Amazon puts profits ahead of Seattle homeless

[guillaumeb]

From the article:

Four members of the City Council recently proposed a modest "head tax" of $500 per year on each employee of the 3 percent top businesses--those that make over $20 million a year--in Seattle. This would provide $75 million for homeless services and "deeply affordable" housing.
Amazon could pay its share of the tax--$20 million--for the next 80 years just out of its first quarter 2018 profit, and Bezos could personally pay it for 650 years out of his net worth of $130 billion.
But instead of supporting this modest levy, Amazon suspended construction on two buildings in downtown Seattle, jeopardizing 7,000 construction jobs, to defeat the tax. As of May 12, Bezos worked out a deal with Mayor Jennie Durkan to cut the tax in half and reportedly planned to re-start construction.

To read more of how one modern corporate pirate plunders the country and his fellow citizens:

https://socialistworker.org/2018/05/14/amazon-puts-profits-ahead-of-seattle-homeless

[uppityperson]

1. Why do they keep calling it a "modest"? How is it modest?

[guillaumeb]

3. It is a modest levy, based on the massive profitability of Amazon

and large corporations in general.

Should the ultra rich and their corporate entities pay their fair share in taxes?

[uppityperson]

5. Again the word "modest". How was it decided that being charged $500/employee is "modest"?

Last edited Wed May 16, 2018, 09:10 PM - Edit history (2)

Ultra rich and corporate entities should pay more taxes, yes.
I have 2 problems with this though. Charging a fee per employee is one, vs just raising taxes on income or profit. The other one is the use of the word "modest" which, when challenged or asked to be defined, gets the answer "it is modest".

[guillaumeb]

6. I would suggest that a corporation such as Amazon

is massively profitable, and well able to pay this small tax. Amazon is like Walmart in that the company avoids paying taxes, thus raising the tax burden for the bottom 90%. Amazon externalizes its costs onto the average taxpayer.

[uppityperson]

7. This time you use "small" vs "modest" and have not given any indication as to what or how

it means beyond "they can afford it". All of which are subjective words and phrases. How was it decided that being charged $500/employee is "modest"? What amount is not modest?

Congratulations on being able to read my previous reply as my autocorrect has gotten very weird. I corrected it for more sense. I have pixies on my autocorrect.

I agree they need to pay more taxes, but don't like a fee of $500/employee. Base it on profits.

I'm sure you know there are other companies in Seattle protesting this tax by employee, not just Amazon.

[guillaumeb]

8. Taxes on the 1% are far too low.

Making taxes on the 99% too high.

If it were based on profits, creative accounting would cause the profits to be hidden or offshored.

[Blue_true]

11. Does Washington State have an income tax?

If not, impose a 3% income tax and use the revenue only for schools and low income housing. I have to admit that I am cold to a tax per headcount. Do smallish companies get exempted? How about the man or woman who has 3 employees and is running a business that is not yet profitable?

[uppityperson]

13. We've no income tax, but a good sized sales tax. This is for companies making $20 million/ yr.

[Blue_true]

16. Sorry, a selective tax like that will get blown out of the water in Court. nt

[RainCaster]

2. The word "homeless" does not appear in Amazon's...

Corporate papers or their fillings. They have a responsibility to their shareholders. The morons on the Seattle city council do not seem to understand that.

[guillaumeb]

4. The government levies taxes.

So you feel that the rich owe nothing to others?

And given that approximately 84% of common shares are held by the top 1%, the shareholders are essentially the 1%.

[Blue_true]

14. How about raising the city sales tax on all items except food and personal care products?

If you make those exemptions, the poor won't be hurt and the tax increase would raise millions per month.

[msongs]

9. is everyone in seattle paying this? or is it just corporations being socked for it? nt

[guillaumeb]

10. It was in the article.

Why would taxpayers with no employees pay a tax on employees?

[uppityperson]

12. Here... 3% top businesses, making over $20 million a yr in Seattle. Business making less are exempt

"head tax" of $500 per year on each employee of the 3 percent top businesses--those that make over $20 million a year--in Seattle

Only corporations making more than $20 million a yr.

[Blue_true]

15. Seems like that would fail in court.

An increase in the sales tax with some items exempt would not.