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

361–370 of 487 posts

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

#361

Post by SCUSKU »

magicalhippo wrote: post #353
SCUSKU wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 empl…

Hmm, maybe then maybe put the shares into a retirement account? Basically a government 401(k). Then people will be discouraged from selling because of the tax hit when selling before retirement age. Unless of course they really need it. Which presumably they would also be receiving other government services and payments (Section 8, foodstamps, etc) if they are desperate enough to be liquidating a 401(k).

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

#362

Post by r14c »

prepend wrote: post #360
r14c wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

that's addressed in my comment :)

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

#363

Post by ramblenode »

atleastoptimal wrote: post #333
muffinman26 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it mid-skilled desk jobs that are becoming worth less and less? You can't automate a lot of tasks firefighters do. You need someone to actually show up in-person, in an area where there might be things that interfere with electronics. Automation in cleaning or cooking is pretty minimal. I don't see computers replacing chefs at any of the restaurants in town. We have roombas, but they aren't even particularly go…

You can't yet, but with robots you will be able to. Once humanoids are good enough nobody will be, or rightfully want to be a firefighter. Even without AGI, teleoperation could be enough. However once AI is good enough that you don't need a human to operate it then there's no reason to hire a human for any step in the process.

There is no clear path to a general android. Every physical task that has been automated with robots requires robots engineered specifically for that task. Engineering, building, and maintaining those robots is a massive expense and only happens for tasks that are lucrative and occur at scale. Much of the economy is in a long tail of tasks that would not be profitable to automate, barring a major revolution in robotics.

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

#364

Post by vkou »

carlosjobim wrote: post #350
vkou wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Henry Ford lived in a universe where the odds of the working class getting together and guillotining the owners were non-zero. Most of the West's labour gains were done under the shadow of the Red Scare. Nobody is seriously scared of that in 2024.

It's still fundamental logic that the masses need to be able to afford your goods if you produce mass market goods. Or are you going to stockpile them?

> It's still fundamental logic that the masses need to be able to afford your goods if you produce mass market goods.

It's fundamental logic that unless your company provides something close to 100% of the employment market (as in, you are a complete monopolist on all economic activity), you are better off paying your workers as little as possible.

Your workers are a tiny portion of your customer base. Let some other sap pay theirs well.

Now, if you have other reasons to pay your workers well (competitive demand for their labor, high turnover, need for growth, motivation tied directly to output, etc), then it is also logical to come up with a nice-sounding fairy tale justifying your largess.

(Or you might actually be motivated by some kind of chivalristic noblesse oblige largess, and are tricking yourself - or socially signaling to your peers - by coming up with a 'logical' motivation for it. I wouldn't immediately assume this of HF, but I am not exactly a Fordian scholar. All I know about him is that he owned a factory that built cars, was a bit of an anti-semite, and also had a lot of opinions about how his employees should live their lives.)

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

#365

Post by gopher_space »

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #329
gopher_space wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s an aversion to calculating wages based on local rent, food, and gas prices that I haven’t found an explanation for. If you’re hiring machinists or nurses for $2 more than fast food wages you will be continually understaffed and the local pool of skilled workers will dry up.

> There’s an aversion to calculating wages based on local rent, food, and gas prices that I haven’t found an explanation for. If this is a recent development, I would say that it's just inertia against inflation. Are you saying this has been happening more than the past couple years?

From my perspective it’s post-pandemic behavior, but I’m just one set of eyeballs.

Inflation inertia seems reasonable but this is back of the envelope math most businesses do as a matter of course.

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

#366

Post by JumpCrisscross »

Pet_Ant wrote: post #309
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…

> 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. You are wrong, but so very close that it's understandable. What can be done with an hour of labour has gone up so very high. That it is true. But what has increased in v…

> what has increased in value is the infrastructure of that allowed for the force multiplier. The actual value of labour thus goes down because it can be consumed so efficiently

The price of unskilled labour is objectively higher today than one hundred years ago, and it's clearly higher in developed countries in comparison with undeveloped ones. This is due to a myriad of factors. But to date, workers have done well by way of increasing productivity. (Others have done better.)

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

#367

Post by al_borland »

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?

How does this new niche form? How does the AI know to fill it? How does the AI get access to fill do what it needs to do? How does AI solve the edge? Humanoid robots? Who is going to protect the robots from the people who aim to destroy them? More robots? Are they allowed to kill? How is AI policed? What happens when the AI does something it shouldn't do? What happens when AI decides humans are getting in the way? This is how The Matrix started.

I don't think humans are going to just roll over and accept their new AI overlords.

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

#368

Post by JumpCrisscross »

hi-v-rocknroll wrote: post #257
NovemberWhiskey wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy

This itself is a fallacy derived from the Keynesian crowd. There isn't unlimited demand for labor and never was. In the real world at microeconomic and local levels, labor demand is absolutely limited to discrete job posting and people who are already employed. This number is ultimately countable and finite. There are not infinite jobs available.

> isn't unlimited demand for labor and never was

Correct. But we're nowhere close to it. To the extent labor is a limiting factor on growth, it's in its lack of adequate supply.

> In the real world at microeconomic and local levels, labor demand is absolutely limited to discrete job posting and people who are already employed

You're describing edge cases, e.g. mining towns and war zones. In enterprises, it's an open secret that most jobs aren't filled by asking for applications. In small businesses, it's quite common for someone to pitch a service or a role. (A lot of "small business" is indistinguishable from freelancing/contracting. For example, the person who told me at a bar that he does yard work, and whom I wound up hiring.)

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

#369

Post by hi-v-rocknroll »

carlosjobim wrote: post #331
hi-v-rocknroll wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need to find more work for people to do and make it easier to start businesses.

Workers are already at an extremely high level of productivity compared to any other time in history. The problem is what they get in exchange for their labour, and that is a question of monetary policy and how inflationary money enters the economy (it's through real estate).

Going beyond unionization to ownership, one solution is worker-owned co-ops. Making those easy to start and providing tax benefits for such would be fantastic.

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

#370

Post by hi-v-rocknroll »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #368
hi-v-rocknroll wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This itself is a fallacy derived from the Keynesian crowd. There isn't unlimited demand for labor and never was. In the real world at microeconomic and local levels, labor demand is absolutely limited to discrete job posting and people who are already employed. This number is ultimately countable and finite. There are not infinite jobs available.

> isn't unlimited demand for labor and never was Correct. But we're nowhere close to it. To the extent labor is a limiting factor on growth, it's in its lack of adequate supply. > In the real world at microeconomic and local levels, labor demand is absolutely limited to discrete job posting and people who are already employed You're describing edge cases, e.g. mining towns and war zones. In enterprises, it's an open…

Ah, no. There are absurd numbers of job reqs that don't provide livable wages, lowball workers compared to industry brackets, or require skillsets that are niche or unrealistic.
Post reply on HN