881–890 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you keep putting a - in front of your percents? Is it a -25% PR hit?
Attempt at a bullet list. - indenting by 2 sort of works - until the lines get long and don’t wrap https://news.ycombinator.com/formatdoc
This is: - 25% PR - 25% free advertising for their openings (i.e., Amazon pays well) - 25% necessity (we're at full-employment) - and 25% ROI (they've figured less turnover and better quality employees are worth the investment) The question is: how will this effect other companies in the markets where Amazon employs a measurable number of people.
And 100% "Get out of Bernie Sanders' crosshairs before he regulates us to do this"
Bernie vs Amazon? I can't imagine Bernie having a chance. Prime will trump Bernie.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it’s not middle class. If you recently bought a $1M plus condo in SF, you are most certainly upper class. I don’t care if it was a 2 bedroom apartment.
It's not about dollars. It's about your behaviors. Behaviors of the middle class. Middle class people typically do things like own one home, work two jobs, save for their kids' college, keep their cars for a while, etc.
Hell, if you have a lawn in Sf you are super wealthy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point wasn't that paying employees more leads to sells. Its more of a remark about the overall world. Your employees are somebody's customers, your customers are somebody's employees, You are somebody's customer. If nobody in the world makes enough to be a consumer, nobody consumes, and thus you have no customers.
Exactly this. I've spent the last year or so studying Ford. His whole point was that if people didn't have the money to buy his product or time to use it (he reduced work hours as well) then your business will never survive. He wasn't banking on employee sales, he was looking at employees as a snapshot of a wider market. Great example is fast food as well. If you are offering the "lowest cost" food option, and provid…
workers organised
organise, workers!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand why frugality means you're middle class. I also don't understand how $200k-$500k, a very sizable income, even in the SF bay area, is magically the middle class now
$200-500k in the SF bay area is still considered middle class because housing prices have gotten so ridiculously high. The 2 br, 1 bath, 800 sq foot apartment I live in 3 years ago for $900/month would probably be $2,500 in SV. Likewise, the 1850 sq ft, 3 br, 2.5 bath house I live in now that I bought for $338k in 2015 would probably have been over $1,000,000 in SV.
This is: - 25% PR - 25% free advertising for their openings (i.e., Amazon pays well) - 25% necessity (we're at full-employment) - and 25% ROI (they've figured less turnover and better quality employees are worth the investment) The question is: how will this effect other companies in the markets where Amazon employs a measurable number of people.
> - 25% PR - 25% free advertising for their openings (i.e., Amazon pays well) - 25% necessity (we're at full-employment) -- and 25% ROI (they've figured less turnover and better quality employees are worth the investment) On the other hand, their stock is currently down by ~$30/share (~1.5%) following the announcement.
Jeff Bezos in the announcement. “We’re excited about this change and encourage our competitors and other large employers to join us" Is this an attempt to pressure its competition with less money in the bank to do the same, loby for a higher minimum wage and drive them out of business? Maybe it's a reaction to the union organizing taking place a whole foods and they think this will be cheaper in the long run. I don't…
Even if it is motivated by an attempt to gain competitive advantage, it's still a good thing. If the competition can't find labor at less than $15 an hour, then they'll either go out of business or start offering competitive pay. It's an example of capitalism working both for business and employees.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I don't take that explanation at face value because it's describing a perpetual motion machine. Sales to your own employees are only going to be a trivial amount of revenue for any reasonable business. And I'm sure he knew that. But interpreted charitably, it's showmanship. This is a way to show leadership, get a lot of publicity, and hire better workers, so what's not to like?
No, yours is the uncharitable explanation. In reality it shows that Ford understood that all of us are in this together (“The owner, the employees, and the buying public are all one and the same”) – and we take it that Ford was not only referring to his own employees but to all employees. So if you want the public to be able to by your goods then we ought to recognise that the public must be able to afford those good…
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/28/most-americans-now-support-m...
I absolutely support single-payer and so do most of the people I know.
There isn't a HN thread long enough for the discussion of what it might take to actually get single-payer done.
Bezos felt the Burn! I would still support Bernie's bill. Walmart pays the least of any major retailer. The market power they push onto communities undermines much of the social fabric of America. Small retailers really can't compete with Walmart and a lot of small business owners would feel guilty asking their employees to go on welfare. Charging Walmart for employees who apply to welfare would likely lead to pay in…
Wasn't that the bill the encouraged employers to only hire people without dependents, because more dependents = more benefits, which the bill does not adjust for at all?
Why would anyone support that bill?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, time to buy?
You joke but probably yes. Amazon can afford to raise wages because it's still slowly strangling old-world retail and absorbing the business they used to do. The raises don't change that.