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

I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 210 posts

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#81

Post by aerotwelve »

snarfy wrote: post #34
LitFan wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lowering profits means reduced shareholder value and a lower market capitalization. Every company is interested in providing as much value to shareholders as possible. I don't know all the ins and outs, but I believe public trading and shareholders are to blame here. And again - the middle to upper middle class people who rely on returns from their investments in companies to support their standard of living think th…

It's not that they are interested in providing as much value possible - they are legally mandated. [1] [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co .

Dodge v. Ford is only precedent in Michigan. Even within Michigan, it's my understanding that the decision is outweighed by the business judgement rule[1], which contradicts any mandate of shareholder primacy.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_judgment_rule

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#82

Post by ameister14 »

sokoloff wrote: post #36

IMO, it is never proper for the legislature to target an individual or individual company. It's perfectly fine for enforcement agencies (OSHA, FDA, IRS, FAA, FTC, SEC, etc) to enforce policy/law on individuals/companies who have been found in violation, but to originally target individuals with the force of government lawmaking is a dramatic overreach of power, IMO. If Senator Sanders et al want to target all compani…

>it is never proper for the legislature to target an individual or individual company. It's perfectly fine for enforcement agencies (OSHA, FDA, IRS, FAA, FTC, SEC, etc) to enforce policy/law on individuals/companies who have been found in violation, but to originally target individuals with the force of government lawmaking is a dramatic overreach of power, IMO.

I don't agree. It's been done before, many times, and to the benefit of the people. Look at what was done with JP Morgan, Standard Oil, Rockefeller as an individual person, multiple Railroad companies and trusts to start.

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#85

Post by jnordwick »

geggam wrote: post #78

If you have a business in a country and cannot afford to pay your workers high enough wages that they can afford to live without society subsidizing them. Then you cannot afford to run your business and are stealing money from the society you are in. This concept that people are welfare bums when they are working is incorrect. Their employers are the welfare bums. If you want to use the infrastructure to run a busine…

It isn't the businesses fault that people don't have high margin skills. There effort should be on improving workforce skill and productive. Not villianising those who employ them.

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#86

Post by jcranmer »

snarfy wrote: post #34
LitFan wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lowering profits means reduced shareholder value and a lower market capitalization. Every company is interested in providing as much value to shareholders as possible. I don't know all the ins and outs, but I believe public trading and shareholders are to blame here. And again - the middle to upper middle class people who rely on returns from their investments in companies to support their standard of living think th…

It's not that they are interested in providing as much value possible - they are legally mandated. [1] [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co .

That case doesn't mean what most people who bring it up want it to mean, particularly as has been interpreted by 100 years of intervening case law. In that case, Henry Ford had more or less admitted that he was attempting to screw over specific shareholders.

As it is applied in modern practice, a corporate officer merely has to articulate a rationale of why his/her actions benefit the shareholders. For example, deciding to double every worker's salary, on the basis that it would improve morale and productivity, could be seen as ultimately benefiting shareholders, even if it tanks profits and dividends in the short-term.

Pretty much the only way you could actually get the Dodge v Ford case invoked in precedent is to have someone on the stand admit that he/she was trying to screw over shareholders (which is basically what Henry Ford did, and why he lost the case), which should be impossible if that person has competent representation.

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#87

Post by badpun »

Ricardus wrote: post #71
Rotdhizon wrote: post #6

A company as big as Amazon doesn't make as much as it does by treating workers fairly. They are the modern day version of old industrial factories. They take down and out people who they know they can exploit and push them to their limits. I've seen a few places in the poorer section of states where most of the locals are forced to work in a small number of factories/plants. Even in these cases though, they are at le…

I live a few miles from a Walmart distribution warehouse, and had a good friend who worked there. It really started to affect his health. The working conditions are horrible, and the culture promoted is toxic and demeaning. The money was a little above average for the area, but that's about the only thing positive he could say about it. When he left, his migraines went away.

Tough physical labor is not for everyone. For example, I would not last 6 months in a construction job (I easily get colds when I work outside). As long as the majority of people working in that warehouse are ok, then maybe your friend was just not suited for the job.

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#88

Post by EpicEng »

devit wrote: post #35
EpicEng wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>or alternatively a ban on having children if the parents can't provide an equivalent payment. Yours is the stuff dystopian literature is made of. You want to severely limit freedom for the greater good, a tactic which never works.

I don't think people should be entitled to the freedom of having children no matter what, since having children forces significant externalities on society, especially if there's an agreement that everyone should have a good standard of living (as implied by this article) or even just that there's a right to healthcare; and even without those, since the children may become criminals and harm others. The root causes o…

>the simplest fix is to prevent that from happening (by forcing them to have an abortion

Simple doesn't mean best or even acceptible. The simplest solution for stopping many forms of crime is to institute martial law, yet we do not do so because we view it as an extreme form of oppression and tyranny. I don't see any positive outcome from a government telling people under which circumstances they are allowed to procreate unless we are in dire straights (e.g. massive, world wide, irrecoverable famine. We're not there and we're not going to be there any time soon.)

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#89

Post by zaroth »

sokoloff wrote: post #36

IMO, it is never proper for the legislature to target an individual or individual company. It's perfectly fine for enforcement agencies (OSHA, FDA, IRS, FAA, FTC, SEC, etc) to enforce policy/law on individuals/companies who have been found in violation, but to originally target individuals with the force of government lawmaking is a dramatic overreach of power, IMO. If Senator Sanders et al want to target all compani…

The bill is not targeted at Amazon and, for example, Walmart could be hit even harder.

Even good bills need public support and public support needs good marketing. Don’t confuse what’s on the label with what’s inside the tin.

Re: I worked in an Amazon warehouse. Bernie Sanders is right to target them

#90

Post by archagon »

gagege wrote: post #70

Why does everyone ignore the fact that employment at Amazon is voluntary? When the employee was hired, they made an agreement that the payment was a fair trade for the work to be done. If it turns out that the pay was not fair after all, which it sounds like it isn't, then the employee should simply stop working there, because Amazon isn't holding up their end of the bargain. The reason this continues to be an issue…

"Why does everyone ignore the fact that is voluntary?"

Some business arrangements are exploitative by their incentives, even if they are "fair".

Post reply on HN