Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Amazon Fires Back at AOC: She's 'Just Wrong' to Say We Pay 'Starvation Wages' [View all]LonePirate
(14,366 posts)110. And stock prices are impacted by business costs (including labor costs) which impact profitability.
Granted, Amazon was not a profitable company for many years; but its stock price soared due to the anticipation that it would be. Holding down labor costs is a huge (but not the only) driver in reaching profitability.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
123 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Amazon Fires Back at AOC: She's 'Just Wrong' to Say We Pay 'Starvation Wages' [View all]
DonViejo
Jun 2019
OP
Yeah! It is not starvation wages, it is "decide whether to pay rent or starve" wages.
Thomas Hurt
Jun 2019
#1
A minimum wage law is not a duty or an impost or an excise, those are all taxes...
Thomas Hurt
Jun 2019
#65
you left out the actual clause containing the enumerated power, number 3, in Sec. 8
Celerity
Jun 2019
#77
Don't blame Amazon only...Walmart, among other companies are this same way, ...
SWBTATTReg
Jun 2019
#4
The key is average. A $3 million per year executive and a lot of people paid much less.
Blue_true
Jun 2019
#42
It was only 25,000 (the other 25K were to be in Virginia) and only half were in tech. It also
Celerity
Jun 2019
#48
You know that democrats don't leave people to burn, even when people are stupid.
Blue_true
Jun 2019
#123
Yes, $15/hr ($30K/yr) is dirt wages. $7.25/hr min wage is subterranean wages.
LonePirate
Jun 2019
#28
How come you have not been posting against the people calling for $15 a hour?
former9thward
Jun 2019
#30
$15 per hour for a childless, single person where I live is a pretty good wage.
Blue_true
Jun 2019
#43
And stock prices are impacted by business costs (including labor costs) which impact profitability.
LonePirate
Jun 2019
#110
She does not know. None of the people mouthing the $15 per hour standard know.
Blue_true
Jun 2019
#47
Yeah, and who let on that they plan to automate that facility in 2 years, after getting tax breaks?
TheBlackAdder
Jun 2019
#10
I would assume those who don't agree with Amazon's wage structure do not do business with them
still_one
Jun 2019
#11
If you are a single parent, 15 USD an hour, pre-tax, in NYC, is a joke AND, as Amazon's
Celerity
Jun 2019
#19
Yes, and not working for Amazon because because they "don't pay enough" is about Amazon
Alea
Jun 2019
#26
If you want to defend them paying less than half of the US average for similar work, knock
Celerity
Jun 2019
#29
How does making the MW a decent level (enough to support a family) allow single people to price
Celerity
Jun 2019
#88
that is a huge leap, and I would love to see some datasets to back that up now
Celerity
Jun 2019
#90
Then we need to stop with the outrage about employees being on public assistance
Recursion
Jun 2019
#112
revise it again to show that Amazon is going to pay less than HALF of the national average for that
Celerity
Jun 2019
#38
How many people who criticize Amazon are willing to stop ordering their inexpensive goods
StarfishSaver
Jun 2019
#57
I didn't mention "working class people." Why would you suggest I'm "blaming" them
StarfishSaver
Jun 2019
#68
Do you seriously think the reason they don't make people full time is lack of business?
melman
Jun 2019
#86
you mean that wages would rise automatically, independently of market forces.
kennetha
Jun 2019
#105