Senator Bernie Sanders, for example, recently introduced legislation to end what he calls “corporate welfare” — and it’s pretty clear who he had in mind, since the bill was titled Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies (BEZOS). Bernie out-marketing AMZN is pretty funny.
Maybe I've got no sense of humour, but I think that's unprofessional and something like bullying, rather than funny. Legislation should surely not target one individual by name like that?
Amazon raises minimum wage to $15 for all US employees
111–120 of 1001 posts
Re: Amazon raises minimum wage to $15 for all US employees
#112Because I don't want to starve.
Re: Amazon raises minimum wage to $15 for all US employees
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's usually best, when criticizing something, to come prepared with concrete examples that demonstrate the issue you're talking about.
Here you go. I couldn't find anything that even registers in comparison to Amazon aside from Walmart. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&ge...
(Meijer is a regional chain. Sears is nearly out-of-business. Using them as examples would fall flat.)
Re: Amazon raises minimum wage to $15 for all US employees
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
First, you mean one of his staff. Mad scientists have underlings. Second, you have literally no idea how much input he had into it. He may have come up with the name himself, or he may have directed his staff to come up with something pithy that spells out "Bezos" or he may have sat around with them spitballing ideas until they came up with something good. But in the end, he was the senator who introduced it, and he…
> First, you mean one of his staff. Mad scientists have underlings. In the real world so do politicians and executives...
If I referred to HRC's staff as "underlings" no one would question I was anti-HRC.
Re: Amazon raises minimum wage to $15 for all US employees
#115Opponents of the minimum wage argue that it reduces employment by creating an artificial floor on wages, that jobs are lost because employers can't afford to pay the minimum. But if you can't pay the minimum, then you didn't really have a job to offer in the first place! By extension of this logic, employers could argue that they are losing jobs because they can only afford to pay someone who will work 12 hours a day…
> If you can't pay a basic living wage, for fair hours, in safe conditions, with necessary medical benefits, then you don't have a job to offer. Why not let the employees decide if the job is worth taking? If there exists people willing to voluntarily take a job given its wage/conditions, you have a job to offer.
You could argue we could go back to the 1800's in terms of labour standards, but don't be suprised when workers simply decide to kill their bosses and companies retaliating[1].
Diminishing labour rights is just asking for another violent class struggle.
Re: Amazon raises minimum wage to $15 for all US employees
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
that's the whole point of the job market. The dysfunction displayed by Amazon is evidence of a supply/demand imbalance in the job market for warehousing roles, because if people have an option to move to another company that does not treat them badly they generally will do. As it stands I'm guessing the ratio of Amazon applicants to positions is way too high meaning they can afford a high turnover rate and focus sole…
I worked in a call center and I used to always wonder why they'd accept such extreme turnover, given that there were a few weeks of training before they could put you on (the fact that there was a course in touch-typing as part of that training probably gives you an idea where the bar was for hiring). But I'd read some analysis that suggested that in some ways the employers running these systems found that desirable,…
Re: Amazon raises minimum wage to $15 for all US employees
#117Re: Amazon raises minimum wage to $15 for all US employees
#118While this is a very welcome development it would be more impressive to see them reform their slave like fulfilment center work practises. Employees are forced to walk massive distances, have their every move tracked and are penalised for taking bathroom breaks. I doubt many people in Silicon Valley would consider $15 an hour a fair compensation for the oppressive work conditions.
Walking long distances isn't much of an issue. The human body is very well adapted to it (or built for it, depending on who you ask). Having a job that forces you to do it is good for your health. It's forcing people who might not be in the best of shape to be bending over, reaching, lifting, etc, etc all day that results in health problems.
Re: Amazon raises minimum wage to $15 for all US employees
#119$15/hour is still not much in the international market where Amazon sells its goods. In large parts of Europe it's less than what a warehouse worker makes. It's still barely enough for an adult to be able to pay his/her half of family expenses in the US. A lot of employees will still need a second job. And it only comes now, 20 years after the company's founding, after it has huge profits (and can deduct expenses lik…
i don't understand this comment. while i'm all for warehouse workers getting a fair wage i don't understand the point of comparing a us wage, being paid in the us, to us workers, to foreign workers in foreign economies? yes USD 15 is not enough to survive in Oslo but these people don't live in Oslo! $15USD is double the average us minimum wage! before taxes for a full working year that's 30k. again in many places in the us that's enough to get by and even probably save a little.
again i think everyone should be getting a fair wage and unskilled laborers should be treated with respect and dignity but that particular line is nonsensical.
Re: Amazon raises minimum wage to $15 for all US employees
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did Amazon actually pay any worse or have worse working conditions than any other unskilled warehouse job? If so, why didn’t the employees change jobs? If not, why is so much criticism directed at Amazon specifically, rather than at capitalism itself?
>If not, why is so much criticism directed at Amazon specifically, rather than at capitalism itself? What's the point of criticizing capitalism if there are no viable alternatives?