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

351–360 of 487 posts

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

#351

Post by quickthrowman »

thfuran wrote: post #323
quickthrowman wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> i. Restore corporate tax rates to historically high levels My gut feeling is that this would increase inflation, but I could be wrong. > iv. Gradually curtail subsidies on field corn, currently occupying 5% of America's land (~100 million acres) I would much rather the US spend $2.2B on corn subsidies so that we have food security in the event of a global catastrophe. I’d prefer eating nothing but corn flour/meal f…

>I would much rather the US spend $2.2B on corn subsidies so that we have food security in the event of a global catastrophe. I’d prefer eating nothing but corn flour/meal for years than starving to death. Are those really the only two options?

There are definitely other options, I’m not trying to present a false dilemma. My point is that spending 0.03% of total federal expenditures to guarantee food security is money well spent. Subsidizing other crops would work, it just happens to be easy to industrialize and automate corn farming and there’s plenty of good agricultural land in the US that is suited to grow corn.

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

#352

Post by seanmcdirmid »

locococo wrote: post #308
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Amazon has a monopoly because they are the only ones interested in taking advantage of the surplus labor, then that’s a huge problem, but unless they are somehow locking other companies out, they aren’t the cause of that problem. Are you trying to tell me that Amazon shouldn’t bring those jobs to those areas, and that would somehow be better for the residents? I don’t see any good logic in that, yes, they are taki…

The issue is simply companies taking advantage of people. We like to call it the market, but the market only works when there is a balance. I am simply advocating for a balancing force. Government or Unions usually fill this role. I would equally challenge you to go to a warehouse and listen to peoples stories about their working conditions and personal stories.

In most cases for low end jobs, you have a lot choices, you just work somewhere else. Amazon usually isn’t the only job in these towns, just the one that pays the most without requiring much education and experience. Ya, life still sucks for a lot of these people working in a warehouse, but less than it would without the job.

The edge could be taken off of these jobs by just giving health insurance to everyone and not making it employer responsibility anymore. This would actually hurt Amazon since they often provide health benefits more easily than the rest (by giving enough hours). Detaching healthcare and maybe even minimum wage (via UBI) would go farther than expecting companies provide everything to workers no matter the job value.

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

#353

Post by magicalhippo »

SCUSKU wrote: post #343
bloppe wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that extreme inequality is generally bad and the value of labor should be higher than the value of capital. But market forces are really important for the functioning of the economy and the welfare of everybody, including low-skilled workers. Regulations like this would distort market forces. A much better solution is progressive taxation. Capital gains and dividends should be taxed much higher, with the bene…

Probably not a new idea, but something I've been wondering is if the US implemented progressive taxation, and instead of a UBI implemented a stock buyback program where the government buys shares and then redistributes ownership to citizens. Even though this is totally wealth redistribution (which is politically unpopular, socialism and all), I bet you could market it as super American like Andrew Yang did with UBI a…

Interesting idea, but if you need medicine for your child and are low on cash, you will sell those stocks today rather than save them for the future.

And the buyer will be someone who has enough cash to not worry, and will thus get even more cash to not worry.

That is, I don't think it'll be that simple.

edit: one way to solve the above would be like the Spanish coops, where the ownership (stock) is tied to your employment. IIRC you have to buy say one stock to get employed, and you can only sell when you leave your position.

But then it's harder to redistribute the stocks...

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

#354

Post by nomel »

jacobolus wrote: post #262
gottorf wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Jeff Bezos founded Amazon 30 years ago and is now worth more than $200 billion Computing someone's net worth by multiplying the number of shares he holds by the last-traded price of that share yields a theoretical number that's only good for placing people on Forbes rich lists and as fodder for demagogues. It is not possible for him to actually convert all of his shares to $200B. > gained about $7 billion per year…

Amazon has been incredibly hostile to labor rights for their employees, including worker safety, fair compensation, parental leave, provision of basic benefits, reasonable schedules, collective bargaining, etc. They've been cited by federal labor judges for systematic unlawful behavior, and are under congressional investigation. Hopefully there will be some real consequences sometime soon. I'm not holding my breath t…

> Amazon's uncompetitive

Could you expand on this? If they were uncompetitive, from a worker perspective, they wouldn't have any workers. Having workers means they are the best choice out of all the other companies competing for those workers. It, quite literally, means all the other choices were even worse!

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

#355

Post by Vegenoid »

legitster wrote: post #244

We really need to stop treating this as such a "gotcha!" The whole idea of welfare is that it is supposed to go to people who need it - working or not. Are people on Food Stamps always going to be unemployed? No? Then are they are going to be employed somewhere? Am I supposed to be mad that these programs are working as designed? Food stamps and medicaid in particular are also explicitly tied to family need. Unless A…

Agree with all that. The criticism is that this is a big, American company, one of the largest and most impactful ever, that makes lots of money and is quite profitable, and yet pays its workers low enough that they need to be subsidized with tax dollars. Your tax dollars are given to Amazon's workers, so that Amazon can continue employing them for low wages, and the money saved by paying low wages is going into the shareholder's pockets. Is that a system that you are happy with, and would be fine with continuing in perpetuity?

Obviously, there isn't a silver bullet, and every potential solution has thorns, but are food stamps really meant to perpetually sustain individuals that make low wages at companies that can afford to pay them more?

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

#356

Post by locococo »

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…

I think what we need to remember is that there are two issues with your ststement.

1. Companies need consumers to sell to. If no one earns enough money to buy then the companies gave a problem. 2. If people cannot feed themself from working for others then becoming a subsistence farmer and forming tight knit communities is the best way to survive.

People can exist without companies, the reverse is not true.

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

#357

Post by carlosjobim »

hi-v-rocknroll wrote: post #196
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…

Yep. There will be too many people competing for too few jobs, even so-called high demand professional specialities. There are always too many lawyers, and it's not a lawyer joke. We're going to have to reform extreme wealth inequalities and move to UBI and redistribution of wealth, or otherwise there will be a great upheaval and billions will be impoverished and living in favelas in 20 years. Already, there are vast…

There is no "system" nor "reform" that can magically fix a problem that is fundamentally within the modern human soul. Avarice has become the defining characteristic of most people and that reflects in the culture. If you look with the same critical eyes that you use on the government, big businesses and ultra-rich, and use those critical eyes on people near you including family and friends, then you will be quite uncomfortable.

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

#358

Post by delfinom »

coffeecloud wrote: post #288
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…

I'm not sure what you consider low-skilled - but have you tried to hire someone to build or fix anything recently? Labor jobs seem to demand a huge price right now - and I don't think anyone is predicting robots that can tile a backsplash, install a 240v outlet, or even dig a trench for a sewer line anywhere in the near future. Let alone have the cost of owning and operating such a robot be more cost effective than p…

The cost of labor is tied to rent.

People need to pay rent. As the housing crisis spirals and people need more money to pay rent, they will job hop to do so.

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

#359

Post by hackable_sand »

svachalek wrote: post #267
al_borland wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Historically humans have been much more adaptable than machines. When machinery catches up to human capabilities, it out-competes them and humans find a new economic niche. In a world where machines are more adaptable and beat us to the new niches, where do we go?

Personally, I am finding the sublime in numerical methods and I have always been horrible at manual algebra.

It's like a time travel movie. "We have to go back!"

Machines can do math, sure, and even learn the contours of the systems they represent. That's incredible. But machines lack the human interface that allows infinite abstraction.

So, humans, left with the power of infinite regress, must teach the machines that are so adamantly automating the tasks we deem important as a species.

It is possible now, in 2024, to legislate runaway automation with more human-verified checkpoints and more skilled humans running these checkpoints.

Major integration network paths are verified by the veracity of the integral checks performed on the flowing data.

From here you can measure capacitance, rate of flow, and begin to inspect the data as far as legislation will allow you to.

For any practical scientific purposes, such as analyzing tornado paths and devising a rubric of resource allocation,

You can measure all elements as a wave until a significant event occurs (including malicious data vectors). You can tune a sample rate for that.

With enough people continuously performing validation analysis on data flow, the machines we rely on to achieve our target numbers can begin to rationalize truth and fiction.

--

Here's the catch: we just have to do it right the first time round.

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

#360

Post by prepend »

r14c wrote: post #154
drivebyhooting wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn’t this greatly increase inflation? Look at post Covid rise in the cost of literally every humdrum item.

there's significant evidence that this is due to corporate price gauging. though it is fair to point out that this type of system does require a few other changes in the corporate incentive structure. shareholder primacy for one, would have to go. you can't really be a shareholder profit maximalist and provide a consistent standard of living for everyone in your society, because every possible penny is supposed to en…

Corporate price gouging is only due to increase in consumer funds.

Companies want to price gouge all the time, but were only able to do so because everyone, especially lower income people, had extra cash.

Good luck introducing price controls on basic goods like groceries. Otherwise, things like UBI will increase inflation.

Post reply on HN