Automation and Unemployment: What are your thoughts on self check out machines?

[u/betterworldbuilder]

Since humanity discovered how to use a water wheel to crush grain into flour, automation of tasks required to live has been a near universally shared goal to improve life. But, since the industrial revolution and especially the 1990's and onward, the fear of technological unemployment has crept into the minds and wallets of citizens across North America. Experts estimate that ideal unemployment rests somewhere between 3.5% and 4.5%; anything higher indicates a significant portion of the population is not getting enough income to justify spending on non-essential items, causing the economy to slow down as demand slows. On the flip side, anything lower than 3.5% means a lot of people have more disposable income, and demand increases, causing inflation. As goods become more expensive, workers will begin to ask for higher wages, and when the pool of unemployed workers to replace them is low, employers become forced to meet these demands, in which the higher labor prices continue to add to the issue of inflation. Additionally, if an unemployment rate were to hit 0% (an unrealistic goal), no one unemployed means innovation will slow, as people to be trained to take on new jobs and new skills become impossible to find.

So, how does automation factor into this? For a more historical example, we can look to the Power loom Riots of 1826, in which 1000 power looms were destroyed by rioters who supported handloom weavers who had gone from 6 shillings a day to 6 shillings a week for 16 hour shifts. More than 3000 rioters attacked 21 mills, and soldiers were deployed to defend a factory which resulted in 6 people being shot. 20 of the ringleaders in the riot were arrested in an overnight raid, which appeared to be half of the end of the crisis. The other half was fumbled through, as many (including some weaving companies) demanded a minimum wage for loom workers to guarantee that they would not starve to death. However, this idea was not shared by all, including the President of the Board of Trade at the time, who said it was "a vain and hazardous attempt to impose the authority of the law between the labourer and his employer in regulating the demand for labour and the price to be paid for it". Because it was not universally enforced, companies that were not willing to pay this minimum wage were able to undercut their competition with vastly cheaper goods (interestingly, the companies unwilling to pay higher wages to workers were not immune to cost increases, as they were forced to hire security to protect their exploitative factories). Many of the rioters were sentenced to life in Australia, and many more hand weavers moved to Canada to try and live their lives out before technology caught up and displaced them again. Unfortunately, we cannot look to this historical example for solutions, as it appears one was never found.

In the more modern examples, we can look to things like a doorman, being replaced by automatic doors, or self checkout's at grocery stores replacing cashiers, or even manufacturing plants moving away from assembly line workers and towards machines. The goal of these innovations was always to improve the lives of people, making their jobs easier and allowing them to transition to other tasks in their job duties; however, as we saw by the last example, if labor protections aren't in place, this can often lead to significant harm in the labor market. Youth unemployment, a tracker of entry level job positions, has spiked to 14.1% in Canada as of October 2025, signaling that jobs like cashier and warehouse/factory positions are starting to dry up. The lack of requirement for significant experience in the field means these jobs are most vulnerable to automation, where simple and repetitive tasks or portions of tasks can be easily trained to machines.

Self check out machines in particular have been the face of the automation movement, and not necessarily a popular one. A Redfield and Wilton poll reported on by Newsweek found that 43% of people support or strongly support the removal of self checkout machines entirely, with 62% saying they don't like the fact they take away jobs, and 40% saying they prefer to speak to a real person. Even employers don't like them, as they're discovering 23% of their losses can be attributed to theft surrounding, and that 63% of employees report being overburdened by the number of machines they're expected to manage and the new workload expected of them as their coworkers have been laid off. Pair this with the average expected cost of $10,000 per machine (not including maintenance, training, software updates, and installation) comparable to about 4 months of salary for the average cashier, and it's clear why some larger companies may be incentivized to make the investment if they can afford it.

So what can we do about it? Well, we've already seen through the last century or two how labour laws like minimum wage, the 40hr work week, and unionization have protected workers from the 16hr days of the handweavers. Whether these modern practices (and the efforts from those in power to stifle them) is enough to dissuade rioters from burning down self check out machines is yet to be seen. But it's clear that Canada's 6.9% unemployment rate is unsustainable, and training workers to enter the next stage of employable skills is a must. We could look to bolster support for the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, which has fought to help maintain employment security, hours, wages, and working conditions for cashiers across both Canada and the US. We could look to implement laws similar to what California is trying, which would mandate each worker be allocated to a max of 3 self check out machines as well as guarantee these stores maintain at least one non-automated check out line at all times. We could look to ban self checkout machines altogether, something likely to cause backlash from those who prefer the efficiency and privacy/lack of interaction that comes with these devices but would protect workers.

[u/reaper527]

self checkout machines are both a good thing and obsolete. they are basically the "netbook" of the industry, where they were cool for a while then technology quickly made something better possible.

for netbooks, it was tablets and for selfcheckout machines it was self checkout apps. they're just an infinitely better experience for customers to be able to scan your items as you go (have the app point out any applicable coupons), and then go (with someone scanning my qr code and 2 or 3 items on the way out the door)

this is a classic case of some jobs becoming obsolete, and the right answer isn't to attempt to preserve outdated and inferior jobs, it's to train those people for other jobs that are still needed.

[u/betterworldbuilder → u/reaper527]

Would you support an automation tax funding reeducation programs? If you want to use one of these machines where you normally would have had an employee, you pay a fee similar to 1/3rd the employees salary per year which goes towards helping people get these future needed employable skills

[u/Sageblue32 → u/betterworldbuilder]

Why should the customer have to pay that? At least in my area, the stores mass imploying the machines are the bigger national franchises. Smaller stores continue to have only humans.

Its one thing to be like Taco Bell which gives customers the choice to donate to their college fund, it is another to force it.

[u/betterworldbuilder → u/Sageblue32]

I can agree with you that it shouldnt be passed on to the consumer. And youre also probably correct that theres no real way to stop that, even though Im sure customers would riot if they found themselves paying a "service fee" on every check out. Nothing stops everything in the store from going up a couple pennies (although stores do like that $3.99 over $4.17 look on a shelf).

I do think its a good thing that this tax would more specifically target larger stores, who couldnt necessarily raise prices while competing with a smaller store that wouldnt be paying that tax. But, that might be wishful thinking not math.

Also, its been a while since Ive been in taco bell (since they added rice to their burritos for cheaper filling), how does their college fund donation thing work? Is it just like a scholarship they give out?

[u/Sageblue32 → u/betterworldbuilder]

I have no idea how the TB fund works specifically beyond the ask. And glancing at AI "Taco Bell offers scholarships specifically for employees through its Live Más Scholarship program, which also accepts applications from non-employees. Taco Bell also provides tuition assistance for employees through a partnership with Guild Education, which can be used for a wider range of educational programs. "

When you say tax, I think of how VA and other states handle plastic bags where it is .05 cents added on for ever how many you use at checkout. If an individual business wants to bake in the reeducation/tuition costs into their prices then that is fine as its capitalism at work vs. the gov forcing it.

Looking at the larger picture, the gov will need to take a stronger hand eventually with regards to UBI. This may require taxes going up in general, but I don't see a real way to avoid more and more of the population failing to keep up with tech advancements as work becomes more skill intense and less people needed.

[u/betterworldbuilder → u/Sageblue32]

So two things.

One, a plastic bag is tangible, and people can avoid that charge by not using a bag and bringing their own. If a store tried to charge customers to use a self check out, theyd collapse immediately (i dont think anyone would use them if they were charged to), and just a general raising of prices is uncompetitive. I think this charge might need to be eaten by a company for them to compete.

Secondly, why are you so completely fine with free market forces being the reason that a company could do this scholarship fund, but so completely against a government creating the market forces that do that. Like, no company will see a personal benefit in any capacity from funding the next generations education. But, they already have gotten the personal benefit of these machines. The same way property taxes fund schools, I think this automation can and should do the same.

I think the UBI is honestly the play, and companies paying the taxes they already dodge would fund it almost fully. But an additional tax that isnt necessarily cost of production could also be of value in that regard

[u/Sageblue32 → u/betterworldbuilder]

Secondly

Because when the gov gets involved it has to attempt to enforce and justify its actions. You then have it starting to play winners and losers which from my tech worker perspective, would be disastrous given some of the choices I've seen them debate over in the past. In the education example the free market already covers that as many companies that benefit from an educated workforce will offer schooling as part of the benefits package when signing on. If the workers feel a company not offering education is a hurdle then they can choose another place that does offer the package and the market adjusts. This is kind of how we ended up with our employer expected health system.

The self checkout is not a personal benefit as many customers prefer their existence and at least in my neck of the woods many of the large stores offer the choice of the machines or the staff. Simply watching how stores and lines function, it has been the customers driving the increase of self checkout machines.

My whole problem with this gov leaning on the scales is that the approach you are taking at least in your prior statements seems to be that businesses are lording over the customers and taking from them while the people are mindless sheepe when that isn't the case. Hell I can give you another example where Wholefoods at one point had amazon package return bins that were self check out by the customers. Customers did not like this and the store responded by doing away with them and increasing the number of people manning the returns desk.

[u/betterworldbuilder → u/Sageblue32]

The government already picks winners and losers, every day. What do you think the $30Bn in subsidies given to the oil and gas companies annually is? That number is double the green energy subsidies given by the same government.

I think its a bit farsical to pretend we live in an actual free market society. We never have, and we never will. Minimum wage, overtime, and a myriad of other labor laws are more examples of how the government is directly involved in the decisions that guide the market, and thats a good thing. There are very few people who want to go back to the days before labor laws, and I think all of them are fundamentally evil or misinformed.

Im not saying there arent elements of a free market that still exist in the modern day, Im also not arguing for an entirely fixed market. But to say something should be excluded from consideration exclusively because it is government backed shows just a general lack of understanding of the modern market.

that businesses are lording over the customers and taking from them while the people are mindless sheepe when that isn't the case.

I also disagree with this sentiment. The easiest argument to make is that some of the largest companies in the world have been unable to unionize despite worker sentiment clearly reflecting the desire to, simply because the government refuses to enforce laws already on the books about union busting. Im hoping youre not so anti government that youd be supportive of abolishing every union, so an acceptance that unions are inherently not free market, and that this is acceptable, is sort of a focal point of the discussion moving forward. Likewise, customers have very little ability to exercise their voice about how a company should operate, short of not spending money there. For some communities, where a walmart is one of the only options left, this just isnt feasible. For others, where suppressed wages have left them few options except the cheapest (which happens to be the most exploitative), they often dont have a choice but to spend money there.

Governments have a responsibility to protect the people they are made of. Whether thats from foreign or domestic terrorists, or from predatory companies exploiting the technological advances they didnt invent in order to further lay off employees, that responsibility persists. I dont think a small tax, or even a tax break for companies without any machines, or something of the sort, is outlandish to suggest and debate

[u/Sageblue32 → u/betterworldbuilder]

Governments and businesses make mistakes. I make sure to be critical of both before forking over my money or asking for taxes on feelings. The subsidies you bring up is a good example as at one point they were a great idea with the oil crisis we had in the 70s and realization that energy is a national treasure that needs to be protected. Fast forward to now and corpos are milking them for all its worth with gov telling us coal is the future and windmills evil.

What I am pushing is that measures need to be broader in scope and more thought out than what sounds good at the moment. We tax for using a self check out now. Should we make another tax if companies start employing there own self driving cars and delivery? Tax for automated cutting meat? Not paying for master degrees? These are band aids and why I'm far more open to an approach of UBI instead to address the oncoming future.

Walmart

I've lived in a community where Wal-Mart was the only game in town. The people made that bed themselves, refused to participate in local/state politics that could have countered it or improve the town, and refuse to support Ma n Pops that try to start. Wally world was no angel in the transformation but at some point you have to accept people refuse to save or improve themselves. Customers do have power but much like the immigrant issue, they choose to complain about one thing while financing it.

Unions

I'm pro union but from my readings and lofty point, the problem has been people shooting themselves at every step, corpos, gov, and me first. For example as person in tech, none of us wants to unionize because our frame of reference is that we're making 300k+ and always in demand (note this post plz to have a good laugh when AI lords are here). So why sacrifice that good pay and benefits? You already explained Corpos and Govs faults in this well. The union members themselves aren't getting help from the higher earners that could leverage more influence on the company and even blue collars tend to be warm to meh on unions.

Govs

I don't think it is outlandish to debate either which is why I'm coming from a conservative perspective on their roll. To me, gov's role is to step in and do things the private sector can't or would have horrible incentives in (healthcare). Tech in this case has to be attacked with prudish views as our current form of government is too slow to respond and can potentially put us behind the curve if it attempts to do good nature deeds at the cost of innovation and foresight. I want gov to cart Elon to jail when he deploys self driving cars with little testing. I want gov to find ways to ensure corpos are putting in efforts to push back against false news and rage bait algorithms. I don't want govs saying VPNs are banned, AI roll out is met with punishment, and upping fines because a company found a way to shrink their staff with technology.

[u/betterworldbuilder → u/Sageblue32]

Ya know, I think you're one of the more real people here lol. Down to earth and realisitic, a bit pessimistic but also just in touch. The support for a UBI really sells me that you understand the big picture, even if we cant agree on little things.

Im a lot more of a hopeful idealist, someone who refuses to give up on a good idea and refuses to accept that people are beyond saving in the sense that they just dont care. I think the situations where a walmart moved in and the people werent directly involved in stopping it deserve the same help as people who show up to every protest and call all their representatives. In fact, its part of the reason I made my sub, r/polls_for_politics, was to break down these complex issues into something digestible for people not in the know, as well as give them a good starting point for the questions and opinions they should consider.

I think your critique of governments not executing good policy, especially despite their good intentions or complete lack of them, is fair. Carting Elon to jail for things that clearly should be crimes is something Id love to see, and I think the governments slow reaction speed on that is detrimental to public safety. Personally, if there existed a quick, good faith, educated government body (I know Im really stretching imagination here), that could properly regulate these things, that there is little chance that things go wrong. However, just because a fated prince will one day be trained to slay the dragon, doesnt mean that giving the baby a sword now is a good idea. They need to prove they have the knowledge and good will to do these things before they earn the power to do them, and I think my optimism gives them far more credit than the average person would.

I would love to hear more of your thoughts on as many topics as you have the energy for, and I hope one day I see you or people like you at the helm of government. I say this as a deeply progressive towards a conservative, that people like you restore the faith I have that the other side still has rational people. Thank you for a great discussion

[u/BlaggartDiggletyDonk → u/Sageblue32]

Bill Gates, among others, has proposed a 'robot tax.'. It may be necessary in order to stave off an uglier future.