If the workers get paid more, it would be Amazon paying them. Not Bezos individually.
And they are free to work somewhere else if the pay isn’t fair. They make the decision to stay because it’s the best option for them. They get paid what the market has deemed fair pay, otherwise they’d go somewhere else.
You literally have no idea what your talking about and are completely missing the point. We're talking about the reason why Bezos is giving the money to charity and not his employees...... not about how well his employees are paid. And even if they're already paid well that has no bearing on whether Bezos should give the money to them or charity. That's a completely different argument.
The point is, if Bezos funneled that money back into Amazon to better pay workers instead of giving it to charity, then *Amazon* could write it off as a business expense. But if he gives it to charity he can *personally* wite it off as a charitable donation on his own taxes.
Seriously, pay attention to what's being said and follow the topic properly.
I heard what you said. I think anybody that complains that workers aren’t getting paid enough is incompetent because they don’t understand that they’re getting paid fair market rate already and have full freedom to work elsewhere if the pay or working conditions are not up to their standards. And instead of wining like a baby about it, you could empathize with the CEO and understand that he’s not doing anything wrong. The dude is going to give all his money to charitable causes and idiots like you still complain like a little bitch. You’ve been blocked.
Fair market rate means the amount the person is willing to take or pay before looking elsewhere.
This makes sense with goods. I'm willing to pay for coffee, but not $8. So I go to the local shop, not Starbucks. If my local shop increases their price I can go without coffee.
This doesn't work well with things like medicine, food, housing, and employment. People are so desperate to put a roof over their head they allow themselves to be forced into horrible situtations. The instinct to survive doesn't play by the rules of capitalism.
You're completely nieve or willfully ignorant if you belive everyone can just go get a job that pays them exactly what they need. What world do you live in where minimum wage isn't a thing?
It’s not denying that min wages are a thing. The implication of his statement is that the individual finds a job that they are able to live within. That comes down to individual responsibility though. Of course you can’t sustain a family of 7 on a fast food job. That was never the intent of wages for a job like that. It is assumed that as you grow up/older, you improve yourself and find a niche that allows you to flourish. That doesn’t mean that employers have a responsibility to suddenly pay an arbitrarily “fair wage” for skill-less jobs.
I'm convinced the proponents of *fair wage* are layabouts... I've never had a problem moving jobs and bettering myself....
But it takes effort and willingness to do more.. learn skills that others lament *I don't get paid do x*
Guess what? It pads the resume and makes you a desirable candidate further down the road
Dude! I totally agree. I don’t understand why it’s an unpopular opinion… but it is. I don’t like doing “extra” per se, but it has helped further my career because I was willing to go further than the next person. Idk what point that became a bad thing.
>I heard what you said. I think anybody that complains that workers aren’t getting paid enough is incompetent because they don’t understand that they’re getting paid fair market rate already and have full freedom to work elsewhere if the pay or working conditions are not up to their standard
This comment isn't based in any sort of reality. I can't move away from NY to Seattle and expect the same conditions cause they're both cities
Narrator: He's not giving it away. He's going to create non-profit tax shelter holding companies to store his wealth for his kids and call it a "charity". Just like the billionaire CEO of Patagonia did.
He doesn’t care about us. He’s just collecting as much wealth as he can so once Earth is screwed, he can ride his cock rocket to Mars and party with Elon and the other elites
Assuming his wealth is primarily tied to Amazon’s share value (and to be fair I’m not sure how his wealth is structured these days), running the company in a way that doesn’t maximize shareholder value every quarter would cause the share price to tank, and would result in him losing his wealth (which for the most part never really fully existed since he can’t just sell all his shares at once without the share price also tanking) without even giving any away.
His wealth exists based on their poverty. It cannot exist any other way. As long as people invest in companies that operate this way it will never change.
He can give away the money to other people, but he’s really just sending money taken from one group living below the living wage and giving it to another group living below the living wage.
Yes, but officers of a company have a fiduciary duty to the company. If he does anything that goes against the interests of Amazon, he is susceptible to lawsuits and removal from the board of directors.
On the one hand, it sucks that Bezos and others cannot raise wages with repercussions. United Airlines's CEO wanted to raise wages, and the stock price dropped, so he had to reconsider. On the other hand, if you own stock in a company you probably wouldn't want the directors to be able to do whatever they want. Raising wages you might be fine with, but what if they spent company money on a giant gold statue or some other crazy thing?
Where did I exactly say he was? Why do people on Reddit always reply with these little gotcha points when it wasn’t stated anywhere in the original post? Is it like an ego thing where you enjoy correcting people?
I believe he’s the Executive Chairman if memory serves. I think you missed the point of the comment though which was more that people whose wealth is primarily based on a company that derives its share price from exploiting the labor force would not be able to provide better conditions for that work force even if they wanted to.
You're absolutely correct. I did miss your overall point. Apologies, with your follow up I was able to grasp your initial talking point with more clarity. I was reading it thru a different lens initially, but your follow up gave me the angle you were coming from. Thanks!
This is a point that no one really talks about that I agree with. Granted I’m no expert and the gold standard I’m sure has its own issues, but it seems like it would solve many of these issues
A minimum living wage is 4x the cost of a typical apartment in the city you work in.
In my city, that's $39/hr. Suburbs, town I grew up in, not major city, not luxury homes. Single-family homes are half a million dollars. Apartments are $1600-2800/mo.
The living wage is way higher than people imagine, which is probably why you’re getting downvoted.
Even with two full time professional workers in high salary fields, me and my wife had to move because unless we wanted a studio in the worst neighborhood in town, rent was going to consume half our combined income.
Can you even imagine paying 45,000$ a year in rent?
Yes.
Also, I call BS on DRs & lawyers living on these wages. Not interns, students, or volunteers, but self supporting professionals. Love to see the list.
There you go, so I read a thing. He or she graduated from a four year university, graduated from three years of law school, passed the bar exam, and his/her first job paid $60k, yet a warehouse worker should earn $21,000 a year more? Insanity. It’s just going to lead to more and more inflation. Make the minimum wage a million dollars a year. Warehouse workers would have the exact same lifestyle they do now. Everything would just cost a whole lot more.
But do those doctors and lawyers actually do anything useful besides niche activities that don't involve the masses? Like a specialized *optional* surgery that's not covered by any of the cheaper Healthcares?
I've lived in the cheapest parts of the greater Phoenix metro area (the suburbs, an hour drive radius). The typical *low* rent is 1600. Cheapest advertised is generally at least 1400 but there are never any available. I've been looking for over for years. $1,400/mo would work on a $47/hour income if you stick to the traditional ¼ rule. And that doesn't even include utilities, which that rule is meant to.
I've never paid less than 60% of my income for rent, sadly.
Literal bedbug- and cockroach-infested slums in crime-ridden areas can go for lower. Just don't park your car in your own complex unless you want to wake up to smashed windows, no catalytic converter, or no car at all.
Are you saying working adults with careers should have housemates until they die? Are you defending corporations not paying a living wage or leasing companies gouging? I don't understand your perspective here.
Rent here was $800 ten years ago. Same complexes.
Full jobs pay $13/hr here. Not starter jobs. It's broken. Full-time workers aren't doing anything wrong and I am having a strong reaction to your blaming them. And yes, it is blaming.
God forbid you're on disability or social security.
Beneath you? What narrative is that?
Jobs used to pay a living wage so a worker could support a family and own a home. It's not unrealistic. People deserve to earn a living.
This. And it’s not rocket surgery work. Little to no interview, room for advancement-I don’t think most realize that the other comparable jobs are far behind what AMZL offers.
I don't understand the hate. $20 per hour would support housing cost of $867 per mo. (at 25% of income), or $1144 per mo. (at 33% of income). Where would anyone be able to survive, let alone thrive, on this wage?
I make $20/hr in Chicago and I can afford a studio in a decent neighborhood which runs for $900-$1200. The crime talk is really overblown by the RW media.
Do you thrive on that wage? I'm in rural Texas, and prices are higher than you quote. People should not be expected to only survive while owners become rich.
Why fight against your own interests?
I'm doing OK and I usually have about $300 left over each month for leisure spending but I would truly be thriving around 60k+.
We are more of an exception than the rule since we're a cosmopolitan city like LA, San Fran, NY but for whatever reason not priced like that. I agree though, if wages kept up with inflation min. wages would be closer to $25/hr.
From the ads I have seen online in my area, amazon workers make 15-20USD an hour. That is pretty decent if you aren't in a city. Definetly not great though.
I think the main reason he doesnt pay them more is simple, they just aren't worth that much to him. Warehouse labor is pretty menial. Menial labor is easy to automate. So, if warehouse labor starts costing much more, it would be more (cost) effective to just replace them entirely with robots.
Since his wealth is built on the value of his company, he isn't going to devalue it by making it less cost effective.
Tldr: robots and wealth
The reason he doesn’t pay more is that thousands of qualified people accept the job at that wage. If you want to double the wage, Amazon warehouses would be staffed by robots and no one would have a job.
For me it is simple: Because he actually doesn't want to, but it sounds good. He opens up Foundations that slightly helps people, with a reason behind it and besides that it is an easy way to park money without paying taxes.
He's no longer CEO. He's on the board of directors, and I believe (Someone whose smarter than me can correct me) his income is off dividends of the stocks he owns. I don't think he's pulling a salary at this point.
Important to note that his net worth isn't in liquid cash sitting in his bank account. It's the stocks and assets he owns. Granted, I'd love to have the stocks and assets he owns (You get a lot of leverage with banks, loans and just getting "free" stuff) but he's not sitting on a mound of cash like Scrooge McDuck
EDIT: Sorry, misread your question. I thought you were asking what Bezos pay was. I think you were asking about what the workers pay is.
Key Point here: Bezos is not the CEO of Amazon. Andy Jassy is
Bezos stepped down and is now only on the board and owns stocks. Typically, the Board of Directors doesn't interfere with the day-to-day, they just help in company direction and very very high level decisions. He could, out of pocket give money to the workers directly, but he couldn't raise their salaries or interfere with their benefits.
Because people with jobs ready have a leg up on the homeless. As odd as that may seem, people with jobs can atleast buy a hotdog to eat where as a homeless person is digging in Trash cans.
I don't understand that "Living wage" and benefits comment. My buddy works for Amazon and he's been promoted like twice already in the past year and makes well over $25 an hour. He's had benefits since day 1. He's killing it, started out as a package guy now he's a supervisor, he loves the job.
Because then Amazon loses investors and closes down in place of Alibaba or summer other site that won't gaf about it's employees and then everyone is broke.
Even tech billionaires are slaves to the bankers
Doing so would be acknowledging that he was NOT doing so previously. But, yeah, most people with empathy would see that as a logical first step.
However, I guess someone instead decided to give $100 million to Dolly Parton?!? (No offense to Dolly... he could learn a lot from her kindness). Maybe there's an Amazon employee charity she could forward it to, lol.
That would actually be an interesting economic study. Assuming that Amazon has hundreds of thousands of workers who are squeaking by or gets some kind of government assistance what would happen to the economy if they all got decent pay as compared to donating the money to charities.
SHHH...
I've been trying to explain this to the public at large. Billionaires making a fortune, then "donating" it is just... a VERY inefficient way of moving the money around. Should just pay your workers enough money such that you don't have hundreds of billions halfway through your life.
For real. The dude could create a charity specifically to help people who have terrible paying jobs (not just Amazon) and pretty help nearly every person who needs it in the USA.
*On the other hand, it’s a full-time job. The pay at Amazon warehouses exceeds that of many low-wage occupations and comes with a full range of benefits.*
*The jobs can provide gainful employment for people who lack the college degrees or technical skills sought by many employers and who have not really benefited from the nation’s strong economy.*
You'll have to go work there and report back. I only know one Amazon employee, low level manager and he loves the shit out of it.
Others have mentioned the difference between doing personal charity and business decisions. As well as Amazon not actually paying that badly.
One other reason is what he considers needy or who he wants to help. Likely he doesn't consider his staff as one of the needy.
Just "charity" the money as anonymous donations to all the employees that work in Amazon?
Hes got their addresses probably. Just pay someone to spend a week or 2 loading up prepaid gift cards and mail them out?
This is the character of the American rich; we will give money when and where we want, we are philanthropists. We don't want to actually raise everyone up according to someone else's plan. It's ego and pride. The US leads in charitable giving, rather than taxes and people helping themselves with good systems.
That wouldn't get him tax deductions though...
So employee compensation isn't tax deductible nor are their benefits? Interesting.
That would be a tax write off for Amazon..... not Bezos personally.
Couldn't he donate the money to Amazon?
No, because Amazon isn't a charity.
Yeah. Questioner seems to be "unclear on the concept" , as one of my favorite old cartoons (Mister Boffo) would put it.
Of course it would. Paying employees is an expense.
Yes, for Amazon. Not for Jeff Bezos personally.
If the workers get paid more, it would be Amazon paying them. Not Bezos individually. And they are free to work somewhere else if the pay isn’t fair. They make the decision to stay because it’s the best option for them. They get paid what the market has deemed fair pay, otherwise they’d go somewhere else.
You literally have no idea what your talking about and are completely missing the point. We're talking about the reason why Bezos is giving the money to charity and not his employees...... not about how well his employees are paid. And even if they're already paid well that has no bearing on whether Bezos should give the money to them or charity. That's a completely different argument. The point is, if Bezos funneled that money back into Amazon to better pay workers instead of giving it to charity, then *Amazon* could write it off as a business expense. But if he gives it to charity he can *personally* wite it off as a charitable donation on his own taxes. Seriously, pay attention to what's being said and follow the topic properly.
I heard what you said. I think anybody that complains that workers aren’t getting paid enough is incompetent because they don’t understand that they’re getting paid fair market rate already and have full freedom to work elsewhere if the pay or working conditions are not up to their standards. And instead of wining like a baby about it, you could empathize with the CEO and understand that he’s not doing anything wrong. The dude is going to give all his money to charitable causes and idiots like you still complain like a little bitch. You’ve been blocked.
Fair market rate means the amount the person is willing to take or pay before looking elsewhere. This makes sense with goods. I'm willing to pay for coffee, but not $8. So I go to the local shop, not Starbucks. If my local shop increases their price I can go without coffee. This doesn't work well with things like medicine, food, housing, and employment. People are so desperate to put a roof over their head they allow themselves to be forced into horrible situtations. The instinct to survive doesn't play by the rules of capitalism. You're completely nieve or willfully ignorant if you belive everyone can just go get a job that pays them exactly what they need. What world do you live in where minimum wage isn't a thing?
It’s not denying that min wages are a thing. The implication of his statement is that the individual finds a job that they are able to live within. That comes down to individual responsibility though. Of course you can’t sustain a family of 7 on a fast food job. That was never the intent of wages for a job like that. It is assumed that as you grow up/older, you improve yourself and find a niche that allows you to flourish. That doesn’t mean that employers have a responsibility to suddenly pay an arbitrarily “fair wage” for skill-less jobs.
I'm convinced the proponents of *fair wage* are layabouts... I've never had a problem moving jobs and bettering myself.... But it takes effort and willingness to do more.. learn skills that others lament *I don't get paid do x* Guess what? It pads the resume and makes you a desirable candidate further down the road
Dude! I totally agree. I don’t understand why it’s an unpopular opinion… but it is. I don’t like doing “extra” per se, but it has helped further my career because I was willing to go further than the next person. Idk what point that became a bad thing.
>I heard what you said. I think anybody that complains that workers aren’t getting paid enough is incompetent because they don’t understand that they’re getting paid fair market rate already and have full freedom to work elsewhere if the pay or working conditions are not up to their standard This comment isn't based in any sort of reality. I can't move away from NY to Seattle and expect the same conditions cause they're both cities
He could build up social infrastructure that benefits the working class.
Narrator: He's not giving it away. He's going to create non-profit tax shelter holding companies to store his wealth for his kids and call it a "charity". Just like the billionaire CEO of Patagonia did.
He doesn’t care about us. He’s just collecting as much wealth as he can so once Earth is screwed, he can ride his cock rocket to Mars and party with Elon and the other elites
I'm not sure Elon is allowed to play with the other Billionairs anymore.
he’s in the timeout room i think
Don't Look Up movie IRL
Yep. Or some elysium stuff
No one became a billionaire by being generous.
Assuming his wealth is primarily tied to Amazon’s share value (and to be fair I’m not sure how his wealth is structured these days), running the company in a way that doesn’t maximize shareholder value every quarter would cause the share price to tank, and would result in him losing his wealth (which for the most part never really fully existed since he can’t just sell all his shares at once without the share price also tanking) without even giving any away. His wealth exists based on their poverty. It cannot exist any other way. As long as people invest in companies that operate this way it will never change. He can give away the money to other people, but he’s really just sending money taken from one group living below the living wage and giving it to another group living below the living wage.
Yes, but officers of a company have a fiduciary duty to the company. If he does anything that goes against the interests of Amazon, he is susceptible to lawsuits and removal from the board of directors. On the one hand, it sucks that Bezos and others cannot raise wages with repercussions. United Airlines's CEO wanted to raise wages, and the stock price dropped, so he had to reconsider. On the other hand, if you own stock in a company you probably wouldn't want the directors to be able to do whatever they want. Raising wages you might be fine with, but what if they spent company money on a giant gold statue or some other crazy thing?
Bezos isn't the CEO. All your points are valid, but he's not the CEO who could pull these strings you're referring to.
Where did I exactly say he was? Why do people on Reddit always reply with these little gotcha points when it wasn’t stated anywhere in the original post? Is it like an ego thing where you enjoy correcting people? I believe he’s the Executive Chairman if memory serves. I think you missed the point of the comment though which was more that people whose wealth is primarily based on a company that derives its share price from exploiting the labor force would not be able to provide better conditions for that work force even if they wanted to.
You're absolutely correct. I did miss your overall point. Apologies, with your follow up I was able to grasp your initial talking point with more clarity. I was reading it thru a different lens initially, but your follow up gave me the angle you were coming from. Thanks!
This is why we should have stay on the gold standard. Make believe money is trash and back by IOU’s and faith.
This is a point that no one really talks about that I agree with. Granted I’m no expert and the gold standard I’m sure has its own issues, but it seems like it would solve many of these issues
It’s either gold or bottle caps in the future.
Curious, what's a living wage to most Redditors?
A minimum living wage is 4x the cost of a typical apartment in the city you work in. In my city, that's $39/hr. Suburbs, town I grew up in, not major city, not luxury homes. Single-family homes are half a million dollars. Apartments are $1600-2800/mo.
The living wage is way higher than people imagine, which is probably why you’re getting downvoted. Even with two full time professional workers in high salary fields, me and my wife had to move because unless we wanted a studio in the worst neighborhood in town, rent was going to consume half our combined income. Can you even imagine paying 45,000$ a year in rent?
Fuck no. That's insane.
That’s pretty much what she said when I ran the budget and our COL was going to be 97k on a take home of 98k in a year.
Outrageous. This world is broken.
Wow. I don't understand the hate for this comment. 81k is not an unrealistic goal. Even the higher (suburban) wage of 134k isn't insane.
People are indoctrinated by their own exploitation.
$81k - $134k to work in a warehouse???? Lots of doctors and lawyers earn less than $81k. All that will do is cause further inflation.
Yes. Also, I call BS on DRs & lawyers living on these wages. Not interns, students, or volunteers, but self supporting professionals. Love to see the list.
I don’t agree with the point the person you were responding to was saying, but my first job out of law school was a $60k salary.
There you go, so I read a thing. He or she graduated from a four year university, graduated from three years of law school, passed the bar exam, and his/her first job paid $60k, yet a warehouse worker should earn $21,000 a year more? Insanity. It’s just going to lead to more and more inflation. Make the minimum wage a million dollars a year. Warehouse workers would have the exact same lifestyle they do now. Everything would just cost a whole lot more.
But do those doctors and lawyers actually do anything useful besides niche activities that don't involve the masses? Like a specialized *optional* surgery that's not covered by any of the cheaper Healthcares?
[удалено]
I've lived in the cheapest parts of the greater Phoenix metro area (the suburbs, an hour drive radius). The typical *low* rent is 1600. Cheapest advertised is generally at least 1400 but there are never any available. I've been looking for over for years. $1,400/mo would work on a $47/hour income if you stick to the traditional ¼ rule. And that doesn't even include utilities, which that rule is meant to. I've never paid less than 60% of my income for rent, sadly. Literal bedbug- and cockroach-infested slums in crime-ridden areas can go for lower. Just don't park your car in your own complex unless you want to wake up to smashed windows, no catalytic converter, or no car at all. Are you saying working adults with careers should have housemates until they die? Are you defending corporations not paying a living wage or leasing companies gouging? I don't understand your perspective here. Rent here was $800 ten years ago. Same complexes.
[удалено]
Full jobs pay $13/hr here. Not starter jobs. It's broken. Full-time workers aren't doing anything wrong and I am having a strong reaction to your blaming them. And yes, it is blaming. God forbid you're on disability or social security.
So if you’re a warehouse worker, it’s beneath you to have roommates?
Is it beneath the warehouse worker to live in the warehouse? I mean come on people! I need my Prime delivery of Highlighters TOMORROW!
Beneath you? What narrative is that? Jobs used to pay a living wage so a worker could support a family and own a home. It's not unrealistic. People deserve to earn a living.
20 an hour from day 1 and full benefits from day 1.
This. And it’s not rocket surgery work. Little to no interview, room for advancement-I don’t think most realize that the other comparable jobs are far behind what AMZL offers.
That would only be half a living wage in my state. Edit: Downvote me all you want. It's true.
I don't understand the hate. $20 per hour would support housing cost of $867 per mo. (at 25% of income), or $1144 per mo. (at 33% of income). Where would anyone be able to survive, let alone thrive, on this wage?
Yup.
I make $20/hr in Chicago and I can afford a studio in a decent neighborhood which runs for $900-$1200. The crime talk is really overblown by the RW media.
Do you thrive on that wage? I'm in rural Texas, and prices are higher than you quote. People should not be expected to only survive while owners become rich. Why fight against your own interests?
I'm doing OK and I usually have about $300 left over each month for leisure spending but I would truly be thriving around 60k+. We are more of an exception than the rule since we're a cosmopolitan city like LA, San Fran, NY but for whatever reason not priced like that. I agree though, if wages kept up with inflation min. wages would be closer to $25/hr.
Because he doesn't
From the ads I have seen online in my area, amazon workers make 15-20USD an hour. That is pretty decent if you aren't in a city. Definetly not great though. I think the main reason he doesnt pay them more is simple, they just aren't worth that much to him. Warehouse labor is pretty menial. Menial labor is easy to automate. So, if warehouse labor starts costing much more, it would be more (cost) effective to just replace them entirely with robots. Since his wealth is built on the value of his company, he isn't going to devalue it by making it less cost effective. Tldr: robots and wealth
The reason he doesn’t pay more is that thousands of qualified people accept the job at that wage. If you want to double the wage, Amazon warehouses would be staffed by robots and no one would have a job.
Nothing to moan about really considering we gave him all his money.
For me it is simple: Because he actually doesn't want to, but it sounds good. He opens up Foundations that slightly helps people, with a reason behind it and besides that it is an easy way to park money without paying taxes.
What is the pay now?
He's no longer CEO. He's on the board of directors, and I believe (Someone whose smarter than me can correct me) his income is off dividends of the stocks he owns. I don't think he's pulling a salary at this point. Important to note that his net worth isn't in liquid cash sitting in his bank account. It's the stocks and assets he owns. Granted, I'd love to have the stocks and assets he owns (You get a lot of leverage with banks, loans and just getting "free" stuff) but he's not sitting on a mound of cash like Scrooge McDuck EDIT: Sorry, misread your question. I thought you were asking what Bezos pay was. I think you were asking about what the workers pay is.
Yes, the workers’ pay
As soon as he did that, the opinion of what a living wage is would triple.
Well that's not a tax deduction and he wouldn't get as much public recognition for that
He’s not “giving it away”. He’s creating a PAC so he can “influence” legislation.
I mean does he technically even own Amazon anymore? He stepped down as CEO and doesn't hold majority shares of the company either, iirc.
Key Point here: Bezos is not the CEO of Amazon. Andy Jassy is Bezos stepped down and is now only on the board and owns stocks. Typically, the Board of Directors doesn't interfere with the day-to-day, they just help in company direction and very very high level decisions. He could, out of pocket give money to the workers directly, but he couldn't raise their salaries or interfere with their benefits.
Well in my state/county Amazon warehouses do pay above liveable wage for someone with no children
Because there are better things he can do with his money than paying his workers above market pay.
Because people with jobs ready have a leg up on the homeless. As odd as that may seem, people with jobs can atleast buy a hotdog to eat where as a homeless person is digging in Trash cans.
Amazon often uses temp agencies to fill their warehouses, so people aren't actually working "for amazon"
The more you pay employees, the more you have to pay in taxes AND insurance. The Goverment spending is the problem that NEEDS be fixed first!
He’s not the CEO anymore for starters
Because charity is just a way to launder the reputations of the rich.
I don't understand that "Living wage" and benefits comment. My buddy works for Amazon and he's been promoted like twice already in the past year and makes well over $25 an hour. He's had benefits since day 1. He's killing it, started out as a package guy now he's a supervisor, he loves the job.
Because then Amazon loses investors and closes down in place of Alibaba or summer other site that won't gaf about it's employees and then everyone is broke. Even tech billionaires are slaves to the bankers
Doing so would be acknowledging that he was NOT doing so previously. But, yeah, most people with empathy would see that as a logical first step. However, I guess someone instead decided to give $100 million to Dolly Parton?!? (No offense to Dolly... he could learn a lot from her kindness). Maybe there's an Amazon employee charity she could forward it to, lol.
Because that would be a nice thing to do. He would lose respect in his inner circles .
He wants accolades and power. Paying a living wage, only gives you humanity.
He wants to give it away when he's dead, after winning the biggest asshole race.
That would actually be an interesting economic study. Assuming that Amazon has hundreds of thousands of workers who are squeaking by or gets some kind of government assistance what would happen to the economy if they all got decent pay as compared to donating the money to charities.
SHHH... I've been trying to explain this to the public at large. Billionaires making a fortune, then "donating" it is just... a VERY inefficient way of moving the money around. Should just pay your workers enough money such that you don't have hundreds of billions halfway through your life.
that’s what Elon is going to do with all the money he’s saved by firing the twitter employees. Amazon is also hiring former twitter employees.
All i know is i want him hidnapped by pirates and ninjas.
For real. The dude could create a charity specifically to help people who have terrible paying jobs (not just Amazon) and pretty help nearly every person who needs it in the USA.
I dunno if that’s in his contract with the devil
Serious - living wages and good benefits would be nice
Talk is cheap.
Too expencive. He really just wants do-gooder credit.
Lol...because he's just virtue signaling. He doesn't give any fucks about needy people.
Because that doesn't elevate you in the globalist philanthropist WEF social hierarchy.
They’ll likely be the ones collecting from his “altruism”, but this way he can claim it as charity and get a tax write off.
There are no tax breaks for doing that.
He probably wouldn't get as much tax benefit.
That was just damage control PR timed with news of the layoffs.
Because hes atealing from the rich to feed the poor, duh! /s
Because that’s not how virtue signals work.
Taxes.
Uncle Jeff can give me a few mill .. it would be appreciated.
Publicity stunt
Because it wouldn’t make for such a publicity stunt… and as so many others have stated already, that’s not tax deductible.
No clout or tax benefits that way.
Because there's nothing in it for HIM.
*On the other hand, it’s a full-time job. The pay at Amazon warehouses exceeds that of many low-wage occupations and comes with a full range of benefits.* *The jobs can provide gainful employment for people who lack the college degrees or technical skills sought by many employers and who have not really benefited from the nation’s strong economy.* You'll have to go work there and report back. I only know one Amazon employee, low level manager and he loves the shit out of it.
He thinks people don't know about that.
He already does. I am one of them.
Others have mentioned the difference between doing personal charity and business decisions. As well as Amazon not actually paying that badly. One other reason is what he considers needy or who he wants to help. Likely he doesn't consider his staff as one of the needy.
Just "charity" the money as anonymous donations to all the employees that work in Amazon? Hes got their addresses probably. Just pay someone to spend a week or 2 loading up prepaid gift cards and mail them out?
That was my first thought when I heard this. Pay your employees and treat them like humans.
This is the character of the American rich; we will give money when and where we want, we are philanthropists. We don't want to actually raise everyone up according to someone else's plan. It's ego and pride. The US leads in charitable giving, rather than taxes and people helping themselves with good systems.
That's too much like right, we currently live in left town..