I just bought $250 worth of about a dozen Christmas presents from Amazon. Assuming $20 per item, I'd like to know how much goes to wages (I'm guessing less tha

I just bought $250 worth of about a dozen Christmas presents from Amazon. Assuming $20 per item, I'd like to know how much goes to wages (I'm guessing less than $1). If it may not significantly raise prices to double wages, I'd like to know why companies are so reluctant to do so. It seems illogical when customers would generally pay more to know they aren't ripping someone off. Short of that, I recommend that we stop pointing the finger at these large multinational corporations. They are incentivized at every level to skirt the law as close as possible to maximize profits. Historically the only thing that ever changed that was pressure from the demand side (unions, consumer protection programs, lawsuits, legislation, etc etc). Off the top of my head, a fairly straightforward way to effect change might be to get every worker signed up in a time-wage union. Pick a target wage for every employee and have them go home at the end of the day a few hours early by however much their wage is short. Women earning 75% of men would leave at 3:00 instead of 5:00. For every firing, send one or more employees who have a lot of savings or are thinking of changing jobs home with them as leverage. The core of the issue is that currently labor is undervalued against capital which is self-evidently incorrect since time is priceless but we can always print more money. I would even argue that as we approach full automation, labor has been devalued to such a degree that it no longer makes sense to measure it against the inherent worth of a person's life. The inevitable conclusion is that at some point labor will not have enough value to support a minimum quality of life and we’ll move to a non-labor form of compensation. We already do it in various forms for the bottom half of earners and it’s only a matter of time before that fraction becomes the majority.