Bernie Sanders Intros ‘Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies (BEZOS)’ Bill
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
Also, categories are complicated. One reason Amazon is the target of discussion here, and not Google for example, is that Amazon operates warehouses, and warehouses hire low wage employees. If Google was running as many warehouses as Amazon, would they pay better? Maybe they would, but how much better? If Google's low wage workers are in factories in East Asia run by third parties we've never heard of, instead of actual employees on their payroll in the US, is that better?
Instead, compare Walmart to Costco: similar operations, same skills required of their workforce. Yet Walmart, which makes much more money than Costco, pays its employees wages that require many of them to rely on government assistance. And Costco provides not only living wages, it also provides benefits even to part-time employees. And it does it with much less money. Why should we be subsidizing Walmart's workforce, when we don't have to do the same for Costco's?
Still totally reasonable to look at what structural changes could be made to shift costs towards Walmart (away from taxpayers), but the comparison to CostCo isn't really instructive.
And it could just be that Walmart shouldn't be able to run so many stores. But that's going to change the availability of good for many people.
I agree, and I think the original headline is making precisely that apples to oranges comparison. If you call out certain companies for paying low wages, there has to be some accounting for how much of that is because of the business they're in ("not their fault") vs how much is because of their CEO's bonus or whatever ("their fault").
I don't want to sound like my side of the argument is "deregulate Amazon or else society will collapse." Especially when the original topic was a single specific bill and not really an entire political worldview. But making those sorts of arguments is certainly a lot of fun so :)
I think the last two hundred years of history and politics should leave us exceptionally worried about how to incentivize people in the extremes. Stable political systems that aren't some kind of hereditary monarchy are relatively rare, not that hereditary monarchies are fantastic places to live either. Of the stable systems we have, a disproportionate number of them seem to be some offshoot of English law. I didn't study history, so any generalizations I want to make after that point are kind of worthless, but my totally biased take on it is that the whole "the poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown" part of the system is a really important part for stability. (Whether that take even ends up having anything to do with the BEZOS Bill is anyone's guess; maybe it doesn't.)
That is not at all what I thought when it said ending subsidies, this is nothing, its not the punishment that this article suggests it is. This is a great way to balance welfare budgets in a national spending debate, or get companies to raise their employee's salaries above eligibility for federal programs.
The actual cost for companies though? Still negligible, but that only matters when it is improperly framed as a punishment.
"Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism"
Not all low wage workers are equal in terms of the benefits they receive. If the new rule were as simple as this, employers would have an incentive not to hire e.g. parents with dependent children. Or not to hire people who are more likely to receive benefits in the future for whatever reason. I get that Sanders wants to enact transfers from the wealthy to the poor, but there are ways to do that that aren't a mismash of bad incentives.
Edit: Not to mention that this would give low wage employers a huge reason to oppose any new legislation to raise benefits. It just seems really poorly thought out. (Maybe no one expects it to pass, so it doesn't matter what the actual effects would be?)
I'd be interested to know if this is actually true/where they're getting their numbers from, and if these are full-time, or seasonal employees.
Not sure why part time and seasonal workers don't count since that's often the only way to even start working at Amazon.
Same for switching between seasonal jobs; if I'm working for Sunshine Ranch as a ranchhand April through September, and I'm working for Powder Bowl Ski Lodge as a custodian October through March, those two companies would need to be taxed proportionately.
Bezos is rich because he had a huge position the company he started and presided over taking to a $1T market cap. He pays himself relatively little in salary and stock grants on an ongoing basis. You might as well go after Warren Buffett.
Oracle stands out among tech companies, if anyone wants to create a cutely acronymed bill for them: https://www.asyousow.org/reports/the-100-most-overpaid-ceos-...
edit: "This brings me great sadness, as Sanders' career has been to improve the lives of his constituents, and American people as a whole. I think this is uncalled for." It brings me great sadness, too, because I think it's opportunistic grandstanding on his part, and far beneath the standards he has set. And what saddens me more is that it appears to be part of a trend for him in the past 3 years.
This brings me great sadness, as Sanders' career has been to improve the lives of his constituents, and American people as a whole. I think this is uncalled for.
> Bezos is rich because he had a huge position the company he started and presided over taking to a $1T market cap. He pays himself relatively little in salary and stock grants on an ongoing basis.
Then tax his stock grants at wage based levels. Your argument is that there are "bigger fish to fry". There's no reason not to start with a trillion dollar company.
I hope you're aware that investors already get to write off their losses.
I was initial against Trump's tariffs, but after reading what other countries have in place, I think he is justified. Other countries subsidize and tariff the shit out of certain industries.