Many Amazon Warehouse Workers are on Food Stamps

[kahless]

Maybe what kahless is referring doesn't mean just raw Government influence like the Robber Barons? Is Amazon in fact so big that they don't need much from government other than to stay out of their way?

Amazon might be considered historic from that financial resources and their huge presence on the net which is a different kind of power. I'm not sure if any other company is comparable for having this much of a presence without really having a brick and mortar storefront.

Not exactly. I believe Amazon has become a single source in several sectors due to their tactics of selling below cost to eliminate competition. While having achieved that they are using government to institute a tax policy that is detrimental to some by providing ideologs the power in 9600 or so jurisdictions to misuse their political advocacy to censor or destroy those that oppose their ideology through audits. A policy they achieved by buying off politicians in multiple regions. Something not typically possible by small regional businesses.

They are ultimately a cancer on this country. Amazon shills are fine with that since they are typically simpletons that think opposing it is opposing their finer points like Amazon Prime and their UI.

 

[Anti Federalist]

I distrust big business as much as big government.

They usually go hand in hand with each other.

Were it not for big government and it's equally big tax burden, the wages being paid by Amazon would support a family.

 

[kahless]

I distrust big business as much as big government.

They usually go hand in hand with each other.

Were it not for big government and it's equally big tax burden, the wages being paid by Amazon would support a family.

IDK, if you eliminated taxes for the Amazon employees the employees are still basically slaves to Amazon if competition is eliminated and their internet tax regulations adopted by government stifle competition or are used as a political tool to stifle decent.

 

[Swordsmyth]

IDK, if you eliminated taxes for the Amazon employees the employees are still basically slaves to Amazon if competition is eliminated and their internet tax regulations adopted by government stifle competition or are used as a political tool to stifle decent.

If welfare didn't exist then they would have to pay a decent wage to keep anyone.

 

[VIDEODROME]

I don't know that Amazon would care if SNAP or subsidies went away or make up the difference in pay. More likely, it would be up to low wage workers to share housing with more room mates to get rent relief while living on Ramen.

Or as others have suggested, just get more jobs and have no life while somehow getting enough rest to meet performance expectations of Amazon micromanagers.

 

[kahless]

I don't know that Amazon would care if SNAP or subsidies went away or make up the difference in pay. More likely, it would be up to low wage workers to share housing with more room mates to get rent relief while living on Ramen.

Or as others have suggested, just get more jobs and have no life while somehow getting enough rest to meet performance expectations of Amazon micromanagers.

Yet they expect us to celebrate that and worship at the altar of Amazon to make that happen. Fucking slave master shills. The programming runs too deep with some people.

 

[Swordsmyth]

I don't know that Amazon would care if SNAP or subsidies went away or make up the difference in pay. More likely, it would be up to low wage workers to share housing with more room mates to get rent relief while living on Ramen.

Or as others have suggested, just get more jobs and have no life while somehow getting enough rest to meet performance expectations of Amazon micromanagers.

If taxes, welfare and regulations were reduced and eliminated people would have other options.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

we have a "private sector?" news to me.

It's regulated AF, but not totally State controlled *yet*. They're working on it, tho.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_sector

 

[Raginfridus]

So what?

So all this griping about low wages is horse crap.

 

[angelatc]

If welfare didn't exist then they would have to pay a decent wage to keep anyone.

Exactly. If the labor market was tight, wages would rise dramatically. This whole "people can't be bothered to go look for a better job!" and "Life isn't easy!" stuff is ridiculous. Thats what charity is for - not government.

 

[angelatc]

I don't know that Amazon would care if SNAP or subsidies went away or make up the difference in pay. More likely, it would be up to low wage workers to share housing with more room mates to get rent relief while living on Ramen.

Or as others have suggested, just get more jobs and have no life while somehow getting enough rest to meet performance expectations of Amazon micromanagers.

Oh, the condescension.

 

[angelatc]

So let's stop the program!

Cold turkey, work or starve.

While we're at it free (tax dollar supported) housing and medical need to go too.

What about the children? Some people don't have time to go look for better jobs. It's not easy for everybody. Why are you so mean???

 

[acptulsa]

Labor is worth what a business is willing to pay for it and what a laborer is willing to work for it. Period.

If the State intervenes in that transaction, all it does is distort the market. Like everything else.

And is not giving SNAP and/or Section 8 to working people an intervention that distorts the labor market? There was a time--I remember it--when full time workers were not eligible for such benefits. There's yet another case of conservatives shooting conservatism in the foot. If people who don't work deserve it, how is it that people who do work don't deserve it?

That's just a dog whistle argument for corporate welfare. If a person can work sixty hours a week and have to choose between being homeless and eating, or having shelter and starving, that person is not going to do that job. The only reason these people do these jobs is because the taxpayer is picking up the slack. Which means the taxpayer is enabling the CEO and the stockholders to pocket more. Yes, of course the CEO is going to do that, if the taxpayers are dumb enough to put up with it, and the stockholders won't complain either.

There's nothing free market about it. People owing their souls to the company store, people working for a wage which doesn't allow them to meet their basic necessities for survival, does not happen in a free market. It does not happen. People do not work for the right to starve to death. Suggesting such a thing is 'free market' is laughable.

The State is intervening in the labor transaction to Amazon's benefit. And Amazon is using political clout to ensure it continues. They are paying politicians with money that should be going to their employees. The labor market is distorted. If the State weren't making it possible for Amazon employees to survive, they would leave the company and find a way to survive.

To say that libertarians should defend Amazon because it's an enterprise is laughable. When the corporations are in bed with the politicians, you have fascism, and fascism is no more free market than socialism. And the more libertarians babble about how enterprises are good no matter what--even to the point of winking at obvious distortions of markets and turning a blind eye to fascism--the less people looking for the answers the media obviously isn't giving them will look to libertarians for those answers.

People would quit these jobs if the government weren't giving them enough food to survive on the starvation wages. What has that got to do with the free market? It's disguised as individual welfare, but it isn't. It's corporate welfare. Just as oil companies and drug companies wouldn't be able to operate profitably in certain areas of the world if the army and navy weren't providing them with free security. Corporate welfare is what it is, and we, of all people, should call it that.

 

[Madison320]

The problem isn't the "program"- the problem is that we are so submerged in The Matrix and what we think is "reality", that we are clueless to what life ought to be. Working 8-12 hrs a day for The Man is NOT freedom, it's a government prison for all.

Real freedom would be to have the right to travel, roam, own land, learn, exchange, set your own perimeters, be a real entrepreneur, w/o constant gov interference. Most people would do quite well- and all charity would be local.

This 9-5 American Dream, that everyone accepts as "reality". is utter bull$#@!.

Most individuals don't have the capital, or the knowledge, and don't want to take the risk associated with owning your own business. If our government wasn't so big workers would be able to work way less hours and have a much higher standard of living. Back in the 1950s a guy with a high school diploma could make enough to support a family and wife that stayed at home.

 

[Madison320]

Are you $#@!ing kidding me? You must be a $#@!ing moron.

Labor is worth what it is worth. If the State intervenes in the market and artificially props up the low end of the labor market, how the $#@! is that Amazon's problem?

How is it Amazon's responsibility to pay MORE for labor than it values it?

Jeezus Criminy what is going on here at RPF? Please don't tell me this is what is passing for libertarian around here any more.

I agree. The real problem is our 4+ trillion a year government. And it's going to get a lot worse when we can no longer borrow and print.

 

[H_H]

So let's stop the program!

Cold turkey, work or starve.

While we're at it free (tax dollar supported) housing and medical need to go too.

What about the children?

The children are the whole point. Eugenics FTW!

 

[H_H]

And is not giving SNAP and/or Section 8 to working people an intervention that distorts the labor market

The only reason these people do these jobs is because the taxpayer is picking up the slack.

The State is intervening in the labor transaction to Amazon's benefit. And Amazon is using political clout to ensure it continues

To say that libertarians should defend Amazon because it's an enterprise is laughable. When the corporations are in bed with the politicians, you have fascism,

People would quit these jobs if the government weren't giving them enough food to survive on the starvation wages. What has that got to do with the free market?

Your point is good, and very clearly true. It's undeniable, yes? Does anyone here wish to try to deny it?

Societies are designed and planned. This is not done by a Central Committee meeting once a week in a high chamber, but it is done. It is planned by the whole community, organically, with the most intelligent and the most invested men steering developments most strongly, naturally, organically.

Societies are large complexes of variables, and few indeed are the variables that stand unaffected by changes in any of the others. Inviting in 100 million third-world peasants to live with us, as we have, is a variable that has consequences. Massively promoting and subsidizing the buying of everything through mail-order (sorry, got to use the hip new term: "online") is another variable with consequences.

At some point we, the people, are going to have to start caring about our communities again and consciously thinking and acting in regards to "what is going to make this a great place for my children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren to live and thrive?" Right now, our living places are fast becoming not only not great, but not even human. Inhuman. Our way of living is getting hosed.

There's more to life than the free market. There's free-dom. People aren't just consumptive bots that happen to have low tensile strength. They don't like to be, anyway. They have souls. They like to have souls.

TL;DR: Actions have consequences, and the actions of the Boomers have been disgustingly poor. Nihilistic. They've run our society into the ground (((with encouragement))) and now it's our job to look around, realize that, accept that truth, and start building it up again.

 

[Krugminator2]

Most individuals don't have the capital, or the knowledge, and don't want to take the risk associated with owning your own business. If our government wasn't so big workers would be able to work way less hours and have a much higher standard of living. Back in the 1950s a guy with a high school diploma could make enough to support a family and wife that stayed at home.

For one thing, the entire world was decimated at that time. Japan and Europe were destroyed and that was when China was a closed economy. That opened the door for the US to make things at uncompetitive prices.

More importantly, that family from the 50's can still do the same thing today. The kicker is they have to live like the 50's. Most houses built in the 50's were super small. Just look at any neighborhood with old houses. The average house from that time wouldn't be considered very nice compared to the average new house by today's standards. If you eliminated cell phone, internet, cable had one vehicle, and only had access to 1950s health care you could raise a family on a high school income if you don't live in an expensive area.

 

[Madison320]

For one thing, the entire world was decimated at that time. Japan and Europe were destroyed and that was when China was a closed economy. That opened the door for the US to make things at uncompetitive prices.

More importantly, that family from the 50's can still do the same thing today. The kicker is they have to live like the 50's. Most houses built in the 50's were super small. Just look at any neighborhood with old houses. The average house from that time wouldn't be considered very nice compared to the average new house by today's standards. If you eliminated cell phone, internet, cable had one vehicle, and only had access to 1950s health care you could raise a family on a high school income if you don't live in an expensive area.

So you don't think the rise in the size of government has affected living standards?


Assuming a cheap area to live a guy with a high school diploma is probably $10 an hour * 40 = 1,600 a month - taxes about 1,200.

$600 payment on a small house
$200 for a used car
$400 for food:

That's $1200 right there and that's not even close to covering everything.

 

[timosman]

What about the children? Some people don't have time to go look for better jobs. It's not easy for everybody. Why are you so mean???

Pleeeeeeese, what about those who can but can not find anything because a big corp, who never made a dime of profit, has grabbed the government by the balls and is dangling a huge revenue in front of their noses and these idiots are salivating. Whatever you want, they say.