I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them • Hacker News Board

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#191

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 8:36 PM UTC

s73v3r_ wrote: post #183

sokoloff wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody is upset that Wal-Mart sells food to SNAP beneficiaries. Literally the post to which I replied complained about "simultaneously are the beneficiary of 20% (or $14B) in taxpayer funded food stamps annually there is a problem". It seems that someone is upset about that.

No. They are benefitting because they are having their labor subsidized by taxpayers because they don't pay enough. Again, pretending the reason people are upset is because they're selling food, and not because Wal-Mart is requiring you and I to subsidize their labor costs, is incredibly dishonest.

> They are benefitting because they are having their labor subsidized by taxpayers because they don't pay enough.

That's not a labor subsidy, and if it was the simple fix would be to make employed people categorically ineligible for federal benefits—we don't do that, because we know it's not a wage subsidy, and all the hyperventilating about it being a wage subsidy is (at least on the part of public officials and other people that know anything about policy) dishonest grandstanding.

(Now, work requirements in benefit programs do make them wage subsidies, because then the threat is “work at whatever job will have you or lose public benefits in addition to the marginal benefit of pay”; that's easily solved by removing such requirements.)

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#192

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 8:38 PM UTC

sokoloff wrote: post #36

IMO, it is never proper for the legislature to target an individual or individual company. It's perfectly fine for enforcement agencies (OSHA, FDA, IRS, FAA, FTC, SEC, etc) to enforce policy/law on individuals/companies who have been found in violation, but to originally target individuals with the force of government lawmaking is a dramatic overreach of power, IMO. If Senator Sanders et al want to target all compani…

> If Senator Sanders et al want to target all companies who pay below a certain wage or offer/don't offer a certain benefit or whatever broad category of social/economic ill that the legislature wants to end, have at it.

That's exactly what the STOP BEZOS bill does, Amazon isn't uniquely effected by it.

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#193

Post by sokoloff » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 8:48 PM UTC

will_brown wrote: post #190

geezerjay wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Again consider the fact that Walmart as a national grocer is able to milk the SNAP program on a national level to the tune of $14B/year. Others in this thread have pointed out that "milk the SNAP" program is a very disingenuous and deceitful statement. SNAP is a wellfare program that subsidizes food purchases and both wallmart and amazon sell groceries, and somehow people like you spin the fact that supermarkets se…

>Others in this thread have pointed out that "milk the SNAP" program is a very disingenuous and deceitful statement. SNAP is a wellfare program that subsidizes food purchases and both wallmart and amazon sell groceries, and somehow people like you spin the fact that supermarkets sell groceries to sound like these companies are stealing money from the government at the expense of poor people. Walmart is stealing...it’…

IMO, there are two, perhaps three issues:

1. Walmart sells things to SNAP recipients. This is something that is perfectly fine, as I downloaded the MA.csv listing of food vendors who accept SNAP and it seems like it's damn near everyone, including tiny little convenience stores. That's a level playing field, and the fact that Walmart gets money from SNAP is no more interesting than the fact that they get money from American Express. In particular, this is not stealing; this is selling.

2. Walmart employees being recipients of government support programs. It's fine to object to this, but I don't see it in any way as related to #1. Presumably, you would object to any other employer who doesn't sell food (and therefore doesn't take SNAP) paying their full-time employees at a level that permits them to qualify for and accept SNAP benefits. Could you confirm/deny that?

3. Walmart lobbying for the preservation / expansion of SNAP program. It's also fine to object to this, though I see the case for their lobbying to be much more strongly to preserve the #1 status quo than the #2 status quo.

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#194

Post by Ricardus » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 9:13 PM UTC

badpun wrote: post #87

Ricardus wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live a few miles from a Walmart distribution warehouse, and had a good friend who worked there. It really started to affect his health. The working conditions are horrible, and the culture promoted is toxic and demeaning. The money was a little above average for the area, but that's about the only thing positive he could say about it. When he left, his migraines went away.

Tough physical labor is not for everyone. For example, I would not last 6 months in a construction job (I easily get colds when I work outside). As long as the majority of people working in that warehouse are ok, then maybe your friend was just not suited for the job.

This is not just about tough working conditions. It's about the way management treats employees, and encourages employees to crap on other employees for small gains. Google "I was a distribution warehouse wage slave" and read that article. It will get you a better idea of what I am talking about.

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#195

Post by mikestew » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 9:41 PM UTC

gagege wrote: post #70

Why does everyone ignore the fact that employment at Amazon is voluntary? When the employee was hired, they made an agreement that the payment was a fair trade for the work to be done. If it turns out that the pay was not fair after all, which it sounds like it isn't, then the employee should simply stop working there, because Amazon isn't holding up their end of the bargain. The reason this continues to be an issue…

If it turns out that the pay was not fair after all, which it sounds like it isn't, then the employee should simply stop working there, because Amazon isn't holding up their end of the bargain.

It's as if you've willingly chosen to ignore over 100 years of collective bargaining, and the reasons for it, just to poorly make a point. If it were as facile as you make it out to be, we would have never had unions.

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#196

Post by JoshuaDavid » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 10:03 PM UTC

xamuel wrote: post #101

ElBarto wrote: post #22

"Sanders has introduced a bill designed to force companies such as Amazon to pay their workers higher wages." Instead of picking on Amazon perhaps politicians should look at the actual root cause here. If there are minimum wages laws (and there are) and people paid minimum wage still need food stamps then perhaps the problem lies with minimum wages and those who set them... Politicians.

Unpopular alternative interpretation: the market is distorted by food stamps. Imagine if the government announced it will pay for lightbulbs for workers whose workplaces don't provide lightbulbs. Inevitably, certain workplaces would stop providing lightbulbs. Would you really blame them? This will sound unintuitive, but what if one of the requirements for welfare was that the recipient NOT work? Suddenly, companies w…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_trap

> The welfare trap (or unemployment trap or poverty trap in British English) theory asserts that taxation and welfare systems can jointly contribute to keep people on social insurance because the withdrawal of means-tested benefits that comes with entering low-paid work causes there to be no significant increase in total income. An individual sees that the opportunity cost of returning to work is too great for too little a financial return, and this can create a perverse incentive to not work.

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#197

Post by IWeldMelons » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 10:11 PM UTC

geezerjay wrote: post #159

maxxxxx wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of people don't have other options so they take whatever they can get in order to survive. Why don't victims of domestic abuse leave immediately but stay for years?

> A lot of people don't have other options so they take whatever they can get in order to survive. Why don't victims of domestic abuse leave immediately but stay for years? If Amazon is offering the very best jobs available to those workers, and Amazon actually complies with all laws and regulations, then I fail to see how is Amazon responsible for the worker's problems. It seems to me that the problem lies elsewhere…

What is legal is not equal to what is moral. If you force Amazon to pay some decent wages all across the country they would have to comply, and, as the result won't be able to shutdown the facilities in the depressed areas. Because they need the facilities to run their business, duh.

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#198

Post by s73v3r_ » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 10:26 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #188

s73v3r_ wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If that's the case then I fail to see how a particular employer is responsible for that problem." I fail to see how they're not. Wal-Mart is entirely, 10,000% responsible for how much they pay their workers. "I mean, if the economy is so depressed in a region that the absolute best some job seekers are able to get is a job that requires them to remain on public assistance then obviously the employer isn't to blame f…

> Wal-Mart is entirely, 10,000% responsible for how much they pay their workers. Yes, but the public is largely responsible for how little of what they allocate to pay gets to employees, by way of the fact that wages are taxed higher than regular income (because payroll taxes) which in turn is taxed higher than capital gains, which in turn are taxed higher than most unearned generational wealth transfer (thanks to th…

No, I can't agree with that statement. Wal-Mart has lots of smart accountants; they know what the tax burden the average person making their wages would be. While I'm not at all opposed to changing how different categories of income are taxed, I still can't see this as anything but Wal-Mart's fault.

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#199

Post by dennisgorelik » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 10:38 PM UTC

QuotedForTruth wrote: post #41

ElBarto wrote: post #22

"Sanders has introduced a bill designed to force companies such as Amazon to pay their workers higher wages." Instead of picking on Amazon perhaps politicians should look at the actual root cause here. If there are minimum wages laws (and there are) and people paid minimum wage still need food stamps then perhaps the problem lies with minimum wages and those who set them... Politicians.

"If there are minimum wages laws (and there are) and people paid minimum wage still need food stamps then perhaps the problem lies with minimum wages and those who set them... Politicians." If by "politicians" here you mean the one politician the article is discussing, Sen Sanders, you should know that he is for increasing the minimum wage. [1] Of course he needs other politicians and/or their voters to agree. This c…

> Corporations take advantage of this to lower their payroll costs.

... which is a very good thing for low-wage workers. Because if corporations would not benefit from these "no benefits" savings, then these corporations will be more likely to fire these low-wage workers.

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#200

Post by mrnobody_67 » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 10:47 PM UTC

ElBarto wrote: post #22

"Sanders has introduced a bill designed to force companies such as Amazon to pay their workers higher wages." Instead of picking on Amazon perhaps politicians should look at the actual root cause here. If there are minimum wages laws (and there are) and people paid minimum wage still need food stamps then perhaps the problem lies with minimum wages and those who set them... Politicians.

Raising minimum wages could just raise the ROI of investing in fully automated warehouses... law of unintended consequences.

JD already has these in China - see Youtube