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

Amazon Is Creating Company Towns Across the United States

jacobinmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 271 posts

Re: Amazon Is Creating Company Towns Across the United States

#261

Post by perryizgr8 »

sofixa wrote: post #138
perryizgr8 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even the phrase "company town" itself does not signify anything evil. In fact I'm wondering if such a place might be better than the usual government administered cities and towns.

Doesn't it? It usually signifies abuses like being paid in company "currency" only usable in company owned stores, being unable to change jobs without having to move ( with the associated inability to refuse whatever the employer throws at you, however hard/illegal/dangerous). Is there anything positive about company towns? Maybe they're better than towns with no jobs, but I'm not even sure about that..

> It usually signifies abuses like being paid in company "currency" only usable in company owned stores,

Does it? I've never heard of companies not paying the workers any money, just because they have their own town.

> being unable to change jobs without having to move

That is true for many job changes. If it is a big deal for someone they can just not join such a company.

> ( with the associated inability to refuse whatever the employer throws at you, however hard/illegal/dangerous)

Huh? Having a company town doesn't grant the company absolute authority. They still have to abide by the laws of the land.

Re: Amazon Is Creating Company Towns Across the United States

#262

Post by perryizgr8 »

sumeno wrote: post #202
aga98mtl wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I was hoping Amazon was actually making housing for its workers. I think high density housing within walking distance of your job is the realistic solution for lowering co2 emissions.

What happens if you want to switch jobs? Tying basic necessities like housing to your employer is a disaster that traps people in jobs. It's part of the reason healthcare in the US is so screwed up.

Then you can find another accommodation. What's the big deal? Many times people try to find a place closer to their new work. There are many factors that contributed to the healthcare problem, generalizing one factor and using that here does not make sense.

Re: Amazon Is Creating Company Towns Across the United States

#263

Post by bzbarsky »

taurath wrote: post #244
bzbarsky wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US tax handling of employee discounts at least on physical goods is as follows: if the discount brings the price paid below cost, then the below-cost subsidy is treated as income received by the employee. Concrete example: Company sells widgets for $12, of which $2 is profit. Then as long as the employee price is at least $10 there are no tax implications for the employees. If it were $9 they would owe tax on…

I wonder how clearance items work with that.

That is a good question. I don't know offhand; it had not come up in the cases I was dealing with.

Re: Amazon Is Creating Company Towns Across the United States

#264

Post by pas »

Hydraulix989 wrote: post #257
aga98mtl wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The housing could be normal rentals not conditional on keeping the job. I would guess that most Amazon facilities are located in urban areas. It would not be isolated mining town like in 1900s

If it's normal rentals, then there's no incentive for companies to build said housing in the first place -- unless they want to separately diversify into real estate.

The incentive is to get workers at all.

Sure, as long as they can externalize this cost, they won't do this, but in the Bay Area Google determined it costs them less to to fight for housing projects and fund those, than pay the enormous overhead for getting their employees living there.

Re: Amazon Is Creating Company Towns Across the United States

#265

Post by Retric »

bsder wrote: post #255
sjg007 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It actually sounds like a great way to lose weight if you can handle it. We need to walk more. I’ve thought about moving to NYC just to walk more.

Exercise is not a great way to lose weight. The phrase is: "You can't outrun the fork." Deuterated water studies back this up. Humans burn roughly the same amount of calories active or passive. The body only shunts the available calories around. Now, exercise has lots of documented benefits. Weight loss just isn't one of them.

The body temporarily shuts down multiple processes like digestion during exercise to increase peak performance. However, it still needs food etc so those calories are still burned during downtime. Active people can consume 2-3x as many calories in a day as inactive people do. At the extreme end some elite athletes need 8,000+ calories per day diets simply to maintain weight.

Re: Amazon Is Creating Company Towns Across the United States

#266

Post by sofixa »

perryizgr8 wrote: post #261
sofixa wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't it? It usually signifies abuses like being paid in company "currency" only usable in company owned stores, being unable to change jobs without having to move ( with the associated inability to refuse whatever the employer throws at you, however hard/illegal/dangerous). Is there anything positive about company towns? Maybe they're better than towns with no jobs, but I'm not even sure about that..

> It usually signifies abuses like being paid in company "currency" only usable in company owned stores, Does it? I've never heard of companies not paying the workers any money, just because they have their own town. > being unable to change jobs without having to move That is true for many job changes. If it is a big deal for someone they can just not join such a company. > ( with the associated inability to refuse…

> Does it? I've never heard of companies not paying the workers any money, just because they have their own town

Yes, because it's now illegal, at least in the US where this practice was pervasive.

> That is true for many job changes. If it is a big deal for someone they can just not join such a company.

There's a world of difference between there are few options for jobs without changing your field ( e.g. working as a waiter/waitress when in a financial emergency) and literally having zero jobs outside of a company where you live. One is " we probably have to move if i piss off my boss", the other is "we need to move".

> Huh? Having a company town doesn't grant the company absolute authority. They still have to abide by the laws of the land

That's extremely naive. Everyone in that town works for the company or has immediate family working for it. How many people would dare refuse or blow the whistle on illegal activities when their lives would be uprooted as a consequence? The power dynamic is very heavily tilted towards the employer.

Re: Amazon Is Creating Company Towns Across the United States

#267

Post by objectivetruth »

username90 wrote: post #171
tmpz22 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet his parents were able to slide him a cool quarter million to start Amazon without breaking a sweat.

Most people here on HN could do the same for their kids once their kids are adults.

Ding ding ding, and that is a signifier of "upper class."

Re: Amazon Is Creating Company Towns Across the United States

#268

Post by Hydraulix989 »

pas wrote: post #264
Hydraulix989 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's normal rentals, then there's no incentive for companies to build said housing in the first place -- unless they want to separately diversify into real estate.

The incentive is to get workers at all. Sure, as long as they can externalize this cost, they won't do this, but in the Bay Area Google determined it costs them less to to fight for housing projects and fund those, than pay the enormous overhead for getting their employees living there.

Is this what you are referring to? If so, it sounds like it's not for the workers, it's a social good project, much like what Amazon is doing by housing the homeless. I don't think it will even put any pressure on the market whatsoever.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/03/04/google-backs-three-ba...

Re: Amazon Is Creating Company Towns Across the United States

#269

Post by vanusa »

vortico wrote: post #27

>$15 an hour, Amazon’s starting wage, is below the average for the warehousing industry Where are they getting this information? The average wage in the US is lower, like $13-14. https://www.indeed.com/career/warehouse-worker/salaries https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Warehouse_Worker/Ho...

Under the second link you provided I'm seeing:

   $14.33 / hour
   Avg. Base Hourly Rate (USD)
So not only are you seriously quibbling over a $0.67 per hour discrepancy - but you're doing so dishonestly (attempting to make a 5 percent discrepancy look more like 15 percent).

Re: Amazon Is Creating Company Towns Across the United States

#270

Post by emteycz »

tomcooks wrote: post #93
emteycz wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not confusing anything, that's exactly what I mean. The EU sends a minor (sub 1%, in many cases) contribution but its flag must be displayed on the right side of the local flag facing the children/people - that's exactly the problem. Now the flag is everywhere - public parks, public transit, hospitals, schools, etc - and today's children think there was nothing before the great EU funds rescued us from total pov…

Sub 1% is a figure I don't see anywhere here https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/countries/member-c... Edit: ah yes, less than 1% is what Chzechia contributes TO the EU. ``` Intra-EU trade accounts for 84% of the Czech Republic’s exports (Germany 32%, Slovakia 8% and Poland 6%), while outside the EU 2% goes to both the United States and Russia. In terms of imports, 76% come from EU Member States (Germany 29%, P…

You're talking about irrelevant figures. That the country receives money from the EU does not mean that everything was built by the EU. I am talking about contributions to specific projects - public infrastructure, schools, etc, which are funded by local government (local meaning towns, not states, funded by property taxes, completely disconnected from these EU funds you link to) with minor contributions from EU funds.
Post reply on HN