AM
Obama is weeping.
You can stay out of this, Sergeant Institutionalized Welfare.
I have been to places where the server inputs the order into a tablet type device. I dont think I would like to eat at a place where I need to input the data myself.
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 05, 2013, 11:05:15 AM
I dont think I would like to eat at a place where I need to input the data myself.
Maybe it'll have a Sneeze Guard.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 11:07:11 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 05, 2013, 11:05:15 AM
I dont think I would like to eat at a place where I need to input the data myself.
Maybe it'll have a Sneeze Guard.
:lol:
Quote from: Valmy on December 05, 2013, 11:08:40 AM
Quote from: 11B4V on December 05, 2013, 11:01:40 AM
Obama is weeping.
Why? He has a public sector job.
His friend Seedy no longer believes. In short, Seedy has turned Republican.
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 05, 2013, 11:05:15 AM
I have been to places where the server inputs the order into a tablet type device. I dont think I would like to eat at a place where I need to input the data myself.
In order to make sure my order gets entered correctly, I'd absolutely prefer to enter the data myself. Plus I'm sort of a control freak when it comes to things like this, so I go with self-service whenever it's an option.
I'm hungry.
Quote from: 11B4V on December 05, 2013, 11:11:53 AM
His friend Seedy no longer believes. In short, Seedy has turned Republican.
French Republican, maybe.
I'm serba.
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 05, 2013, 11:05:15 AM
I dont think I would like to eat at a place where I need to input the data myself.
That's cause you're old. :P
QuoteThe modern age and I have grown apart. Its not the modern age, its me.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 10:59:31 AM
Jobs cost money and negatively impact the potential of profits. Therefore, in order to maximize profits, jobs have to go. Maybe not until every other alternative is exhausted, but in the end, they need to go.
I'm surprised you didn't know that.
Capital costs money. Raw material costs money. Offices and factories cost money. Energy costs money. All inputs cost money. The fact you seem to be overlooking is if you eliminate all inputs you're not producing anything.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2013, 12:11:14 PM
Capital costs money. Raw material costs money. Offices and factories cost money. Energy costs money. All inputs cost money. The fact you seem to be overlooking is if you eliminate all inputs you're not producing anything.
He's either trolling or just bitter. Either way he's irrational & shouldn't be taken seriously.
Quote from: derspiess on December 05, 2013, 12:14:30 PM
He's either trolling or just bitter. Either way he's irrational & shouldn't be taken seriously.
He's repeated the same troll a dozen times. That says to me that whereas no one else takes him seriously, he takes himself seriously.
I take technological unemployment seriously.
Quote from: derspiess on December 05, 2013, 11:14:03 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 05, 2013, 11:05:15 AM
I have been to places where the server inputs the order into a tablet type device. I dont think I would like to eat at a place where I need to input the data myself.
In order to make sure my order gets entered correctly, I'd absolutely prefer to enter the data myself. Plus I'm sort of a control freak when it comes to things like this, so I go with self-service whenever it's an option.
I am not sure if this is just your minimalist ideology speaking or whether you tip so poorly servers go out of their way to get your order wrong.
In any event I would think that ordering off a tablet, in the absence of a server, would make it more likely you would not get exactly what you want. Servers provide an invaluable interface between me and the kitchen which I use to pass on how I want my meal prepared. I suppose if you had simple tastes this could work for you - but then you would probably be the market Applebees is aiming for.
I take what Grumber said as a viable option - having both tablets and servers - so that if anything needs to be clarfied a server is close at hand to make sure all goes as I want it. Although I would probably still ask a server to do the work of inputing what I want into the tablet - and I would tip accordingly for their efforts.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 05, 2013, 11:49:15 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 05, 2013, 11:05:15 AM
I dont think I would like to eat at a place where I need to input the data myself.
That's cause you're old. :P
QuoteThe modern age and I have grown apart. Its not the modern age, its me.
Yeah, I think there is definitely something to the generational thing. I like good service when I go out to eat.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2013, 12:16:15 PM
Quote from: derspiess on December 05, 2013, 12:14:30 PM
He's either trolling or just bitter. Either way he's irrational & shouldn't be taken seriously.
He's repeated the same troll a dozen times. That says to me that whereas no one else takes him seriously, he takes himself seriously.
And I say let him repeat the troll
ad nauseum. No one takes it seriously, not even him. Its no better or worse than Neil's constant-drumbeat troll about subhumans or whatever.
Hey, remember chilliwilli?
Oh, funk me!!!11
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 05, 2013, 12:22:17 PM
I am not sure if this is just your minimalist ideology speaking or whether you tip so poorly servers go out of their way to get your order wrong.
Neither, actually. I'm just a very DIY-minded person. As long as the system works, I always prefer inputting my own order (as in ordering pizza or other food online for pickup), doing the self-checkout at the grocery store, shopping online, etc.
About the only thing I can think of that I don't like doing is the kiosk at Kroger where you can enter your deli order and pick it up in a few minutes. The interface itself is excellent, but it seems that these orders never get filled by the time promised, or at all. Sadly, taking a number & waiting in line is still the lesser of two evils.
I tip generously, btw.
QuoteIn any event I would think that ordering off a tablet, in the absence of a server, would make it more likely you would not get exactly what you want. Servers provide an invaluable interface between me and the kitchen which I use to pass on how I want my meal prepared. I suppose if you had simple tastes this could work for you - but then you would probably be the market Applebees is aiming for.
Well obviously if we're talking about a higher-end establishment like a nice steakhouse I'd prefer the human element. But for a chain family-type restaurant, I'd be all about ordering from a tablet, as long as the interface was well-thought-out and included plenty of options to customize your order.
QuoteI take what Grumber said as a viable option - having both tablets and servers - so that if anything needs to be clarfied a server is close at hand to make sure all goes as I want it. Although I would probably still ask a server to do the work of inputing what I want into the tablet - and I would tip accordingly for their efforts.
I'm okay with that. Thankfully there are so many restaurants out there to be test beds for what works and what doesn't.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2013, 12:11:14 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 10:59:31 AM
Jobs cost money and negatively impact the potential of profits. Therefore, in order to maximize profits, jobs have to go. Maybe not until every other alternative is exhausted, but in the end, they need to go.
I'm surprised you didn't know that.
Capital costs money. Raw material costs money. Offices and factories cost money. Energy costs money. All inputs cost money. The fact you seem to be overlooking is if you eliminate all inputs you're not producing anything.
Let's play devil's advocate for a bit.
Since 08, US business have cut capital expenditure as well to boost profit. Offices and factories - my own anecdotal experience suggests that service businesses are increasing economizing on their use of space (e.g. the %of revenue allocated to RE costs by Biglaw firms has declined significantly over the past few years despite recovery in psf rentals). US energy consumption has also declined significantly since the financial crunch.
There is a case to be made that since Lehman, US business collectively speaking has elected to restrain production growth and slash inputs in order to keep profit rates at levels that are historically unprecendented.
Very beautiful and moving Joan.
Now tell me what any of that has to do with Seedy's post.
Quote from: derspiess on December 05, 2013, 12:49:22 PM
Neither, actually. I'm just a very DIY-minded person. As long as the system works, I always prefer inputting my own order (as in ordering pizza or other food online for pickup), doing the self-checkout at the grocery store, shopping online, etc.
About the only thing I can think of that I don't like doing is the kiosk at Kroger where you can enter your deli order and pick it up in a few minutes. The interface itself is excellent, but it seems that these orders never get filled by the time promised, or at all. Sadly, taking a number & waiting in line is still the lesser of two evils.
I think you have it right with the qualifier "as long as the system works".
Local pizza place has an online order that seems to work really well. AS a result we never phone them up, always online, and it always comes just as ordered.
I could imagine tablet ordering working very well in a restaurant. Heck there's a local chain (Famoso Pizza - does Italian-style pizzas in a wood burning oven) that is almost there - you have to order your food up at the cashier, but servers still come by to bring your meal (and come by to ask if you want anything else).
But if you do it wrong, it would be absolutely painful I imagine.
Quote from: Barrister on December 05, 2013, 01:23:49 PM
I think you have it right with the qualifier "as long as the system works".
Local pizza place has an online order that seems to work really well. AS a result we never phone them up, always online, and it always comes just as ordered.
I could imagine tablet ordering working very well in a restaurant. Heck there's a local chain (Famoso Pizza - does Italian-style pizzas in a wood burning oven) that is almost there - you have to order your food up at the cashier, but servers still come by to bring your meal (and come by to ask if you want anything else).
Ordering pizza online is so much easier than over the phone. Online I can specify all kinds of customized options-- light sauce for one of the pizzas, extra bake on the other. Three toppings on one half & three totally different toppings on the other. If I phone in the order, I feel like I'm rushed, there's a chance I'll forget something, and there's an increased chance of them forgetting something I request. And a lot of times I have to wait on hold while they take someone else's order.
QuoteBut if you do it wrong, it would be absolutely painful I imagine.
Yep. But if I get it wrong, I only have myself to blame.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2013, 01:10:50 PM
Very beautiful and moving Joan.
Now tell me what any of that has to do with Seedy's post.
That would require that I understand his post. :D
More seriously, to the extent his point is that businesses are cutting jobs to preserve profit, that fits the facts.
the facts also suggest a broader point that collectively speaking the US business sector is not pursuing growth in output.
Given cheap financing rates and low risk-free interest rates across the term structure, this suggests one or more of the following are true:
1) Total lack of profitable investment projects,
2) Very high risk premia associated with potential investment projects,
3) Some kind of market failure leading to underinvestment.
(1) and (2) are hard to gauge but don't seem that compelling.
As for (3) what could be the culprit? The age-old principal-agent problem leaps to mind given the lack of significant movement on reforming exec comp structures. Are company execs sacrificing future growth opportunities to keep current costs down and EPS up? Not impossible.
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 05, 2013, 12:23:24 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 05, 2013, 11:49:15 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 05, 2013, 11:05:15 AM
I dont think I would like to eat at a place where I need to input the data myself.
That's cause you're old. :P
QuoteThe modern age and I have grown apart. Its not the modern age, its me.
Yeah, I think there is definitely something to the generational thing. I like good service when I go out to eat.
FWIW, I agree with CC on this.
Only tangentially related, but I also dislike when stores try to make me do self-checkout.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on December 05, 2013, 01:53:25 PM
Are company execs sacrificing future growth opportunities to keep current costs down and EPS up? Not impossible.
So, generally speaking, if companies are not using these low interest rates to build up their capacity - what is going to happen when interest rates increase....
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 02:06:18 PM
Only tangentially related, but I also dislike when stores try to make me do self-checkout.
I prefer them unless there is a line for them and there's a standard checkout lane open. Only snag I run into is if I have to walk over to the attendant and show ID for beer or wine. Or if I can't find the right code for produce.
Quote from: derspiess on December 05, 2013, 02:14:00 PM
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 02:06:18 PM
Only tangentially related, but I also dislike when stores try to make me do self-checkout.
I prefer them unless there is a line for them and there's a standard checkout lane open. Only snag I run into is if I have to walk over to the attendant and show ID for beer or wine. Or if I can't find the right code for produce.
I don't care for self-check outs, but the line up for the self check-out is invariably shorter...
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on December 05, 2013, 01:53:25 PM
That would require that I understand his post. :D
:mellow: There's nothing particularly confusing about hs post: companies maximize profits by eliminating all labor.
QuoteMore seriously, to the extent his point is that businesses are cutting jobs to preserve profit, that fits the facts.
The extent is that they both use the words "businesses," "cutting," "jobs," and "profits."
I invest in me.
He didn't say ALL jobs have to go.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on December 05, 2013, 03:02:09 PM
He didn't say ALL jobs have to go.
You're right: according to Seedy the optimal amount of labor is a single employee. :P
"Yup...not too much longer, and before you know it, technology and profit maximization will ensure that the entire McDonald's corporate landscape will be reduced to the point that it will only be CEO Donald Thompson and a single employee at each restaurant. Subcontractor, of course."
Your Jew kung fu is very powerful but I think my Jesuit kung fu can defeat it. :ph34r:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2013, 02:32:39 PM
:mellow: There's nothing particularly confusing about hs post: companies maximize profits by eliminating all labor.
I thought he was saying labor gets dumped to meet the demands of short term stock price needs. You have to remember shareholder value. He only mentions it at least once a sentence.
Quote from: Valmy on December 05, 2013, 03:19:20 PM
I thought he was saying labor gets dumped to meet the demands of short term stock price needs. You have to remember shareholder value. He only mentions it at least once a sentence.
That's a relatively non-controversial claim. Seedy's problem is that he is unwilling to qualify his statement in any way, he makes a blanket statement.
"Jobs cost money and negatively impact the potential of profits. Therefore, in order to maximize profits, jobs have to go. Maybe not until every other alternative is exhausted, but in the end, they need to go."
This is not taking about cases in which jobs do get cut, it is an absolute: in all cases, regardless of profitability, regardless of demand growth, regardless of the cost of labor, regardless of productivity, regardless of anything, it is always better to cut jobs.
With employees that whine about shareholder value it is.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2013, 12:16:15 PM
Quote from: derspiess on December 05, 2013, 12:14:30 PM
He's either trolling or just bitter. Either way he's irrational & shouldn't be taken seriously.
He's repeated the same troll a dozen times. That says to me that whereas no one else takes him seriously, he takes himself seriously.
If you didn't stalk him so much, you wouldn't notice it so much.
Applebee's indeed has to be the worst major casual dining chain, almost everyone I've ever spoken to dislikes it. Even worse, and I can eat at fairly mediocre places when this isn't true, they mostly have shitty beer and anything made with spirits might as well be kool-aid.
BW3 actually has bad food (maybe worse than Applebee's since they basically make wings with everything else an afterthought and their wings are worse than cheap pizza chain wings) but the fact they always have a decent beer selection means BW3 is indeed one of my "travel restaurants" if I'm away from a major city or even just stranded out by an airport or something.
Applebee's and Chili's both sort of exist at the bottom rung of this type of restaurant. Above them I'd put Ruby Tuesday which isn't great but isn't awful, Olive Garden and Red Lobster which are the same, and then some actually decent casual chains like Longhorn Steakhouse, IHOP, Waffle House, O'Charley's etc.
I think I put Waffle House / IHOP in the "decent" category because they specialize in lower brow food but execute it really well. It's nothing fancy but in all reality some foods don't really get done well by chains at all, but waffles, pancakes, omelettes etc are pretty easily done very well by a big chain restaurant.
What I've noticed is that despite attempts to homogenize all of the product from a given chain, there's still variety in how good a restaurant is from location to location. Our local IHOPs are terrible, but I liked them in Indiana and Ohio. Applebee's, Chili's and TGIF are generally lousy, but occasionally I'll hit an ok one. I like BWW primarily because they're one of the few chains that have genuinely hot sauces, although I'm annoyed that they stopped free refills on their now way overpriced non-alcoholic non-soda drinks.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 05, 2013, 05:42:27 PM
BW3 actually has bad food (maybe worse than Applebee's since they basically make wings with everything else an afterthought and their wings are worse than cheap pizza chain wings) but the fact they always have a decent beer selection means BW3 is indeed one of my "travel restaurants" if I'm away from a major city or even just stranded out by an airport or something.
The new B-dubs that opened up near me has a pretty boring draft beer selection. Best thing they had last time I was there was Sam Adams. They ought to at least dedicate one tap to a local beer.
And their carribbean jerk (grilled) chicken sandwich is pretty decent.
I ate at an IHOP in California. The food wasn't bad, but the portion size was ridiculous.
QuoteLonghorn Steakhouse
CRAP
IHOP does have crepes.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2013, 03:19:09 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on December 05, 2013, 03:02:09 PM
He didn't say ALL jobs have to go.
You're right: according to Seedy the optimal amount of labor is a single employee. :P
"Yup...not too much longer, and before you know it, technology and profit maximization will ensure that the entire McDonald's corporate landscape will be reduced to the point that it will only be CEO Donald Thompson and a single employee at each restaurant. Subcontractor, of course."
Your Jew kung fu is very powerful but I think my Jesuit kung fu can defeat it. :ph34r:
It's no longer Jesuit Kung Fu when you turn to the dark side.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 05, 2013, 05:42:27 PM
Applebee's and Chili's both sort of exist at the bottom rung of this type of restaurant. Above them I'd put Ruby Tuesday which isn't great but isn't awful, Olive Garden and Red Lobster which are the same, and then some actually decent casual chains like Longhorn Steakhouse, IHOP, Waffle House, O'Charley's etc.
Chili's isn't that bad, I'd hardly rate it below Olive Garden and Waffle House. I don't go there much though, as you can get just as good a burger from Five Guys for half the price.
I kind of like Olive Garden. :Embarrass:
Quote from: sbr on December 05, 2013, 07:07:57 PM
I kind of like Olive Garden. :Embarrass:
You stuff the unlimited breadsticks in your pockets, don't you?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2013, 03:19:09 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on December 05, 2013, 03:02:09 PM
He didn't say ALL jobs have to go.
You're right: according to Seedy the optimal amount of labor is a single employee. :P
"Yup...not too much longer, and before you know it, technology and profit maximization will ensure that the entire McDonald's corporate landscape will be reduced to the point that it will only be CEO Donald Thompson and a single employee at each restaurant. Subcontractor, of course."
Your Jew kung fu is very powerful but I think my Jesuit kung fu can defeat it. :ph34r:
Only because you decide to battle over what Seedy said, rather than the substantive point Joan made.
Quote from: Jacob on December 05, 2013, 07:32:20 PM
Only because you decide to battle over what Seedy said, rather than the substantive point Joan made.
Nope. I agreed with his substantive point. If I say the capital of Australia is Canberra, and you don't take exception, has my Jesuit Kung Fu defeated your Mermaid Kung Fu? Of course it hasn't.
The issue was the relationship between his point and Seedy's screed.
Quote from: frunk on December 05, 2013, 05:59:51 PM
What I've noticed is that despite attempts to homogenize all of the product from a given chain, there's still variety in how good a restaurant is from location to location. Our local IHOPs are terrible, but I liked them in Indiana and Ohio. Applebee's, Chili's and TGIF are generally lousy, but occasionally I'll hit an ok one. I like BWW primarily because they're one of the few chains that have genuinely hot sauces, although I'm annoyed that they stopped free refills on their now way overpriced non-alcoholic non-soda drinks.
At least in my experience TGIF is way better than Applebees or Chili's
Quote from: grumbler on December 05, 2013, 10:43:25 AM
Quote from: fhdz on December 05, 2013, 10:01:08 AM
Quote from: grumbler on December 05, 2013, 07:04:43 AM
For the last few years, two of my favorite restaurants in Ann Arbor have used tablets rather than menus.
Did you notice whether their wait staff levels stayed the same, declined slightly, or declined significantly?
They stayed pretty much the same, since they were pretty much doing the same job.
:yes: Makes sense to me.
Quote from: sbr on December 05, 2013, 07:07:57 PM
I kind of like Olive Garden. :Embarrass:
In may experience with them, they are a mixed bag. When they're good, their good.
Quote from: 11B4V on December 05, 2013, 06:28:55 PM
QuoteLonghorn Steakhouse
CRAP
True. Real Longhorns go to this steakhouse: http://www.vinceyoungsteakhouse.com/
i think Outback serves a decent steak.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 05, 2013, 12:46:24 PM
Oh, funk me!!!11
That's a real blast from the past. Nice. :cool:
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 05, 2013, 05:42:27 PM
I think I put Waffle House / IHOP in the "decent" category because they specialize in lower brow food but execute it really well. It's nothing fancy but in all reality some foods don't really get done well by chains at all, but waffles, pancakes, omelettes etc are pretty easily done very well by a big chain restaurant.
At IHOP you can get this french toast that is basically 90% sugar and 5% cinnamon by mass.
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 05, 2013, 07:20:20 PM
Quote from: sbr on December 05, 2013, 07:07:57 PM
I kind of like Olive Garden. :Embarrass:
You stuff the unlimited breadsticks in your pockets, don't you?
Breadsticks and that cheapo salad. :punk:
Their "Tuscan" soup is pretty good. I get that instead of salad whenever I go to Olive Garden.
Never been to Olive garden.
When I was a child, I dreamed that one day we could order all food with IT systems. 30 years later that dream has yet to come true. Not because we don't have the technology. But because of people like my father-in-law.
He never touches the menu. Just won't. He'll sit and chat until the waiter shows up. Then he asks the waiter what food he should order.
My answer to technological unemployment involves nationalizing corporations so that we can all share in the increased productivity of capital improvement, and recreating American values to conform to the workerless economy that will come whether we will it to or not.
My answer has the added benefit of avoiding the complete breakdown of society and GDP that will occur once capitalism destroys its own markets.
P.S. The Olive Garbon blows. Last time I was there, they served Korea watered-down... wine. WTF.
Quote from: Monoriu on December 05, 2013, 11:32:41 PM
When I was a child, I dreamed that one day we could order all food with IT systems. 30 years later that dream has yet to come true. Not because we don't have the technology. But because of people like my father-in-law.
He never touches the menu. Just won't. He'll sit and chat until the waiter shows up. Then he asks the waiter what food he should order.
I don't think that's the reason why.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 05, 2013, 11:34:35 PM
P.S. The Olive Garbon blows. Last time I was there, they served Korea watered-down... wine. WTF.
Oh the olive garden is dreadful, make no mistake about that. After all, it shouldn't be asking too much to get fettuccine that is fully cooked. :D
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2013, 11:09:41 PM
i think Outback serves a decent steak.
I like their Alice Spring Chicken.
The problem with western restaurants in Korea, that I have not had in Japan, Taiwan or the Philippines, is that they show no concern with serving food hot. A not surprising flaw, since much of their own cuisine is served cold or lukewarm.
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 11:34:36 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on December 05, 2013, 11:32:41 PM
When I was a child, I dreamed that one day we could order all food with IT systems. 30 years later that dream has yet to come true. Not because we don't have the technology. But because of people like my father-in-law.
He never touches the menu. Just won't. He'll sit and chat until the waiter shows up. Then he asks the waiter what food he should order.
I don't think that's the reason why.
I actually want to know why. What's your theory?
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 05, 2013, 11:38:31 PM
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 11:27:40 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2013, 11:09:41 PM
i think Outback serves a decent steak.
:hmm:
He speaks the truth.
I suppose that depends then on what decent means. I mean it is edible but I would never recommend unless the conversation was about where you can get a super cheap one.
You're so posh Grab On. :worthy:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2013, 11:29:54 PM
Their "Tuscan" soup is pretty good. I get that instead of salad whenever I go to Olive Garden.
Mrs. Valmy LOVES that soup. She typically gets an extra order to take home.
Quote from: Monoriu on December 05, 2013, 11:42:14 PM
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 11:34:36 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on December 05, 2013, 11:32:41 PM
When I was a child, I dreamed that one day we could order all food with IT systems. 30 years later that dream has yet to come true. Not because we don't have the technology. But because of people like my father-in-law.
He never touches the menu. Just won't. He'll sit and chat until the waiter shows up. Then he asks the waiter what food he should order.
I don't think that's the reason why.
I actually want to know why. What's your theory?
Because most people don't have an issue with giving someone their order? Service and all that.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2013, 11:43:28 PM
You're so posh Grab On. :worthy:
Oh hush. That's not what I am saying at all.
Middlebrow restaurants do cheap steaks, and they can be perfectly fine, but they're not great.
Or maybe I don't like steak all that much. I've only been to a few higher brow eateries, and never ordered a steak. Still, I defer to his judgment.
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 11:42:26 PM
I suppose that depends then on what decent means. I mean it is edible but I would never recommend unless the conversation was about where you can get a super cheap one.
I've had much thinner/tougher steaks that were still edible. Outback is as good as any other place you can get a steak under $20.
Their salad sucks though. Dry as Texas.
Free market for the wing!
Quote from: Siege on December 06, 2013, 12:08:00 AM
Free market for the wing!
Are wings subject to central planning? Or is this a call to end poultry subsidies?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 05, 2013, 09:18:02 PM
[At least in my experience TGIF is way better than Applebees or Chili's
Not in mine. TGIFs oversalt so badly that they actually leave a metallic aftertaste. Applebee's is pretty overseasoned, but there are some edible dishes where you can get around that. Chili's is strong, but the only thing I've ever had overseasoned there was guacamole.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2013, 11:16:23 AM
Quote from: 11B4V on December 05, 2013, 11:11:53 AM
His friend Seedy no longer believes. In short, Seedy has turned Republican.
French Republican, maybe.
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parti_r%C3%A9publicain_%28France%29 (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parti_r%C3%A9publicain_%28France%29)?
Long story short, from Giscard's party to centrist, then somewhat pro
laissez-faire (Madelin inside for the cognoscendi), in the French context mind you, they ended up joining Sarko's party.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 05, 2013, 11:34:35 PM
My answer to technological unemployment involves nationalizing corporations so that we can all share in the increased productivity of capital improvement, and recreating American values to conform to the workerless economy that will come whether we will it to or not.
My answer has the added benefit of avoiding the complete breakdown of society and GDP that will occur once capitalism destroys its own markets.
P.S. The Olive Garbon blows. Last time I was there, they served Korea watered-down... wine. WTF.
That seems reasonable, although multinationals might be more difficult to nationalize. The nested multinationals cause a lot of problems.
Quote from: 11B4V on December 05, 2013, 09:31:27 PM
Quote from: sbr on December 05, 2013, 07:07:57 PM
I kind of like Olive Garden. :Embarrass:
In may experience with them, they are a mixed bag. When they're good, their good.
I hate their commercials and how they try to brand themselves as super-duper authentic Italian food. But on a few dishes that are hard to screw up (capellini pomodoro, baked ziti al forno), they're decent. Their salad is okay as well. Carrabba's is a shorter drive for us and they're a bit better.
There's only one or two Italian places around here (both non-chain of course) that come anywhere near the awesome family-owned places we had back in Delaware. And they're both downtown.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 05, 2013, 11:48:31 PM
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 11:42:26 PM
I suppose that depends then on what decent means. I mean it is edible but I would never recommend unless the conversation was about where you can get a super cheap one.
I've had much thinner/tougher steaks that were still edible. Outback is as good as any other place you can get a steak under $20.
Their salad sucks though. Dry as Texas.
I think it's fair to say you can get a pretty decent steak for the money at Outback. Doesn't compare to higher-end places, but most of their cuts are good for what they are.
Mind I put Olive Garden / Red Lobster / Ruby Tuesday in a category "above Applebee's / Chili's" but below casual dining restaurants I regard as "actually decent."
With OG, for me at least, even pasta not done right still tastes "okay." Pasta is hard, at least to my tastes, to render "disgusting." It's the difference between saying Domino's pizza is good versus saying it is "inedible." I can (and have) eaten $1 frozen pizza from a gas station. Was it good? No, but it wasn't "inedible" or even really gross, it was just low quality food. So the worst OG does is "low quality pasta" which (like low quality pizza) is usually worth eating if you've got nothing else in front of you. But Applebee's makes a lot of dishes like steaks, wings, burgers etc that can really be just plain bad if not done right, and they don't execute well.
Red Lobster is in the same category because they basically serve lobster which tastes good just about anyway you cook it and other seafood items like shrimp that are also hard to render unpleasant. Ruby Tuesday serves the same stuff as Applebee's or Chili's but just does a better job of it IMO. I'd probably but TGIF in the same category as Ruby Tuesday.
I tend to eat at real restaurants.
Quote from: The Brain on December 06, 2013, 11:33:07 AM
I tend to eat at real restaurants.
Well there's only one city in Sweden so I'm assuming all the restaurants in the country are in the same square mile. But in America it's pretty common to be traveling and have less options.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 06, 2013, 11:51:39 AM
Quote from: The Brain on December 06, 2013, 11:33:07 AM
I tend to eat at real restaurants.
Well there's only one city in Sweden so I'm assuming all the restaurants in the country are in the same square mile. But in America it's pretty common to be traveling and have less options.
And in some of the shitty little towns I've had to travel to, even Applebee's would have been a welcome sight.
Quote from: derspiess on December 06, 2013, 11:54:32 AM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 06, 2013, 11:51:39 AM
Quote from: The Brain on December 06, 2013, 11:33:07 AM
I tend to eat at real restaurants.
Well there's only one city in Sweden so I'm assuming all the restaurants in the country are in the same square mile. But in America it's pretty common to be traveling and have less options.
And in some of the shitty little towns I've had to travel to, even Applebee's would have been a welcome sight.
You should try some of the shitty little northern towns I've been to, where ANY restaurant would be a welcome sight (instead of schlepping your own food in and hoping you can find a way to heat it before eating).
Quote from: Neil on December 06, 2013, 09:41:00 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on December 05, 2013, 11:34:35 PM
My answer to technological unemployment involves nationalizing corporations so that we can all share in the increased productivity of capital improvement, and recreating American values to conform to the workerless economy that will come whether we will it to or not.
My answer has the added benefit of avoiding the complete breakdown of society and GDP that will occur once capitalism destroys its own markets.
P.S. The Olive Garbon blows. Last time I was there, they served Korea watered-down... wine. WTF.
That seems reasonable, although multinationals might be more difficult to nationalize. The nested multinationals cause a lot of problems.
Ide's idols in North Korea seem to have managed.
Quote from: derspiess on December 06, 2013, 11:54:32 AM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 06, 2013, 11:51:39 AM
Quote from: The Brain on December 06, 2013, 11:33:07 AM
I tend to eat at real restaurants.
Well there's only one city in Sweden so I'm assuming all the restaurants in the country are in the same square mile. But in America it's pretty common to be traveling and have less options.
And in some of the shitty little towns I've had to travel to, even Applebee's would have been a welcome sight.
Just do the Caliga thing: Gas station food.
Quote from: grumbler on December 06, 2013, 01:50:19 PM
Quote from: Neil on December 06, 2013, 09:41:00 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on December 05, 2013, 11:34:35 PM
My answer to technological unemployment involves nationalizing corporations so that we can all share in the increased productivity of capital improvement, and recreating American values to conform to the workerless economy that will come whether we will it to or not.
My answer has the added benefit of avoiding the complete breakdown of society and GDP that will occur once capitalism destroys its own markets.
P.S. The Olive Garbon blows. Last time I was there, they served Korea watered-down... wine. WTF.
That seems reasonable, although multinationals might be more difficult to nationalize. The nested multinationals cause a lot of problems.
Ide's idols in North Korea seem to have managed.
Which multinationals did they nationalize?
Mitsubishi
They probably had operations in Manchukuo. :contract:
Quote from: Neil on December 06, 2013, 03:59:27 PM
Quote from: derspiess on December 06, 2013, 11:54:32 AM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 06, 2013, 11:51:39 AM
Quote from: The Brain on December 06, 2013, 11:33:07 AM
I tend to eat at real restaurants.
Well there's only one city in Sweden so I'm assuming all the restaurants in the country are in the same square mile. But in America it's pretty common to be traveling and have less options.
And in some of the shitty little towns I've had to travel to, even Applebee's would have been a welcome sight.
Just do the Caliga thing: Gas station food.
Several steps up from Offal House
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 06, 2013, 04:12:09 PM
They probably had operations in Manchukuo. :contract:
But they were probably extraterritorial and operating under Japanese law.
Nationalization = totalitarianism and death camps. You know, just like in France, Iceland, Sweden, Britain, and a lot of other third-world hellholes.
Sweden doesn't have death camps.
Quote from: The Brain on December 06, 2013, 05:45:20 PM
Sweden doesn't have death camps.
The Swedish Cheka read all your posts don't they?
Quote from: The Brain on December 06, 2013, 05:45:20 PM
Sweden doesn't have death camps.
I'm sure that Hortlund said that there was at least one. I think it was called Malmo?
Quote from: Ideologue on December 06, 2013, 05:29:48 PM
Nationalization = totalitarianism and death camps. You know, just like in France, Iceland, Sweden, Britain, and a lot of other third-world hellholes.
You still haven't told me how you're going to get around the multinational problem.
Quote from: Neil on December 06, 2013, 06:23:01 PM
You still haven't told me how you're going to get around the multinational problem.
You expropriate assets of the multinational that are in your country.
That would be a terrible idea for the US, since all the valuable industrial bits of companies are located somewhere else.
Maybe they can get retraining as window repairmen?
Quote from: Neil on December 06, 2013, 06:23:01 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on December 06, 2013, 05:29:48 PM
Nationalization = totalitarianism and death camps. You know, just like in France, Iceland, Sweden, Britain, and a lot of other third-world hellholes.
You still haven't told me how you're going to get around the multinational problem.
The valuable assets located in foreign countries become, legally, property of the U.S. government. Attempt to steal or spoil the property of the U.S. government would be an act of war.
Quote from: Neil on December 06, 2013, 03:59:27 PMJust do the Caliga thing: Gas station food.
There's a gas station chain called Sheetz throughout VA/NC/WV/OH/PA that actually makes food I'd eat on a road trip (think ordinary fast food quality--not hot dogs rotating for the past 35 days on a hot roller quality.)
Quote from: Ideologue on December 06, 2013, 10:36:25 PM
Quote from: Neil on December 06, 2013, 06:23:01 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on December 06, 2013, 05:29:48 PM
Nationalization = totalitarianism and death camps. You know, just like in France, Iceland, Sweden, Britain, and a lot of other third-world hellholes.
You still haven't told me how you're going to get around the multinational problem.
The valuable assets located in foreign countries become, legally, property of the U.S. government. Attempt to steal or spoil the property of the U.S. government would be an act of war.
The US isn't capable of fighting a war against anybody, let alone everybody. Try again.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 07, 2013, 10:12:21 AM
Quote from: Neil on December 06, 2013, 03:59:27 PMJust do the Caliga thing: Gas station food.
There's a gas station chain called Sheetz throughout VA/NC/WV/OH/PA that actually makes food I'd eat on a road trip (think ordinary fast food quality--not hot dogs rotating for the past 35 days on a hot roller quality.)
Actually I agree with you here-- Sheetz isn't that bad.
Quote from: Neil on December 07, 2013, 10:25:44 AM
The US isn't capable of fighting a war against anybody, let alone everybody. Try again.
You had better believe we could beat the shit out of Grenada again.
Quote from: derspiess on December 07, 2013, 03:36:52 PM
You had better believe we could beat the shit out of Grenada again.
NO MORE MONROE DOCTRINE.
We only lose when we declare war on intangible things like Drugs, Terror, Poverty and Vietnam.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 07, 2013, 03:44:08 PM
We only lose when we declare war on intangible things like Drugs, Terror, Poverty and Vietnam.
:lol:
Quote from: derspiess on December 07, 2013, 03:36:52 PM
You had better believe we could beat the shit out of Grenada again.
Clint Eastwood is too old now :(
Quote from: derspiess on December 07, 2013, 03:36:16 PM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 07, 2013, 10:12:21 AM
Quote from: Neil on December 06, 2013, 03:59:27 PMJust do the Caliga thing: Gas station food.
There's a gas station chain called Sheetz throughout VA/NC/WV/OH/PA that actually makes food I'd eat on a road trip (think ordinary fast food quality--not hot dogs rotating for the past 35 days on a hot roller quality.)
Actually I agree with you here-- Sheetz isn't that bad.
Wa Wa is *this* much better, though.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 07, 2013, 07:42:58 PM
Wa Wa is *this* much better, though.
Yeah, well they have a full-blown deli with excellent sandwiches. And they're also far, far away from where I live :angry:
My bad. I didn't think Sheetz's had migrated that far away.
Since you've been off the eastern seaboard, you'd be surprised by the new Turkey Hills in Pennsylvania; they've gone from their old hole-in-the-wall-we're-kinda-like-a-shitty-High's motif to building fullblown Sheetz-Wa-Wa type mega centers.
I always wondered why Turkey Hill took the Kroger reward cards and accepted Kroger gas rewards, I assumed they had some sort of partnership. I felt a little dumb when I found out Turkey Hill is just a wholly owned subsidiary of Kroger and is just the branding they decided to put on all their stand alone gas stations.
I like the Outback just fine.
At that price point, I don't know of anywhere that provides a better steak.
It isn't Ruth Chris, but on the other hand, I can actually afford to take the family to the Outback once in a while.
Quote from: Berkut on December 08, 2013, 12:36:25 PM
I like the Outback just fine.
At that price point, I don't know of anywhere that provides a better steak.
It isn't Ruth Chris, but on the other hand, I can actually afford to take the family to the Outback once in a while.
I have no problem with Outback either, I even like the 3,000 calore blooming onion that gets made fun of by many :D. I will say though, I think Longhorn has a better steak than Outback and IIRC is similarly priced, but Longhorn is a smaller chain.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 08, 2013, 01:02:27 PM
Quote from: Berkut on December 08, 2013, 12:36:25 PM
I like the Outback just fine.
At that price point, I don't know of anywhere that provides a better steak.
It isn't Ruth Chris, but on the other hand, I can actually afford to take the family to the Outback once in a while.
I have no problem with Outback either, I even like the 3,000 calore blooming onion that gets made fun of by many :D. I will say though, I think Longhorn has a better steak than Outback and IIRC is similarly priced, but Longhorn is a smaller chain.
A couple Longhorns opened up around here, one quite a bit closer than the local Outback, so we tried it. Wife did not like their filet, so that was that for Longhorn.
Quote from: Berkut on December 08, 2013, 01:43:22 PMA couple Longhorns opened up around here, one quite a bit closer than the local Outback, so we tried it. Wife did not like their filet, so that was that for Longhorn.
I wouldn't know about that as I've never had their filet, but then I pretty much never get filet at a steakhouse. Because it is the most expensive cut people gravitate towards filet, but in my opinion (and the opinion of many serious beef eaters), ribeye is actually the best tasting steak cut and that's almost exclusively what I get in a steakhouse. The only time I eat filet is at random restaurants where they have some appealing dish that involves filet. For example there's a decent fine dining place we go to that has a filet stuffed with crabmeat and topped with hollandaise that I really enjoy.
That may even be precisely why I rank Longhorn > Outback, I can only remember seeing sirloin and filet on the menu at Outback and any place that doesn't regularly offer ribeye is usually a mark down for me. I don't even think I get steak at Outback that often, I usually get something like chicken or ribs there.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 05, 2013, 07:18:36 AM
Quote from: Camerus on December 05, 2013, 06:47:01 AM
I hate having to crane my neck at restaurants looking around for someone, *anyone*, to get me another beer. So yeah, this approach will have some advantages.
In Korea every table in a restaurant has a red button you can push to summon a waitress.
They have these in some Korean restaurants in Atlanta, GA. I felt a little rude when I first had to push the button but I guess it does make sense so the server doesn't have to be constantly on your ass the entire time.
They have those in the White House. Hilarity etc.
Quote from: Barrister on December 05, 2013, 02:15:07 PM
Quote from: derspiess on December 05, 2013, 02:14:00 PM
Quote from: garbon on December 05, 2013, 02:06:18 PM
Only tangentially related, but I also dislike when stores try to make me do self-checkout.
I prefer them unless there is a line for them and there's a standard checkout lane open. Only snag I run into is if I have to walk over to the attendant and show ID for beer or wine. Or if I can't find the right code for produce.
I don't care for self-check outs, but the line up for the self check-out is invariably shorter...
I love self check outs because then I can avoid awkward small talk. They're also faster. You just scan your shit, pay, and then GTFO.
Few self check-out machines are cute teenagers.
Quote from: The Brain on December 10, 2013, 03:54:52 PM
Few self check-out machines are cute teenagers.
Few cashiers are either these days.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 10, 2013, 03:57:06 PM
Quote from: The Brain on December 10, 2013, 03:54:52 PM
Few self check-out machines are cute teenagers.
Few cashiers are either these days.
In Sweden simple jobs are still for young people, and being Swedes they are not katmaiesque. :yeah:
At my regular grocery store about 50% of the cashiers are bait.
If you would like more self checkout machines, have the state mandate that cashiers have to be paid a living wage.
Quote from: Berkut on December 10, 2013, 05:06:49 PM
If you would like more self checkout machines, have the state mandate that cashiers have to be paid a living wage.
I want the state to mandate the checkout machines have to be paid a living wage.
Quote from: Valmy on December 10, 2013, 05:11:20 PM
Quote from: Berkut on December 10, 2013, 05:06:49 PM
If you would like more self checkout machines, have the state mandate that cashiers have to be paid a living wage.
I want the state to mandate the checkout machines have to be paid a living wage.
I am sure that they are regularly serviced.
Quote from: Tonitrus on December 10, 2013, 05:15:58 PM
Quote from: Valmy on December 10, 2013, 05:11:20 PM
Quote from: Berkut on December 10, 2013, 05:06:49 PM
If you would like more self checkout machines, have the state mandate that cashiers have to be paid a living wage.
I want the state to mandate the checkout machines have to be paid a living wage.
I am sure that they are regularly serviced.
I'll volunteer to ensure that cute, of age female cashiers are regularly serviced. :)
Quote from: Berkut on December 10, 2013, 05:06:49 PM
If you would like more self checkout machines, have the state mandate that cashiers have to be paid a living wage.
Yes, because stating the fact that I personally enjoy self check out machines means I do not support a living wage. :huh:
Quote from: Korea on December 10, 2013, 05:32:15 PM
Quote from: Berkut on December 10, 2013, 05:06:49 PM
If you would like more self checkout machines, have the state mandate that cashiers have to be paid a living wage.
Yes, because stating the fact that I personally enjoy self check out machines means I do not support a living wage. :huh:
Well it seems like it'd be hard to have a wage if you don't get hired as a machine has removed the need for your position.
Quote from: garbon on December 10, 2013, 06:31:49 PM
Quote from: Korea on December 10, 2013, 05:32:15 PM
Quote from: Berkut on December 10, 2013, 05:06:49 PM
If you would like more self checkout machines, have the state mandate that cashiers have to be paid a living wage.
Yes, because stating the fact that I personally enjoy self check out machines means I do not support a living wage. :huh:
Well it seems like it'd be hard to have a wage if you don't get hired as a machine has removed the need for your position.
The grocery store I go to has the same number of ordinary cashiers as they had before self-checkout and scan-as-you-go, so the assumption you are making seems to be of limited truth if true at all.
What I don't see as much is people from the rest of the store getting called up as emergency cashiers because the lines are more than three deep (all their full-time employees are trained to run a register and they are added in some kind of order to the register bank when there are four people in any line). They still seem to have the same number of people in each department, too.
Quote from: grumbler on December 10, 2013, 06:41:14 PM
Quote from: garbon on December 10, 2013, 06:31:49 PM
Quote from: Korea on December 10, 2013, 05:32:15 PM
Quote from: Berkut on December 10, 2013, 05:06:49 PM
If you would like more self checkout machines, have the state mandate that cashiers have to be paid a living wage.
Yes, because stating the fact that I personally enjoy self check out machines means I do not support a living wage. :huh:
Well it seems like it'd be hard to have a wage if you don't get hired as a machine has removed the need for your position.
The grocery store I go to has the same number of ordinary cashiers as they had before self-checkout and scan-as-you-go, so the assumption you are making seems to be of limited truth if true at all.
What I don't see as much is people from the rest of the store getting called up as emergency cashiers because the lines are more than three deep (all their full-time employees are trained to run a register and they are added in some kind of order to the register bank when there are four people in any line). They still seem to have the same number of people in each department, too.
Oh well I certainly have not seen that when I go to CVS (where self checkout is king). They now generally have only one actual cashier.
CVS? The drug store? Only been one counter/line there as far back as I remember.
Quote from: garbon on December 10, 2013, 06:44:06 PM
Quote from: grumbler on December 10, 2013, 06:41:14 PM
Quote from: garbon on December 10, 2013, 06:31:49 PM
Quote from: Korea on December 10, 2013, 05:32:15 PM
Quote from: Berkut on December 10, 2013, 05:06:49 PM
If you would like more self checkout machines, have the state mandate that cashiers have to be paid a living wage.
Yes, because stating the fact that I personally enjoy self check out machines means I do not support a living wage. :huh:
Well it seems like it'd be hard to have a wage if you don't get hired as a machine has removed the need for your position.
The grocery store I go to has the same number of ordinary cashiers as they had before self-checkout and scan-as-you-go, so the assumption you are making seems to be of limited truth if true at all.
What I don't see as much is people from the rest of the store getting called up as emergency cashiers because the lines are more than three deep (all their full-time employees are trained to run a register and they are added in some kind of order to the register bank when there are four people in any line). They still seem to have the same number of people in each department, too.
Oh well I certainly have not seen that when I go to CVS (where self checkout is king). They now generally have only one actual cashier.
Almost all of them always only have one cashier and one manager on duty.
Quote from: Korea on December 10, 2013, 06:49:04 PM
Quote from: garbon on December 10, 2013, 06:44:06 PM
Quote from: grumbler on December 10, 2013, 06:41:14 PM
Quote from: garbon on December 10, 2013, 06:31:49 PM
Quote from: Korea on December 10, 2013, 05:32:15 PM
Quote from: Berkut on December 10, 2013, 05:06:49 PM
If you would like more self checkout machines, have the state mandate that cashiers have to be paid a living wage.
Yes, because stating the fact that I personally enjoy self check out machines means I do not support a living wage. :huh:
Well it seems like it'd be hard to have a wage if you don't get hired as a machine has removed the need for your position.
The grocery store I go to has the same number of ordinary cashiers as they had before self-checkout and scan-as-you-go, so the assumption you are making seems to be of limited truth if true at all.
What I don't see as much is people from the rest of the store getting called up as emergency cashiers because the lines are more than three deep (all their full-time employees are trained to run a register and they are added in some kind of order to the register bank when there are four people in any line). They still seem to have the same number of people in each department, too.
Oh well I certainly have not seen that when I go to CVS (where self checkout is king). They now generally have only one actual cashier.
Almost all of them always only have one cashier and one manager on duty.
I don't recall that. In fact, until recently, there was one near me that had no self checkout and 3 cashier spots. It has since closed...and was actually the worst as the cashiers were so so so slow.
Local shop Duane Reade, without self checkout usually has up to 6 cashiers (though typically about 3 on the registers at any time).
I wont willingly shop at a store that requires me to do self check out or bag my own groceries. I dont mind if they give the option to others that feel the need to do the work themselves. They can subsidize my full service all they want.
Quoteblah blah
I don't recall that. In fact, until recently, there was one near me that had no self checkout and 3 cashier spots. It has since closed...and was actually the worst as the cashiers were so so so slow.
Local shop Duane Reade, without self checkout usually has up to 6 cashiers (though typically about 3 on the registers at any time).
They're built with three registers but the hours almost always allow for one cashier on duty at a time. Do you live in California?
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 10, 2013, 06:55:40 PM
I wont willingly shop at a store that requires me to do self check out or bag my own groceries. I dont mind if they give the option to others that feel the need to do the work themselves. They can subsidize my full service all they want.
Time is money, friend.
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 10, 2013, 06:55:40 PM
I wont willingly shop at a store that requires me to do self check out or bag my own groceries. I dont mind if they give the option to others that feel the need to do the work themselves. They can subsidize my full service all they want.
Too good to bag your own shit, eh Lord FitzHugh?
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 10, 2013, 06:55:40 PM
I wont willingly shop at a store that requires me to do self check out or bag my own groceries. I dont mind if they give the option to others that feel the need to do the work themselves. They can subsidize my full service all they want.
That's true. In the city there are two drugstores near each other in Chelsea. I always opt for the non-CVS one as it doesn't require me to play amateur cashier.
Quote from: Korea on December 10, 2013, 06:56:59 PM
Quoteblah blah
I don't recall that. In fact, until recently, there was one near me that had no self checkout and 3 cashier spots. It has since closed...and was actually the worst as the cashiers were so so so slow.
Local shop Duane Reade, without self checkout usually has up to 6 cashiers (though typically about 3 on the registers at any time).
They're built with three registers but the hours almost always allow for one cashier on duty at a time. Do you live in California?
Nah, I'm in New York now.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 10, 2013, 06:59:31 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 10, 2013, 06:55:40 PM
I wont willingly shop at a store that requires me to do self check out or bag my own groceries. I dont mind if they give the option to others that feel the need to do the work themselves. They can subsidize my full service all they want.
Time is money, friend.
And people can ring up my bill and bag my groceries a lot faster and efficiently then I can.
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 10, 2013, 06:59:40 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 10, 2013, 06:55:40 PM
I wont willingly shop at a store that requires me to do self check out or bag my own groceries. I dont mind if they give the option to others that feel the need to do the work themselves. They can subsidize my full service all they want.
Too good to bag your own shit, eh Lord FitzHugh?
I dont even examine it. :P
While I almost exclusively use self-checkout, it never really seems to be a time-saver. More often than not, they are filled up by people who should never use it:
- Moms with 3+ kids in tow and willfully ignoring the item limits
- People buying lots of produce (that has to be weighed by the machine, often fails, and they call on the one person monitoring 8 machines)
- Paying cash, and always confused over how to slide the bills in
- Old people/grumbler
Pushy young people. Get off mah checkout.
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 10, 2013, 07:51:56 PM
Pushy young people. Get off mah checkout.
You probably block entire aisles in your hoveround and attending cohort of children too. :mad:
Quote from: Tonitrus on December 10, 2013, 07:52:55 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 10, 2013, 07:51:56 PM
Pushy young people. Get off mah checkout.
You probably block entire aisles in your hoveround and attending cohort of children too. :mad:
And train of wives.
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 10, 2013, 07:05:17 PM
And people can ring up my bill and bag my groceries a lot faster and efficiently then I can.
Sure. But there's often customers ahead of you that they have to bag as well.
I'll always take the open cashier over the do-it-yourself register, but I'd rather not wait while they're scanning the woman ahead of me with a cart filled to the brim.
I would use the self-service register more often if that automated cunt's voice actually gave me the time to place my items in the bag by giving me more than 1.4 seconds to do it before she tells me to do it again.
I still haven't figured out how to do produce.
Quote from: Tonitrus on December 10, 2013, 07:48:37 PM
While I almost exclusively use self-checkout, it never really seems to be a time-saver. More often than not, they are filled up by people who should never use it:
- Moms with 3+ kids in tow and willfully ignoring the item limits
- People buying lots of produce (that has to be weighed by the machine, often fails, and they call on the one person monitoring 8 machines)
- Paying cash, and always confused over how to slide the bills in
- Old people/grumbler
I actually rarely and almost never see this at the self check outs here. Even at Walmart, although I very rarely go in there.
The commissary on base is the most notorious for this (as the vast majority of patrons are geriatric veterans or the freak show that are military dependents) but I've seen it at Wegmans too.
Quote from: Tonitrus on December 11, 2013, 12:30:32 AM
The commissary on base is the most notorious for this (as the vast majority of patrons are geriatric veterans or the freak show that are military dependents) but I've seen it at Wegmans too.
The common feature in all this fail seems to be you. :cool:
Quote from: grumbler on December 10, 2013, 06:41:14 PMThe grocery store I go to has the same number of ordinary cashiers as they had before self-checkout and scan-as-you-go, so the assumption you are making seems to be of limited truth if true at all.
What I don't see as much is people from the rest of the store getting called up as emergency cashiers because the lines are more than three deep (all their full-time employees are trained to run a register and they are added in some kind of order to the register bank when there are four people in any line). They still seem to have the same number of people in each department, too.
This appears to be what happened at the grocery store where I shop as well, they basically leveraged the self checkout as a way to get more throughput with the
same number of people. So now there is one self checkout attendant monitoring the six-terminal self checkout bay where before that person would be running an individual aisle. The number of normal aisles staffed remains the same, so if anything they actually added a person to the shift to work the self checkout, or more likely they probably moved a position out of some low volume / low importance part of the store and onto self checkout. I do notice if I go at really off hours, the self checkout person won't always be at their station but will be nearby stocking or etc.
I've honestly noticed nothing but faster check out times for everyone because of it. I'll use self checkout myself basically if I have two bags or less of items, or if I'm just going into a store to buy beer or something. I think it's still more convenient/faster to go through regular checkout with a full grocery haul, but a large number of smaller purchases being routed through self checkout definitely cuts down on congestion in the main lines.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 11, 2013, 09:54:44 AMI'll use self checkout myself basically if I have two bags or less of items, or if I'm just going into a store to buy beer or something.
The machine doesn't shut down and summon an employee to check for ID? I've found alcohol to be one of the most inefficient products for buying at self-checkout, since someone ends up needing to deal with you anyway, even if it's just to look at you and override the system.
I've seen that happen if I don't put the item on the conveyor fast enough, at least in the early days when they first came out. PLEASE WAIT FOR AN ATTENDANT
Best part of self checkout is that when you arrive in store, you blast through the line to get to the pharmacy. None of that walking around bullshit for me.
MAH DRUGS
I only use the self checkout if I have a few items.
Quote from: 11B4V on December 11, 2013, 10:50:24 AM
I only use the self checkout if I have a few items.
Weirdo.
Quote from: grumbler on December 10, 2013, 06:41:14 PM
The grocery store I go to has the same number of ordinary cashiers as they had before self-checkout and scan-as-you-go, so the assumption you are making seems to be of limited truth if true at all.
What I don't see as much is people from the rest of the store getting called up as emergency cashiers because the lines are more than three deep (all their full-time employees are trained to run a register and they are added in some kind of order to the register bank when there are four people in any line). They still seem to have the same number of people in each department, too.
In the case of the grocery stores around here, many of them tried self-checkout and actually phased back on it (turns out it goes mad slow, due to customer ineptitude and/or technical difficulties). The place to watch for them phasing back departments is bakery. Several supermarket chains have their bakers show up in the morning to do the baking, then move them over to cash register or other departments. Also watch for open hours cutbacks to departments like meat, seafood, or deli.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 10, 2013, 07:58:34 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 10, 2013, 07:05:17 PM
And people can ring up my bill and bag my groceries a lot faster and efficiently then I can.
Sure. But there's often customers ahead of you that they have to bag as well.
Nope
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 11, 2013, 09:54:44 AM
I've honestly noticed nothing but faster check out times for everyone because of it. I'll use self checkout myself basically if I have two bags or less of items, or if I'm just going into a store to buy beer or something. I think it's still more convenient/faster to go through regular checkout with a full grocery haul, but a large number of smaller purchases being routed through self checkout definitely cuts down on congestion in the main lines.
I've definitely seen the same thing. I actually go one step further and use the scan-as-you-go feature so that all i need to do is pay and leave when I'm done shopping. I'll use the manned register if there is one free or with only a single person in line, so that purchase gets credited to a human checker; otherwise, I'll go to the self-checkout and run the card myself. It has been years since I have had to wait in a checkout line for more than a few minutes at Giant Food.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on December 11, 2013, 10:14:21 AMThe machine doesn't shut down and summon an employee to check for ID? I've found alcohol to be one of the most inefficient products for buying at self-checkout, since someone ends up needing to deal with you anyway, even if it's just to look at you and override the system.
Yes, but a lot of times if I'm buying beer that's all I'm buying. So many a time I've been in the situation where I'm walking to the register with my beer, and all the express lanes and normal lanes are several people back, many of them old and probably packing check books. If the attendant is at their station for self checkout, it's like a 2 second interruption, as they are immediately notified that someone is trying to buy an age restricted item. About 75% of the time they glance over at me, see I'm clearly over 21, and just hit a button to make the prompt go away. Other times they come over and ask to see my I.D., and then swipe a card or something at the station I'm at...but even that takes maybe 5-10 seconds total.
If there is no attendant, you'll notice the register starts flashing a notification light. While I have waited maybe a minute to two minutes before for an attendant to come over and help me, every time that has happened weigh that against the very long regular check out lines I was bypassing to purchase my single item and I still came out far, far ahead. Getting behind people with a lot of merchandise is damn dangerous at a grocery store. If they're trying to do a combination of WIC, EBT, and regular money it could take eternity to process. Even worse if they start coupon stacking and going over line by line the price of each item the cashier scans. Blue hairs who slowly scrawl out their information on a paper check as their hands tremble from Parkinson or similar afflictions also can slow you down forever. Even a brief wait at self checkout with a single item is far preferable to standing in line behind that.
But yeah, if I'm walking out with my beer and see one of the express lanes open I'll go up to it, but since I usually need to go to the grocery store after work like most people it's usually a mad house and the self check out lines are a true time saver.
"But the ad said fish sticks were $2.29!"
:bleeding;
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 11, 2013, 05:35:27 PM
"But the ad said fish sticks were $2.29!"
:bleeding;
I love that shit, especially when they've got five boxes of Gorton's and the ad clearly says Mrs. Paul's, or something else that only someone oblivious to how coupons and products work in a supermarket.
I've never been a big fan of the self-check aisles (they took our jerbs), and I still remember the last time I used one. It was many years ago and I was buying just one thing, a greeting card, maybe for Mother's Day. I went through the self-check because I was in a hurry and there was no line there. After scanning the barcode you had to put the item in the bag, there was a scale that could tell when you did so. The card weighed so little that it didn't register no matter how many times or how hard I threw the stupid card at the scale. I was so pissed I eventually just walked out without the card. I have never used the self-check since.
I will occasionally go through it now but I make the attendant there ring my stuff up and put my money in the machine. I don't touch anything but my cart.
Quote from: sbr on December 11, 2013, 06:24:04 PM
I've never been a big fan of the self-check aisles (they took our jerbs), and I still remember the last time I used one. It was many years ago and I was buying just one thing, a greeting card, maybe for Mother's Day. I went through the self-check because I was in a hurry and there was no line there. After scanning the barcode you had to put the item in the bag, there was a scale that could tell when you did so. The card weighed so little that it didn't register no matter how many times or how hard I threw the stupid card at the scale. I was so pissed I eventually just walked out without the card. I have never used the self-check since.
The last time I used one, there was now an option to tell it you wanted to skip bagging.
Quote from: garbon on December 11, 2013, 06:25:01 PM
Quote from: sbr on December 11, 2013, 06:24:04 PM
I've never been a big fan of the self-check aisles (they took our jerbs), and I still remember the last time I used one. It was many years ago and I was buying just one thing, a greeting card, maybe for Mother's Day. I went through the self-check because I was in a hurry and there was no line there. After scanning the barcode you had to put the item in the bag, there was a scale that could tell when you did so. The card weighed so little that it didn't register no matter how many times or how hard I threw the stupid card at the scale. I was so pissed I eventually just walked out without the card. I have never used the self-check since.
The last time I used one, there was now an option to tell it you wanted to skip bagging.
I figured they had worked that bug out but I still don't bother. Automating service jobs
may not reduce the total number of jobs out there but it is a line I have personally drawn in the sand, and I am willing to deal with the extra time and irritation that usually adds to my grocery shopping trips.
The last couple of times I've been to the supermarket the cashier has been a cute female teenager (different ones).
Did you get her digits? :perv:
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 15, 2013, 01:29:54 PM
Did you get her digits? :perv:
Or did she get a few of yours?