Slashdot Mirror
Many Amazon Warehouse Workers are on Food Stamps (theintercept.com)
Many of Amazon's warehouse workers have to buy their groceries with food stamps through America's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, reports the Intercept.
In Arizona, new data suggests that one in three of the company's own employees depend on SNAP to put food on the table. In Pennsylvania and Ohio, the figure appears to be around one in 10. Overall, of five states that responded to a public records request for a list of their top employers of SNAP recipients, Amazon cracked the top 20 in four.
Though the company now employs 200,000 people in the United States, many of its workers are not making enough money to put food on the table... "The average warehouse worker at Walmart makes just under $40,000 annually, while at Amazon would take home about $24,300 a year," CNN reported in 2013. "That's less than $1,000 above the official federal poverty line for a family of four."
In addition Amazon uses temp workers who may also be on food stamps, notes the article, adding that in 2017 Amazon received $1.2 billion in state and local subsidies, while effectively paying no federal income tax.
"The American people are financing Amazon's pursuit of an e-commerce monopoly every step of the way: first, with tax breaks, subsidies, and infrastructure improvements meant to lure fulfillment centers into town, and later with federal transfers to pay for warehouse workers' food."
Though the company now employs 200,000 people in the United States, many of its workers are not making enough money to put food on the table... "The average warehouse worker at Walmart makes just under $40,000 annually, while at Amazon would take home about $24,300 a year," CNN reported in 2013. "That's less than $1,000 above the official federal poverty line for a family of four."
In addition Amazon uses temp workers who may also be on food stamps, notes the article, adding that in 2017 Amazon received $1.2 billion in state and local subsidies, while effectively paying no federal income tax.
"The American people are financing Amazon's pursuit of an e-commerce monopoly every step of the way: first, with tax breaks, subsidies, and infrastructure improvements meant to lure fulfillment centers into town, and later with federal transfers to pay for warehouse workers' food."
Don't be silly. With all the hours they work, what Amazon Warehouse Worker has time to have a family of four?
Guillotine the billionaires.
Quote "You’d hardly recognize Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos in the super-heavy makeup he wears as an alien Starfleet officer in “Star Trek"."
They cast him as the wrong alien...
They pay the same minimum wages under the same rules as all of the other big and small companies. It's the "system" and laws
There was just a post last week on the conditions of one Amazon warehouse in the UK.
Why is it the worst jobs pay the least?
I hear the executives and those in the top 5% always whine about lower paid workers about how hard the big players have to work compared to them and how much stress they have hence why they need $200,000+ salaries etc. They need the money because they work hard. But Walmart, McDonalds, and Amazon show the opposite apparently.
I see a trend too in the I.T. industry for non programmers. We are expected to take calls 24x7 and be polite at 2am when youtube looks funny and call me on the emergencies only I.T. outage line. If I say can we do this on Monday at a reasonable hour it is grounds for termination. But these big players would not accept a call at 2am for a question on a spreadsheet and would get to keep their jobs if they tell them to fuck off I am sleeping.
http://saveie6.com/
We had NCOs who were on foodstamps and going out on weekends to pick up cans along the side of the road to sell to recycling services.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
It's all about keeping the poor poor for maximum control.
Most warehouse workers are performing jobs that require little skill or talent. These jobs donâ(TM)t pay well. Itâ(TM)s always been that way. Iâ(TM)ve done these jobs. Moving up generally means going from picker to a forklift driver, or moving from night shift to day shift. Not a lot of opportunity here, but there is typically consistent work to be done and thatâ(TM)s what keeps many of these folks in these jobs.
Though the company now employs 200,000 people in the United States, many of its workers are not making enough money to put food on the table...
Can we say the following: -
That folks on food stamps somehow easily find work at Amazon instead of the narrative that the [little] income at Amazon, forces them to employ food stamps?
That Amazon [probably] goes out of their way to employ those who would otherwise be unemployable; these coincidentally happening to be on food stamps?
That those on food stamps get some benefit working at Amazon in terms of other perks they may be getting?
Look, I have heard of the argument that in some jurisdictions, not earning enough qualifies one to get benefits that those who make more may not necessarily qualify for.
In all the above, I stand to be corrected.
Food stamps don't exist here. Its called SNAP benefits.
The problem is government, not Amazon.
America land of the free.. for companies to pay people so little they can barely eat. Good to see capitalism works!
It's nice to live in a country with an actual liveable minimal wage, decent health care and no gun nut jobs everywhere.
Why in the world is the government subsidizing Amazon??? Makes no sense. And why would they receive tax breaks? I mean, I love amazon, order from there frequently. But what the hell? Thecompany doesn't need any financial assistance lol Just their workers. ..
Underlying reasons are:
1 -
2 -
3 -
4 -
Any ideas? Human life counts nothing, environment, future life of our decedents are not a topic or even thought to consider.
If I look at commuter traffic stuffing freeways and thick black smut coming out of trucks exhausts when they accelerate.
Particle matters go in your lungs for good and stay there....
Well, look at something more important, will you?
I'm not sure what the problem is here. If Amazon isn't forcing people to work for them, then the point of the article appears to be that those people who do work for them are making a bad choice. I'd be interested to hear the author's solution to preventing people from making bad choices.
As for the argument that the taxpayers are subsidizing Amazon through "tax breaks, subsidies, and infrastructure improvements meant to lure fulfillment centers into town", the argument appears to be that cities are making bad choices by providing those subsidies. Again, I'd be interested to hear the author's solution to preventing cities from making bad choices.
Finally, the argument that the taxpayers are subsidizing Amazon through the foodstamp program, I think that is a bit of a stretch. Amazon receives no money from SNAP--their workers do. The argument is that Amazon is able to pay such low wages because of SNAP. If this is seen as a problem--a big if--then there isn't just one solution--that Amazon pay its workers more. Another solution is for the government to stop providing SNAP. Both solutions would solve the assumed problem.
One thing this article appears to be missing is an understanding of those people who choose to work for Amazon and to take SNAP benefits; it suggests they are either irrational or fools who do not know their own interests. Although I will not argue that people are rational, or even that they always know what's best for their long term interests, I think most people are quite capable of understanding what's best for them in the short term.
Amazon sucks!
And will never have to fear the masses, and thus will not share a single bit of the resources they command with any other human being.
This is one of the main arguments for the left pushing "Fight for $15." If you're working for minimum wage, then you qualify for food stamps and other government assistance, so the government is essentially subsidizing employers who pay minimum wage.
Here's the math: The federal minimum wage is $7.25. If you work 40 hours a week, 50 weeks a year, that's $14,500 a year. The Amazon wage listed in the summary of $24,300 correlates with $11.68/hour for 40 hours/50 weeks. Of course, the Amazon hourly rate is probably lower, but with overtime depending on demand.
How the hell is it legal to pay someone SO little money for a job that they qualify for food stamps?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Seriously, we need a minimum wage in each area that equals what it takes to support an adult AND a single child. We should have few ppl on snap and NONE that are working.
Sadly, so many idiots around here fight common sense.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
...for majoring in a field with no jobs. It's like me complaint I can't find a good buggy whip job. Oh, biology is his passion, you say? Then do it for the love of it, not the money.
No one us entitled to a job in the field they want.
FIX THE TAX CODE.
This stops so many more abuses of this kind.
CREATE ACTUAL LAWS FOR WORKERS.
Wipe minimum wage, eliminate the part time/full classifications, require mandatory minimum amounts of sick leave and holidays, both with pay, create incentives for businesses to again pay employees a living wage or better to reduce corporate tax liability instead of giving them more incentives to feed the pockects of investors and chase ever-expanding profits until they collapse.
FIX HEALTH CARE
So workers no longer feel like they cannot leave their jobs. Creating a more mobile workforce creates a better market for employees, increases wages, and raises the economy.
Or, just bitch about the corporate giant du jour while changing nothing, and wonder why things keep going downhill.
If Walmart pays so much better, then maybe the Amazon workers should get jobs there. Amazon is a business not a charity, it will pay what people are willing to accept no more no less.
The calculation used to officially determine the 'poverty line' in the USA is bullshit and thus it shouldn't be utilized for anything. Here's how it works: a low-cost diet is tallied to $X, it's then assumed that food will constitute 1/3 of a poor person's expenditures, so then $X is multiplied by 3 to give the 'poverty line'.
Ok, food IS about 1/3 of my expenditures... but the cost of food nationwide is relatively constant, particularly in comparison to the cost of housing. Depending on where you live and your housing arrangement, one might pay between $300 and $1200 a month in rent/mortgage (assuming you're not in a place bursting with UMC residents like Manhattan or San Diego).
So, a much better poverty line calculation would be $W transportation costs + $X food + $Y average rent & utilities for 1-bedroom apartment in your ZIP code + $Z average Bronze-level health insurance plan for someone your age. However, any recalculation of the poverty line that raises the dollar amount will never be used officially since it'd make it look like more people are poor now than before during the previous administration. That's why laws say e.g. 'below 130% of the poverty line' instead of using a better calculation.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
It is well know that minimum wage, at the level set by the federal government, can only fund a single person. As soon as a minimum wage worker has one dependent, then they are at the level to receive government assistance. So two workers can support one dependent, but not two.
The solution to this is not to complain that amazon is supplying jobs. If these people could get better jobs, they would. You average mom and pop retail main street establishment is not going to provide a high wage or benefits. I know enough of these small employers to know that their unskilled or semiskilled employees are paid minimum wage, and maybe commission if it is a sales job. There was one local establishment, for instance, that converted all their wage employees to tip employees so they could pay them even less. Yes tips have to equal minimum wage, but then they get to keep anything that is over.
If we think that provided social assistance to working people, that the employer should pay a wage that is sufficient to cover all normal costs, then we need to consider solutions that level the playing field, not just attack a certain company or industry is abusing the rules. For instance, in the 1990's MS and some other computer companies were able to inflate profits by pretending some employees are contractors. Today many companies, such as Trump recreational clubs, inflate profits by using immigrant labor, paying them well below wages that local would demand. For instance there are no shortage of workers around Trump properties on the East and Gulf coast, but still they routing ask for hundreds of visas so that foreigners, who will work for less and without benefits, can be hired.
The other option is simply to look at tasing the minimum wage. This will, obviously, increase prices, but the current administration is on board with increased inflation if it is necessary to meed other goals. For instance, no one denies that the trade war with china is going to raised prices and even cost profits for industries such as farming, but it is necessary to reduce the trade imbalance. Likewise, if we want to reduce the number of people on program such as SNAP, the the most direct way to do this is increase the minimum wage and have it linked to a realistic and generous consumer price index. We may actually increase the unemployment rate, we may actually put ourselves in an inflation spiral, but we will fulfill the moral imperative of having a working family able to sustain itself.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
It's called Corporate Welfare.
Since our gov is owned and directed by the Satanic Witch family owned corporations, who must legally follow the deadly sin of Greed, your and my taxes go to supporting them in almost every way/manner that can be imagined by the vile minions of evil, and since 1980 corporate profit has climbed but wages and salaries have not increased and purchase power because of inflation have been reduced.
Years ago I read that the properly adjusted buying power of minimum wage would have to be $24/hr to be the same as when it was introduced. Imagine .. pumping gas was a living wage and one could consider starting a family.
Now taxes educate their workers, maintain the infrastructure and corporate legal preference, and go to supplement the pay of their workers so they don't starve to death while working their (and often camping for housing...)
It's called corporate welfare.
Another example of how the wealthy have rigged the system and make the other 99% pay to feed these people.
Shaming Walmart and the Waltons seems to have worked to get Walmart to raise wages.
SO you want 1 in 10 to have enough food or do you want a good price on your amazon product, packaged and delivered in 2 days?
This measurement is bullshit, and I expect it'll cause more harm than good.
Apparently 14% of Americans are on SNAP assistance. On the one hand, yes, that's terribly high and it'd be great to have every American be able to support themselves... but at the same time, it's pointing blame at Amazon for daring to offer low-paying jobs. Again, 14% of Americans are on food stamps. Those 14% are going to need help with or without working for Amazon, so I, for one, am at least glad they're employed and partially offsetting their expenses.
I'd be happy to see studies about how many folks are employed full-time and still need SNAP, or the impact of SNAP participation on economic recovery, or the like, but this seems like a hit piece against one company in particular. Apparently in Pennsylvania and Ohio, the SNAP participation rate lowers to only "around one in 10", but it's phrased like a bad thing to be better than the national average.
Overall, of five states that responded to a public records request for a list of their top employers of SNAP recipients, Amazon cracked the top 20 in four.
From TFS, a perfect example of poor research... How did this result compare to the lists of top employers of non-SNAP recipients, or the count of employees for each company? Amazon is a huge company, and they employ a lot of people. I expect they'll be on the top of a lot of lists.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
In 2013, Mother Jones Magazine reporter Mac McClelland wrote an investigative piece called "I Was a Warehouse Wage Slave" recounting her experience working as a "picker" in an Amazon warehouse in Ohio. In it, she points out that many of her fellow laborers were getting food stamps (aka "SNAP"), because they could not otherwise feed their families on their take-home pay.
It's worth noting that those workers would qualify for Ohio Medicaid - also at taxpayer expense - in addition to SNAP. And HEAP, and an Ohio utilities payment assistance program called PIPP+, as well ...
Check out my novel.
When UBI gets implemented, itâ(TM)ll be just like this. Amazon, Wal-Mart and the like will pay the bare minimum wages they can legally get away with, just like they already do with taxes. Itâ(TM)ll be working individuals who subsidize others through taxes.
Slavery 2.0
Only a fascist like him would support Amazon.
jeff is into $. he could care less about where u r from. its just good business.
19th century employee management and working conditions are back in vogue! Wasn't the world beautiful, almost 200 years ago? /s
-- Cheers!
...that Lord of the Rings show though. Priorities.
Solution is quite simple - government should enforce mandatory coding training for all people earning below certain threshold (close to min wage I'd guess).
If they don't find work after that, force another course, then another one, until they all become 1337 coders.
"Many Amazon Warehouse Workers are on Food Stamps"
Now why is that? Why is it that Amazon can pay such low wages and still get people to work for them? Is it because they know that Government will subsidize their workers for them, so they can pay them shit? Bingo!
Get rid of the food stamps, suddenly Amazon and everyone else has to pay more to get workers.
I shudder to think that we are being defended by idiots who cannot find the building where you get fed for free.
Ignorant asshole. Many soldiers have families and live off-base. Wives and children don't eat with the soldiers.
Is there a story here other than liberal click baiting? If your "career" is packing boxes, I think it's reasonable to expect to live south of the poverty line forever.
Or they could move where the jobs are or where it's cheaper to live, instead of just expecting handouts for choosing to live in expensive places without decently paying jobs.
I am not an accountant, I know nothing about the internal workings of Amazon other than what I can read in public media, and I probably do not know what I am talking about. But, I can do some arithmetic.
1 - The summary states that the Amazon warehouse worker makes $24,300.
2 - Amazon is famous for foregoing profits during its first 15-20 years in favor of expansion of services.
3 - There is financial information at the following links:
Amazon revenues: https://www.statista.com/stati...
Amazon income: https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/...
Amazon employees: https://www.statista.com/stati...
Amazon profits: https://www.theverge.com/2016/...
Based on these numbers, Amazon's performance in 2017 was:
Revenue = $178b
Gross profit after cost of revenue = $66b
Income after operating expenses = $4b
Net income after taxes et al = $3b
Employment = 566,000
For prior years:
2016: $2.4b net on $136b revenue, 341,000 employees
2015: $0.6b net on $107b revenue, 231,000 employees
You can see the trend - Amazon is only recently profitable as employees expand with general revenue and profit.
I have no idea how many of the employees are warehouse or fulfillment center employees. I have seen reports that would place the number between 130k and 200k.
For the sake of this analysis, assume that other low skilled employees are included, and we will go with 200,000 bottom wage employees.
Assume that Amazon had a fit of good will toward its workers and payed them a liveable non-stressful wage.
If in 2017 the $24k current wage was upped to $34k, that is an extra $10k/person/annum x 200k workers = $2 billion extra in wages.
That is 2/3's of profit, so Amazon could have afforded it (at the expense of shareholder return).
In 2016, assume a pro rata fewer number of low wage employees, 341k/566k x 200k = 120k.
Then, $10k x 120k workers = $1.2 billion = 1/2 of profit, so it was affordable.
In 2015, estimate low wage workers at 231k/566k x 200k = 82k.
Then, $10k x 82k workers = $0.82 billion = 1/3 greater than profit, so it was not fully affordable.
Going back farther, there was less profit to fund higher wages.
I am not arguing for or against Amazon, nor for or against minimum wages or workers rights or any other sociopolitical point of view. Being in a human services profession, I tend to side with the workers, and it pains me to hear of such situations. However, I also buy from Amazon, and call me a hypocrite if you will, but so do you.
Emotional or political or social points of view aside, it can be seen that Amazon's push to expand did not permit unfettered generous wages during periods of unprofitability.
Of course, the counter argument must be made that the higher paid employees, which are greater than half the workforce, could have had reduced wages and bonuses for a more equitable pay scale.
Now that Amazon is coming into the black, the righteous thing to do would be to raise wages. Even better, given how long they operated in the red, and were famously proud to do so, they could do so for another year or two and turn their profits into stock or cash bonuses for the low paid employees, to thank them for their sacrifice during the formative years.
Judging by your comment, you are just another overprivlaged asshole with no idea about real life. We dont want or need guns to have a civilised society, with far better worker conditions than your armed society.
10% is not Many. That's Few. It's not really all that surprising that 10% of the workers are going to fall at the low end of the curve, especially in a low skill type job. Simply looking at the new workers in training would account for that.
"at Amazon would take home about $24,300 a year," CNN reported in 2013. "That's less than $1,000 above the official federal poverty line for a family of four."
That's a typical bad statistic. If you have a family of four it is typically including two adults. They both have the option of working. So if both are working and getting $24,300 that means a household income of $48,600 which is quite respectable. Heck, $24,300 is very good to be honest. Realize that a lot of people who are at the lower end of the wage tier are NOT FAMILIES OF FOUR. And if you're not a family of four you don't have the expenses of a family of four. You can SHARE an apartment, live frugally, etc. I do.
People earn what they earn primarily because of choices they make. Sometimes they do have bad luck and we have social safety nets, like food stamps, that help with this. It's not a crisis.
Hello everyone. I would like to apologize for begin the raging asshole that I am. You see I am now undergoing a treatment program in an attempt to resolve my many issues. In going through this self discovery process I have discovered that a lot of my problems, especially with my inadequacy, centers around the fact that I was repressing my homosexuality. I now know that homosexuality isn't bad it is just the repression of it and the problems that causes are bad. Most notably his repression caused me to act out at anyone who rightfully pointed out my failings. I realize now that so much of what I said was just wrong. I also realize that I have developed serious problems such as stalking, harassment, poor physical health, and feelings of inadequacy. To this end I would like to apologize to the entire slashdot community.
APK
P.S. => As part of my treatment I have been forced to read what I wrote and realize now that all the mockery and insults I received were fully justified... apk
Amazon uses temp workers who may also be on food stamps
Temp workers qualifying for SNAP benefits?!?! I don't understand, if they have a job, no matter the skills involved not the hours worked, shouldn't their part-time temporary job meet all their financial obligations, no matter how big their family or where in the country they choose to live? /sarcasm
Ken
These guys are going cashless. That's a good thing, right?
They don't have to. The income threshold for SNAP was vastly changed by D states and the D FEDGOV under the Obama administration to DOUBLE the people eligable for SNAP (formerly food stamps), but also cash assistance, section 8 (rents paid), and, wait for it, FREE OBAMA PHONES!!
In other words, even an Amazon warehouse worker with a family of four does not actually need SNAP, since they are not poor without it. SNAP should really not go to anybody above the poverty line.
And, of course, jobs like that tend to be for people just starting out in the job market, or taking on second jobs; if you marry and have two kids while employed as an Amazon warehouse worker, you are making bad life decisions.
The average salary of a school teacher in the US is $38K, and you have to have a Bachelors and (usually) a Masters degree to get that job. This is the person who is teaching your children and went to college for at least 5 years to do it.
Is it really unreasonable that someone who literally pushes boxes for Amazon and does not need any advanced degree would make $14K less than that?
What we should be upset about is how the salaries in the US have spread out in the past 30 years, which basically kills social mobility. My grandparents could work their factory jobs (with no college degrees or even high school ones) and then come home to their house (which they owned) and afford to send their kids to college. There's no way that you can do that nowadays as a factory worker and you are lucky if you can even do that as a teacher or police officer.
Salaries for those lower skilled jobs need to come up, way up, even if things need to cost more to make that happen. Otherwise we are effectively sliding back into a form of indentured servitude.
full time, benefits including health insurance, and higher pay at warehouses.. compared to no insurance benefits, sub-30 hour weeks at or very-slightly above minimum wage at stores (very few, like count-on-one-hand few per store, non-management workers are full time benefited). warehouses don't dick around though. you mess up, you're fired. you miss too much work, you're fired... and they're pretty strict about policies, especially conduct and attendance.
amazon also avoids the insurance thing by having more staff working fewer hours.. and, hiring temps.. either temp status employees or out-right contracted via an agency.. again, no fucking benefits and minimal pay.
I think expropriation would be more adequate. Each month, organize a party with a lottery: expropriate one of the hundred richest, chosen at random. Give the proceeds to the poorest.
You can always get out of those endangered hundred by donating enough, you know?
No violence, no blood, one feast per month -- what's not to like?
The funny thing to me is how much more I make at Amazon compared to McDonalds, and I knew plenty of people who were somehow getting by (and even had enough money leftover for heroine) working at McDonalds.
Not saying it's good, just saying Amazon could actually be a lot worse.
Why in the world would you pay more for a job to be done than the workers are wiling to take? My bosses have never come to me out of the blue and said they bumped my wages just because, I'm paid for my skills.
I don't by a gallon of gas and tell them here's 20% more because i don't think you're charging enough. I'll bet no one else does. And I'll bet most people shop where the prices are lowest. Amazon does it as well. The only difference is we're all shopping for gadgets and they are shopping for workers.
I will agree minimum wage isn't enough money for a family of four to life on. Mostly because someone who only makes minimum wage shouldn't be having kids they can't support.
If you keep feelings out of it, answers appear pretty quick.
And what about Walmart? Oh right, Wally and his family donate to Republicans and Trump is doing everything he can to attack Bezos because of a personal vendetta.
I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
Kinda off topic but armed societies are the most secure and free in the world, which usually helps a lot avoid gov abuse and preserve civilians rights. Most countries where gov took away peoples guns became extremely insecure and sometimes open dictatorships live Venezuela. Also free speech is a must so you don't have people being jailed for opinions on borderline dictatorships like uk and germany.
How about you move a bit to have a taste of some third world noguns+lots of workers rights+lots of welfare+lots unemployment+everything overpriced to make up for that free shit? Sure you have no idea about actual real life other than your tiny first world bubble.
If I shop at Wal Mart, I'm importing poverty into my neighborhood. If I shop at Amazon, I'm exporting the poverty to shitholes like Arizona. That's a big win.
Israel: land of security and freedom.
If people can't buy food at 23K a year they are doing something very wrong. Average income in Sweden is something like 30K and we have at least 30% income tax (varies, areas with a lot of wealthy people have lower taxes) and 25% sales tax (unless you want beer or gasoline, then its in the several hundred percent). My mothers old age pension is 16K...
Americans must be really spoiled...
Can you imagine the press Amazon would get about working conditions if Amazon was more conservative? Its OK to pay people shit wages if your a liberal mogul making billions like Jeff Bezo but then again how does anyone expect Amazon to make money if it paid all those workers a decent wage? This is clearly just another example of why you stay in school get a skill or learn a trade and not get stuck working entry level low paying jobs like warehouse work.
If someone doesnâ(TM)t like the pay, go somewhere else or go back to school. There is absolutely no one forcing them to work at Amazon.
Then stop buying at Amazon. Stop buying at Walmart. For that matter, stop buying from any place that distributes through a warehouse (which is pretty much any chain). Spend all your money locally and drive to every store yourself.
Yeah, I didn't think so. Much easier to complain and castigate than to inconvenience yourself.
Don't buy from Amazon.
I also buy from Amazon, and call me a hypocrite if you will, but so do you.
You're delusional if you think that everybody shops with Amazon. Some of us still have morals. Not everyone is a selfish piece of shit that knowingly causes other people harm for their own convenience.
I don't respond to AC's.
Amazon competes for labor just like every other company, offering compensation that is competitive in any given market. If one in three Amazon warehouse workers in Arizona qualifies for SNAP then the real question should be what percentage of warehouse workers from all employers in AZ qualify for that program. I seriously Amazon workers are faring any worse than average in terms of compensation.
What a BIGLY bunch of USAmericans. Fuck 'em. Nobody in the USA gubmint is elected on a basis of giving two shits about the poor why the fuck should I??
Fuck Yoy USAnericans and your fearful whining. Man up. Be brave for once in ypur lived.
...which the President is attempting to execute, and with the opposition of almost everyone in Washington.
The basic problem with Amazon is that it is NOT manufacturing, and NOT mining, and NOT agriculture. It is retailing. Manufacturing, mining, and agriculture produce new, tangible things for sale, rather than simply moving money around with some having a better shot at siphoning off more of it than others. Winners are executives and managers, losers are line employees.
The cure the President wants to make happen is to bring manufacturing back in a big way. Manufacturing pays far more than these retail jobs. If 100's of 1000's of factories can be opened or re-opened (we've lost more than that to overseas flight due to our income taxes chasing them out of the country), those Amazon workers and Walmart workers and burger flipper workers would all be showing up at manufacturing plants to actually build things. They would be paid more than what they're paid as retail employees.
What happens then is that people to work retail jobs begin becoming scarce. Amazon, Walmart, and the burger flipper employers start having problems getting help. They can't employ enough people to run their businesses. What do they do? Sure, they'll employ some robots, but robots can't clean the bathroom, interact well with customers when something weird goes wrong, and may or may not be able to successfully drive a forklift without running over people or damaging the merchandise. IOW, these places are always going to need help. So... they hire less, but they hire at higher wages.
Wages too high to qualify for food stamps.
And that's the cure for this. Get people working in high(er) paying jobs, factory jobs.
Both sides oppose this. Some don't want to change, some are making a fortune by building things offshore and importing them and are scared that they won't make as much by building in the US, some just want to "keep those people down" so that they can buy their votes with welfare money. But the President isn't any of those people that wants to screw the American worker. He's fairly unique in Washington. I've watched him from waaaay before he became President, and he's ALWAYS complained about these people that want to exploit workers. Now, he's decided to do something about it himself.
So, that's why the big corporate tax cut. Get the factories back. Should work, although passing the FairTax, which has NO corporate income taxes (or any other income taxes) would work better, but that is probably a bridge too far right now.
Over the next couple of decades automation will take away the vast majority of Amazon's warehouse, transport, and work-at-home customer support jobs. With those, much of the need for Amazon management will disappear too. The existing supervisory personnel are not qualified to maintain machines and most could never retrain to a skillset that different. It won't matter a lot because equipment manufacturers and those working on creating the future TaaS infrastructure already know that they need to design for trivial maintenance in order to sustain geometric growth without hitting the limits of support.
All of this is what we want. Who wants to work? We should stop arguing about this and figure out how to transition to and distribute wealth in a society where very little work is needed. This is the American dream.
As a taxpayer I'm not pleased with funds being spent this way.
So once we end all the wars and bring all of our troops home, then we can end other wasteful spending like SNAP and all other forms of welfare.
You guys have the say. I closed my account when it came up Amazons UK tax dodging practices.
Just stop using them. You may pay a bit more to any other local business, butbat least you will not be awarding nasty business behaviours.
Cut all taxes. Inflation isnâ(TM)t the problem it used to be.
The government created this problem by over taxing the people. The people are taking home less than $25,000 USD in spite of making $40,000 USD which means that the government is getting $30,000 USD from Amazon for each employee they hire (on average). A $40,000 USD wage after taxes are stolen by the government they are saying results in $25,000 of spendable income by employees. What is left out is Amazon then also pays another $15,000 or so. In other words Amazon is paying closer to $55,000 on average for each employee. The government could solve this problem overnight if it simply eliminated the social programs, its funding of the police state, and funding of significant overseas military bases. And it wouldn't have to completely eliminate all spending on the military either. This would then result in government not needing to steal from Amazon and its employees because the employees would be sufficiently resourced to cover there own expenses. Not to mention the sales taxes, property taxes,"fees", and other taxes which further reduce that $25,000 USD by $3750-$4500 USD.
If you pay your workers more than Amazon, you should now be able to insist on higher production, which means you can compete.
not so many years ago, there was an article about Walmart helping its employees to file for public assistance; now, we are seeing same thing from Amazon.com
https://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/04/15/report-walmart-workers-cost-taxpayers-6-2-billion-in-public-assistance/#12fe6afe720b
Why is this news now?
A few years ago it was reported that a high percentage of college students at Michigan State were on SNAP, kind of odd that they can afford/borrow tens of thousands of dollars for tuition & board, but need help buying food - perhaps they should borrow a bit more to sign up for the meal plan?
https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/...
Apparently Michigan questioned the appropriateness of students collecting SNAP benefits and dropped 30,000 students from SNAP.
Ken
It's simply false that Amazon didn't pay taxes.
As a public company, their balance sheet is made public, and it shows they paid hundreds of millions in taxes every year. You can read for yourself at the link below.
So Amazon paid taxes to governments, and the governments decide how to allocate those tax revenues around programs that help the people. That's the right way for this to work as that allows policy makers to do their best to design programs to best help those who need it while not laying a cost on those who can't afford to pay it.
These sensationalized stories don't do society any good.
Amazon filing: http://phx.corporate-ir.net/ph...
Don't worry, the middle class will pay with their tax dollars. HOORAY CAPITALISM
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
So the proposal is: Nobody pays taxes anymore. But the government prints money to redistribute wealth to the poor?
That would theoretically hurt people with large savings accounts, like a middle class retirement account. A wealthy person would move assets out of currency that is under moderate inflation and into investments. That's not to say anyone with an IRA or 401K couldn't also move their retirement into investments as well.
It's especially handy if you owe credit card bills. You get to pay back with inflated dollars. Not that the inflation will be significant against the 22% APR you find with credit cards these days.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Or is it "food stamps expanded so much that employees at X qualify"?
Worth asking, anyway.
I'm in the wrong line of work. Back in 2011 I was working 3 jobs to make $18k a year. I still had enough to pay rent/food/gas and didn't go on food stamps.
This is very important because Amazon is currently asking for big things from the cities it is courting right now for its second headquarters.
This is what the cities that give away taxpayer money in the form of explicit tax breaks, infrastructure upgrades, land deals, etc. can expect to get in exchange: they get to pay the workers as well.
Isn't it amazing that big business has an obligation to take care of unskilled workers, while at the same time workers are not expected to have developed any skills?
If you don't want to work a minimum wage job then you need more than a minimum wage skill set. There's no excuse for going through 12 years of public education and having developed no marketable job skills. Private business is not a charity. Minimum wage is enough to live on, but you're not going to be able to afford your own place, a car, kids, etc. We've got way too many people who think they are entitled to things they haven't earned.
Before you bash Amazon (also realize Amazon is rapidly staffing its warehouses with mobile work forces of RV dwelling retires that need the job to make ends meet) https://www.amazon.com/gp/prod... consider that a lot of pilots early in their career would have wages low enough to qualify for food stamps. They often make less than the flight attendants on their flights who also make low wages.
The US Credit system is corrupt and was created by corrupt people, many of whom are judges and lawyers who also profit by sending you to jail. The US credit system should be dismantled. It is well known that if you were on any public assistance as a child or if you are a child of divorce youâ(TM)ve been tagged with a low credit score. This is only one of the ways the greedy stay rich and oppress the not so wealthy.
Would you please provide the WHOLE story?
How about including related info for all sides of this issue?!
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
So some of their tax money is used to pay a bureaucracy to provide them with a handout to buy food? Really?
Do I need to ask the obvious question? Oh, let's save some time. I'll ask it now.
Why is someone who is making so little money they qualify for the dole being taxed in the first place?
What's wrong with letting them keep the money they earned, and cut the government (and the welfare bureaucracy) out of the loop? So politicians can look generous with other people's money?
There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.