Hacker News Reader

Comment by wcarron | Hacker News Reader

> Bottom line: the taxpayers of this country should not have to subsidize employees at a company owned by Mr. Bezos who is worth $155 billion. That is absurd," Sanders said in the statement.

Agreed. This isn't an Amazon only problem, but they are certainly egregious perpetrators of trying to play cities and states off each other for tax breaks and other benefits at taxpayer expense.

Let's also not forget the whole "peeing in bottles out of fear" fiasco: https://www.pulse.ng/bi/tech/undercover-author-finds-amazon-...

View on HN

I won't comment on Amazon shopping around for tax breaks, but I would take issue with idea that welfare payments "subsidize" Amazon.

The whole idea that public assistance subsidizes employers is based on the false assumption that people only require to get paid what they "need" and therefore accept lower wages because they don't need as much due to government aid.

I think a more plausible explanation is that employers pay employees based on productivity and supply of employees with that skill set. If an employer can make $15 an hour per marginal employee, then that employer will not pay more than $15 an hour, regardless of what employees demand. And if there is an oversupply of employees with those skill levels, then they can choose from the pool based on the market rate. This is pretty standard economic theory.

Another way you can think about it is that Amazon is helping states and federal government by paying these employees, otherwise the welfare payments would be higher.

> And if there is an oversupply of employees with those skill levels, then they can choose from the pool based on the market rate. This is pretty standard economic theory.

Right, and part of the point of all this rhetoric is the fact that our current economy is upending economic theory. Labor is in short supply and wages aren't budging.

> If an employer can make $15 an hour per marginal employee, then that employer will not pay more than $15 an hour, regardless of what employees demand.

If a company needs 10 employees, then it will hire 10 employees at whatever cost, or stop operating. If it can only hire those employees at $100 an hour, then it will have to set its prices so that it makes at least $100 / employee-hour. And if it can't, it will operate at a loss or stop operating.

I don't think it's doable, but it would pretty great to see the federal government just collect extra taxes to make up for every tax break given.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com