Sure. However, I think the poster is commenting on the insensitivity of the post by OP. No one has denied that this is not happening because it is. We can however, comment on them in a way that is empathetic to the workers who are protesting. Never know, might come for any one of us one day.
The reality is appeal to empathy is imo ineffective.
What do you mean? From an approach perspective? Shouldn't the first thing you do to understand the problem is to see it from the other persons perspective? Empathy is not the end all be all. It's a start.
I agree with the worker in the video, they should be treated as human beings. One of the issues is doing a simple, monotonous task every 8 seconds, 10 hours a day, 5 days a week, without creating anything of value, is going to be dehumanizing and unfulfilling regardless. Robots carrying out this work would probably be for the best for everyone involved, although Amazon should do right by the workers carrying them ove…
> The compensation should reflect the mental and physical stress they put people through. As with all companies paying workers to do a job, the compensation should reflect the confluence of supply and demand in the market. The fact that Amazon can easily hire as many workers as it wants at $15/hr says that they are paying their employees plenty already. It bothers me that people are constantly demonizing Amazon for t…
Given Amazon is such a large part of that market, they do in fact play a large role in the perpetuation of that market. This strike action is in fact those people pushing back both against Amazon and that larger set of conditions they are in.
Yes, can you see that is ineffective ? you want to make me care, you have to force me to care.
You're literally just saying you're a terrible person. Congratulations, you're literally the problem.
How is telling me a terrible person going to be useful ? You have to face reality that like many other people, I like fast shipping and cheap stuff more than amazon worker welfare
> The compensation should reflect the mental and physical stress they put people through. As with all companies paying workers to do a job, the compensation should reflect the confluence of supply and demand in the market. The fact that Amazon can easily hire as many workers as it wants at $15/hr says that they are paying their employees plenty already. It bothers me that people are constantly demonizing Amazon for t…
Market conditions are set by regulation and market participants (there is no such thing as a pure free market except in an economist's textbook). Congress (the Senate specifically, conservatives/republicans) have failed to raise the federal minimum wage ($7.25, unchanged since 2009) to reflect the required wage to survive with increased costs of living (housing, broken healthcare, etc). This caused Senator Sanders to…
I will admit that R's don't deserve the full blame here, many Democrats also oppose raising the minimum wage, and Nancy Pelosi, promising she would put a $15 minimum wage on the floor has not brought it up since taking the house. Both parties for the most part have their contingents that oppose raising the federal minimum wage.
> . It bothers me that people are constantly demonizing Amazon for Why does it bother you when people empathize with the poor and castigate billion dollar corporations that don't even allow employees enough time to urinate without it harming the employees metrics making them slip towards the back of the rank and closer to being fired? That bothers you ...think about that.
You entirely missed their point and instead put words in their mouth.
I dont think the point was missed at all. In fact, I think it was effectively rebutted. I think he's pointing out that not being able to urinate without the risk of being fired is incredibly dehumanizing no matter how much you pay.
Perhaps the state should be responsible for the roughness of economic transition, especially for work-affecting phenomena which is global? Such as through polishing the unemployment program.
Perhaps the state should ensure Bezos pays taxes at the level a CEO paid taxes in the 1960's: America's best decade so far...
I agree with the worker in the video, they should be treated as human beings. One of the issues is doing a simple, monotonous task every 8 seconds, 10 hours a day, 5 days a week, without creating anything of value, is going to be dehumanizing and unfulfilling regardless. Robots carrying out this work would probably be for the best for everyone involved, although Amazon should do right by the workers carrying them ove…
> The compensation should reflect the mental and physical stress they put people through. As with all companies paying workers to do a job, the compensation should reflect the confluence of supply and demand in the market. The fact that Amazon can easily hire as many workers as it wants at $15/hr says that they are paying their employees plenty already. It bothers me that people are constantly demonizing Amazon for t…
So I believe it does that at best only imperfectly and further it's neither obvious that compensation should be derived in that fashion nor in my, and many others, opinions is it correct.
Some back of the napkin math: 650,000 Amazon workers. Let's say 600,000 are min(ish) wage and get an increase from $11/hr to $22/hr. That's a 13.2B increase per year. Jeff Bezo's net worth is 165B. Jeff Bezo's Net Worth drops 8% after one year.
Jeff's net worth isn't in cash. It's going to be affected much more strangely than your analysis suggests. If Amazon has to raise its labor costs that much, Wall Street will react in a way that is difficult to predict the magnitude, but easy to predict the direction. Normally I'd suggest analyzing that 13.2B in terms of the profits of the company, which for instance last Jan 2019 was ~$3 billion, which if projected o…
While you're right about Jeff's net worth, profit is also misleading as many times it's manipulated for tax gains/shield. Amazon is notorious for doubling down on reinvesting into capex and maintaining a thin profit margin.
Either way, Amazon profits would not be hit by the full $13B increase - more likely profits would remain unchanged, while capex and other investments would go down by that amount.