Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

One-third of Amazon warehouse workers are on food stamps or Medicaid

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 487 posts

Re: One-third of Amazon warehouse workers are on food stamps or Medicaid

#231

Post by _DeadFred_ »

vaidhy wrote: post #219
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who bears the blame for this though? If social programs are cut then voters freak. If the price of goods increase then voters freak. If taxes increase then voters freak. It seems that we get exactly what we vote for.

If income taxes increase, then voters freak. We can increase the corporate tax, ban share buybacks, impose limits on the executive to non-executive pay, tax wealth etc, which will freak out the richest, but will benefit the society better.

Share buybacks were illegal stock manipulation for the majority of the USAs existence, until Reagan legalized them. They need to be made illegal again, they serve no purpose other than short term stock manipulation. If companies have excess cash, they should issue dividends (which was a huge part of the reason stocks were initially desirable). People would then buy stocks with good dividends (i.e. long term value, versus short term quick gain).

Re: One-third of Amazon warehouse workers are on food stamps or Medicaid

#232

Post by seanmcdirmid »

pas wrote: post #198
michael9423 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, it's the opposite. At the level of automation we've reached, labor is worth, per hour, way more than 100 years ago. The problem is just that this value is siphoned off by shareholders who do not have to work to receive the monetary value that should go to the worker. So the issue is simply in how corporations are set up and how the stock market is designed. The entire system is designed to drain as much val…

worth of labor is not the worth of product/service. Amazon picks the places where it can hire extremely cheap labor, because usually they are the only game in town. (monopsony market for labor.) it happened without automation and happens with automation too. of course it's on society to help those who are stuck in these unfortunately places.

Isn’t that how the market should work? Economically depressed area has people in need of jobs, companies should come in and satisfy that demand, making the place less economically depressed and eventually raising the cost of labor. No point to put an Amazon warehouse in Seattle’s south lake Union neighborhood, for example.

Re: One-third of Amazon warehouse workers are on food stamps or Medicaid

#233

Post by twoodfin »

johnea wrote: post #36

This is reminiscent of the incidents where walmart was instructing new hires on how to apply for food stamps...

Like universities guide students on how to apply for government grants and loans? Or for that matter, professors applying for research grants?

What’s the scandal?

Re: One-third of Amazon warehouse workers are on food stamps or Medicaid

#234

Post by mptest »

jimbokun wrote: post #210
organsnyder wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surviving in these systems is incredibly stressful and leads to trauma for both the workers and their families. The stigma, uncertainty, and bureaucracy exact tremendous tolls.

Try surviving in the world before those systems existed.

This is not a helpful mindset. Because things were worse before, we should ignore how they are still not faultless?

Re: One-third of Amazon warehouse workers are on food stamps or Medicaid

#235

Post by al_borland »

atleastoptimal wrote: post #129

Here's the thing. This is going to happen to everyone, as in, no person will be valuable enough via the contribution of their labor to survive without subsidies. At the level of automation we've reached in society, low-skilled labor is worth, per hour, a very small amount. As AI and automation improve, the majority of people will have negligible economic utility. The only way around this is to let those people starve…

Didn't people make similar claims around the industrial revolution?

Re: One-third of Amazon warehouse workers are on food stamps or Medicaid

#236

Post by SirMaster »

not2b wrote: post #99
dantheman wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not correct - a person with no skills who has 10 kids will never be able to support themselves via a job. It is welfare for them.

Perhaps. But a person with only one kid? Doing a job that the company needs to have done, even if no great skill is required? If that person doesn't make enough for food and rent, then I repeat, it is the company that is on welfare.

What guarantee is there that the individual is managing what money they do get optimally?

Is it ever possible they are wasting money on things they don't need that could have allowed to not need food stamps?

Just wondering how this would be determined.

Re: One-third of Amazon warehouse workers are on food stamps or Medicaid

#237

Post by AnthonyMouse »

superturkey650 wrote: post #230
hi-v-rocknroll wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. You're forgetting that there is a finite amount of work needed and so orders-of-magnitude fewer people are required. Also, the average real purchasing power in America has been declining for a very long time and cannot afford goods and services except through taking on debt.

Why do you say there is a finite amount of work needed? There might be, at any one time, a finite amount of work someone is willing to pay x > 0 dollars for, but as x goes to 0 I’d intuitively think the amount of work increases indefinitely.

This is exactly what happens. Because of automation, the amount of labor needed to do all the work that was done in the 19th century is now a low single digit percentage of the population, and yet the unemployment rate is low.

The actual problem is artificial scarcity, not automation. A robot that can build housing cheaper than humans is great. A law that restricts new housing from being built so young people can't afford it is not.

Re: One-third of Amazon warehouse workers are on food stamps or Medicaid

#238

Post by silverquiet »

monero-xmr wrote: post #190
michael9423 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, it's the opposite. At the level of automation we've reached, labor is worth, per hour, way more than 100 years ago. The problem is just that this value is siphoned off by shareholders who do not have to work to receive the monetary value that should go to the worker. So the issue is simply in how corporations are set up and how the stock market is designed. The entire system is designed to drain as much val…

And I would say that developed western nations, including the USA, have done a pretty good job of providing subsidies and benefits for low skilled workers, so they can get on the lowest rung of the totem pole and contribute to society without starving. We specifically have food stamps, the EITC, welfare, child tax credit, housing vouchers, and so on specifically so they can provide valuable labor to society (and mini…

Asking for a friend - how do you get access to those programs? He's about to be homeless.

Re: One-third of Amazon warehouse workers are on food stamps or Medicaid

#239

Post by bryanlarsen »

skhunted wrote: post #176
rlpb wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's all very well for those lucky enough to be employed. In a future where an increasing amount of necessary work is done by machines, what about those whose labor is not needed? Eventually, that's going to be nearly everyone.

Currently we live in a society in which a few people have more wealth than tens of millions. The distribution of resources in the world is grossly unfair and there needs to be an evening out of this distribution. Let's first have a more equal society and then tackle the problem of underemployment.

> Let's first have a more equal society and then tackle the problem of underemployment.

In other words let's never tackle the problem of underemployment? A good way to ensure that something never gets done is to require a very hard thing to be done before it.

Re: One-third of Amazon warehouse workers are on food stamps or Medicaid

#240

Post by hi-v-rocknroll »

no_wizard wrote: post #73
mountainb wrote: post #35

This is how our system works. The government subsidizes corporate low wage work, and everyone pats themselves on the back for being so enormously virtuous, truly the most wonderful people ever to have graced the earth. The circuitous redistribution is a feature and not a bug of the system. It prevents competition, which makes shareholders happy. It also provides a minimum standard of care for workers, who would other…

>The government subsidizes corporate low wage work But importantly only the lowest of the low wages There is a huge swath of workers that can't get benefits like food stamps or medicaid because they don't qualify via the means testing formula and they can't really afford to live where they live, afford medical insurance etc. Its those folks that have it the worst, IMO. Cost of living keeps you from building any wealt…

This is by design, and not an anti-socialist viewpoint, but another way to treat poor people with disrespect and to encourage class warfare between the working semi-poor and very poor. Keep people trapped by a myriad of low arbitrary thresholds rather than tapering off. In America, you're sometimes "better off" making no or almost no money.

Also, the benefits are paltry. If you're completely homeless, have no resources, and out-of-work in, say California, per month you will get MediCal*, $240 for food**, $149 in cash "aid", and that's it. There is an inconsistent patchwork of programs to give slightly more benefits that require a certain range of income threshold and specific demographic strings. Most all of these programs treat recipients like criminals and require regular paperwork and significant time, time during work and transportation that the working-poor can least afford.

The elderly and disabled qualify for Medicare***, which isn't quite "Cuba-level" health insurance but administered by a for-profit health insurance company under the vague supervision and standards of Medicare who pays for it. Medicare+MedicAid special needs plan (SNP) and Social Security**** is what a disabled or elderly homeless person would typically have.

* Same as the federal program known as MedicAid. It is much worse than Obamacare (health insurance for the working poor), and moderately worse than Medicare (for the disabled and the elderly) and almost no regular doctors take it. Providers who do take it usually are far away and usually serve a specific demographic. While it covers emergency care almost completely and some medications, it's not very good. There is significant healthcare bias in America based on health insurance and age.

** "Food stamps" that used to be actual stamps. In the US, the federal program is either SNAP or WIC (pregnant women, infants, and children).

*** Medicare is a federal health insurance system comprising many types of plans run by private corporations with a Byzantine patchwork of limitations and benefits.

**** Social Security is monthly cash for disabled (SSIDI) and retired people. SSIDI waives work requirements. Non-disabled elderly receive an amount based on how many years they worked and how much income they received, up to a relatively low limit. There is a debate about cutting off income- and/or asset-rich people from receiving Social Security when they don't need it.

Post reply on HN