511–520 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you think would happen if there were open borders? Would the US see net inflow or outflow of populace?
Passive-aggressive nonsense elsewhere, please. If you've got a point or comment, that's on-topic, just make it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't even fathom trying to live on 30k. Where I live childcare costs around 20k, so many subsidies would be required for sure. Any little setback like unexpected healthcare or transportation costs would absolutely destroy you.
>I can't even fathom trying to live on 30k. i have for most of my life lived on less than this. hell i lived on less than this in nyc. it's quite doable if you don't buy new clothes, don't own a car, don't travel, don't eat out, don't go to the movies, etc. you can even afford really bad health insurance. the only real issue is that you can't save enough for retirement (if you're comfortable living this way forever)…
That said, I think this is incredible and I don’t understand the (non sequitur) arguments that $15/hr AS A FEDERAL MINIMUM WAGE would hurt businesses. As a capitalist the higher base wages are the less worried I have to be about a socialist uprising of legitimately poor oppressed people abused by a plutocracy. Besides, do we want to live in a nation where someone who works hard is still way below the poverty line? If businesses can’t compete at $15/hr wages perhaps that’s a sign they should have used automation a long time ago.
Median amazon warehouse employee pay is 24k a year. Amazon has around 300k warehouse employees. Jeff Bezos's wealth alone is equivalent to all 300k of them working 22 years at their current rate.
Why are warehouse workers entitled to anywhere near the share the creator and owner makes?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're willing to shame a company for behavior you don't like, I think you should be prepared to give praise when they do exactly what you just asked for. When you constantly move the goal posts just so that you never have to abandon your righteous anger for even one day, what kind of incentive does that give companies to change their behavior?
Corporations do not deserve praise for doing the right thing. They are not people, with feelings, who respond to emotional stimuli in the form of positive reinforcement. They are businesses that respond to the market (indeed, their legal duty is to maximize profits). In markets, negative pressure works. Asking nicely does not.
I am not nit-picking, asking in good faith: is that enacted into a law ? Or is that part of a contract between shareholders and the board of executives ?
I have heard about that walmart competitor run like a family business and that gives every employees a voice (a cooperative ?).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When the topic in question is how one of the most powerful companies on Earth chooses to use its power we should strive to always be this cynical. Skepticism of concentrated power is the ur-American political belief. We seem to have forgotten that lately.
If you're willing to shame a company for behavior you don't like, I think you should be prepared to give praise when they do exactly what you just asked for. When you constantly move the goal posts just so that you never have to abandon your righteous anger for even one day, what kind of incentive does that give companies to change their behavior?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Precisely this. A small shop in Mobile, Alabama being forced to pay the same minimum wage as some company in Santa Clara County is ridiculous. A rented closet in the Bay Area costs more than a house payment in Mobile. Also, the tax burden on $15 in Alabama is far lower than the tax burden on someone in California. Want to give low wage people an actual pay raise? Cut federal payroll taxes since those affect workers e…
If you lower the federal payroll taxes then won't companies correspondingly lower wages for new employees?
Of course, if that's a significant general problem rather than a narrow edge case, the entire idea of market economics is a sad joke.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you pay your employees $7.25 you deserve to be made fun off at least. Jeff Bezos recently also said Amazon deserved being scrutinised. I'm not saying this is what triggered them, but sometimes you have to take a strong position in order to be listened to.
It hasn't crossed a threshold into being a big deal, but singling out an individual does look like bullying and bullying isn't funny. Jeff Bezos has to respect the law or face a series of consequences up to imprisonment. We all know he is going to respect the law like we all do. It is mean spirited to write a (potential) law that disrespects him directly. He can't really respond to that. Sanders should have stuck to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can both be right. It’s great that they made this move after much criticism, prodding and foot dragging, but... this reaction can also be calculated so that not only they have to carry this load alone but spread it to competitors. In other words AMZN is willing to do it, but they don’t want to be the only ones “burdened” unlike Costco who did it out of concern and perhaps principle (and competitive advantage by e…
Seems like a ridiculous risk to take given it is reliant on the US government that is unequivocally pro-business right now and will be until at least 2020.
Let’s also not forget that while Repubs have traditionally been pro business, Dems, since the 80s have also got cozy with business and get humongous donations from corps —something which was not the case pre 1980s.