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

Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

aboutamazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 581 posts

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#381

Post by [deleted] »

Spivak wrote: post #351
Rebelgecko wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't be totally surprised, given the effort to get the FPC 501c3 delisted from smile last month. I thought part of what made Smile cool is that Amazon would forward my donations to such a wide range of organizations (eg my local church OR my local satanic temple). Talk about consumer choice.

Twitch also ran into this issue recently where blindly allowing donations to any registered charity ended up being a bad look for them. It think it was autism speaks (autism / neurodivergence is a disease that needs to be cured and "not technically eugenics", not popular with gamers, go figure) and the lgb alliance (a boring trans-hate group).

[deleted]

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#382

Post by tootie »

Retric wrote: post #323
tootie wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you have metrics for the average retailer, that's probably not true. Local corner shops vary widely, but are not the least bit shy about hiring undocumented workers, stealing wages, skimping on safety and avoiding taxes. They just do it at such a small scale, it doesn't make the news.

The statistics I gave where in comparison to the average. They also have higher rates of injury and pay less in taxes. Amazon has had wage theft issues, but I don’t know how they stack up on undocumented workers or the average retailer which includes Costco etc not just tiny corner stores. Wage theft: https://www.theverge.com/2021/2/2/22262294/amazon-flex-wage-... more wage theft: https://www.wweek.com/news/2022/11/1…

I don't doubt that Amazon has abused workers in various ways, I'm just saying the headlines exist because of their massive scale and visibility. EPI estimates (which are probably a bit aggressive, but backed by sources) say of 2.4M workers in the 10 most populous states, $8B/yr are lost to wage theft. Amazon, with about 1M employees, is not stealing billions per year. In fact, they consistently pay well above minimum wage. My point here isn't that Amazon is great and we should stop complaining, but rather that worker abuse is rampant across all industries and Amazon is likely exceeding what is a very low bar.

https://www.epi.org/publication/employers-steal-billions-fro...

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#383

Post by Retric »

bhelkey wrote: post #353
Retric wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So wait you searched by comment history rather than say Google: https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/12/tech/amazon-injury-data-study...

> The statistics * I gave* where in comparison to the average. If you say you linked a statistic, it seems reasonable to me to assume that you linked a statistic.

Gave a statistic isn’t the same as linking to a statistic.

Also, statistics include facts like more than average not just specific numerical values.

PS: Though I have also linked to the numeric value before just not in this comment chain.

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#384

Post by Retric »

giantg2 wrote: post #359
Retric wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So wait you searched by comment history rather than say Google: https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/12/tech/amazon-injury-data-study...

So wait, you lied about providing prior metrics. It's important to be looking at the same numbers when having a discussion about those numbers.

No, facts like more than average are statistics. You seemingly misunderstood the term and then tried to derail an argument which I find hilarious.

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#385

Post by vineyardmike »

fakedang wrote: post #347
bombcar wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I'm surprised they're doing this; something must have bit them on the paperwork side, because $100-$200 for each tiny charity (think local dog shelter, local church, etc; even if they're 'branded' they're often independent charities) was a cheap advertisement for Amazon. Now that's over.

Because it came under the field of vision of some dumbass MBA who decided that saving a few millions would be worth more and a sizeable contribution to their end of year bonus figure. Source: I'm a dumbass MBA admittee.

> Source: I'm a dumbass MBA admittee.

Ya sure this is what you learn in school?

> a sizeable contribution to their end of year bonus figure

Highly doubt they’re getting bonuses at Amazon.

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#386

Post by widowlark »

darth_avocado wrote: post #365
perlgeek wrote: post #274

> "our ability to have an impact was often spread too thin" If that's the supposed reason, I call bullshit. Could've just reduced the number of charities.

Unpopular opinion, but charities are like carbon credits. Most of the money goes into people’s pockets and very less percentage of the donations actually make it towards helping the cause they run on. Very few legitimately use the money in the way we expect it to be used. So I’m okay with them losing $400M.

not based on every other statement in this thread.

do you have evidence of this assertion?

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#387

Post by joelesler »

As a board member of an organization that was benefiting from Amazon Smile, this is just the lamest set of excuses I've ever seen. Amazon should have said: "We're cutting this because we don't want to maintain it, it hasn't been staffed, and isn't focused in our core business (making money)"

I would have believed that.

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#388

Post by AdamH12113 »

I like the idea behind Amazon Smile but the execution is a bit underwhelming. I've spent tens of thousands of dollars at Amazon since joining Amazon Prime, but I've only generated $98.66 in donations -- a fraction of a percent. That's worse than just rounding up the price to the nearest dollar. What's the point? I get that Amazon's retail profit margins are terrible, but if they're only going to donate a totally insignificant percentage of their revenue, they shouldn't get any credit for it. Apparently Amazon came to the same conclusion.

If you want to see how much your Amazon Smile account has contributed, there's a web page: https://smile.amazon.com/charity/my-impact

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#389

Post by Retric »

Domenic_S wrote: post #348
Retric wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s hard to imagine the average small business successfully evading taxes as well as Amazon. In 2019 Amazon paid zero taxes receiving a net $129 million refund from the federal government, in 2018 they received a $137 million refund after paying 0$ on a net income of 11.2 billion dollars. In 2020 they paid a net tax of $162 million on $13.9 billion of pre-tax income a net tax rate of 1.2%.

net tax rate is meaningless in this context. Besides the fact that they're doing what each one of us do (take deductions following the law), it completely ignores all the other tax they pay - like payroll tax on a massive employee base and so forth. To imply Amazon (or any corp) are floating by with a total tax load of ~1% is either profoundly disingenuous or profoundly naïve.

Saying companies pay payroll tax is like saying they pay sales tax when you buy something from them. It’s sort of true and sort of false.

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#390

Post by xyzelement »

darth_avocado wrote: post #365
perlgeek wrote: post #274

> "our ability to have an impact was often spread too thin" If that's the supposed reason, I call bullshit. Could've just reduced the number of charities.

Unpopular opinion, but charities are like carbon credits. Most of the money goes into people’s pockets and very less percentage of the donations actually make it towards helping the cause they run on. Very few legitimately use the money in the way we expect it to be used. So I’m okay with them losing $400M.

I upvoted your unpopular opinion but it doesn't have to be that way.

You can be involved in the community and get to know local organizations and how they run, then give to them with more certainty.

In our case, the bulk of our charitable donations goes to organizations we know first hand, which are mainly local. Eg: helping the local preschool, our houses of worship, etc. The most 'remote' org we give to is the Israeli ambulance corps, but we still "know" them in the sense that my wife had been a volunteer EMT there a long time ago.

Point being that - there's some positive synergy between your physical community involvement and your "insight" into how organizations in your community function, and a sense of how the money is spent.

The fact that one of these orgs got something like $400 via Amazon Smile from us last year is nice although let's be real - nobody is going to stop using Amazon because of this change.

Post reply on HN