The New York Times, following as always Tinotopia’s lead, has a story today about automated tills, electronic boarding-pass-dispensers, and the like.

Though Tino’s experience has been that many of these things are a colossal pain in the ass because they’re poorly designed, in many cases they in fact prove more convenient — it’s easier to put up with the lousy user interface of the machine than the wait in a long line to deal with a human — and a lot of people are using them.

The Times is wary, however. In the middle of their story is this:

Critics say

What would be do without unidentified ‘critics’?

Critics say the machines may also provide an all-too-easy escape from social interactions across class lines that may prompt some shoppers to wonder uncomfortably if a minimum-wage cashier has health insurance, or lead an employee to respond angrily to a customer.

Yes, God forbid we’re eliminating opportunities for employees to let customers know just how much they’re resented. And, if only the employers of these surly pit bulls of customer service would spend more money to provide them with health insurance, the New York Times-reading customers’ liberal guilt would be assuaged.

So the employer and the customer alike are faced with rude employees who, ‘critics’ seem to indicate, should have employer-subsidized health insurance. The ‘critics’ seem to think that making customers regret that they came in in the first place, and making them feel guilty that their no-skill jobs don’t come with subsidized health care, is a winning strategy for these class warriors.

In fact, it’s garbage like this — driving away the customers while simultaneously demanding more money for it — that will eventually eliminate these low- and no-skill jobs all together. Perhaps then the ‘critics’ will feel better, because no cashiers will be without health insurance. Instead, they’ll have warranties.