3 ms·

Back in my day, Walmart was the great evil retailer, threatening to put everyone out of business. Many towns had their retail core destroyed by having a Walmart

Back in my day, Walmart was the great evil retailer, threatening to put everyone out of business. Many towns had their retail core destroyed by having a Walmart open, defeat all the small businesses, then close. Are we supposed to penalize Amazon for foresight?

manigandham 8y ago
I didn't say anything about penalizing them. The point is that it's a shrewd business move planned out years ago. It wasn't done out of purely good intentions and may not have the desired effect, and many people seem to miss that.
- ntsplnkv2 8y ago
  Who cares? If it benefits more people then what difference does it make as to why it was done?
  - manigandham 8y ago
    Because it might not actually benefit more people? The posted article is about warehouse workers losing bonuses and stock, which would negatively affect anyone already over $15/hour (which happens to be quite a few who have multi-year tenures). This change has long-term repercussions in total current and future jobs offered, within Amazon, its competitors, and the wider labor market with govt influence. Is is not worth caring about such wide-reaching externalities of a $1 trillion company?
    - ntsplnkv2 8y ago
      That isn't what I said - I said if it does benefit more people. If it doesn't, then my statement doesn't follow. People always act like the sky is falling. Minimum wages were higher in terms of actual value many years ago and the world didn't end then and it won't end now.
  - davemp 8y ago
    Does it really benefit more people though? Walmart and Amazon are prime examples of centralizing forces that slurp up wealth into urban areas and increase wealth inequality. Sure minimum wage goes up, but at the cost of more money leaving circulation in rural economies. It’s a non-trivial topic.
    - ntsplnkv2 8y ago
      Rural economies are too small to matter, there are more people who stand to benefit in cities and generate more economic prosperity in cities. Why should I care about a dying small town in the rust belt?

manigandham 8y ago

I didn't say anything about penalizing them. The point is that it's a shrewd business move planned out years ago. It wasn't done out of purely good intentions and may not have the desired effect, and many people seem to miss that.

ntsplnkv2 8y ago
Who cares? If it benefits more people then what difference does it make as to why it was done?
- manigandham 8y ago
  Because it might not actually benefit more people? The posted article is about warehouse workers losing bonuses and stock, which would negatively affect anyone already over $15/hour (which happens to be quite a few who have multi-year tenures). This change has long-term repercussions in total current and future jobs offered, within Amazon, its competitors, and the wider labor market with govt influence. Is is not worth caring about such wide-reaching externalities of a $1 trillion company?
  - ntsplnkv2 8y ago
    That isn't what I said - I said if it does benefit more people. If it doesn't, then my statement doesn't follow. People always act like the sky is falling. Minimum wages were higher in terms of actual value many years ago and the world didn't end then and it won't end now.
- davemp 8y ago
  Does it really benefit more people though? Walmart and Amazon are prime examples of centralizing forces that slurp up wealth into urban areas and increase wealth inequality. Sure minimum wage goes up, but at the cost of more money leaving circulation in rural economies. It’s a non-trivial topic.
  - ntsplnkv2 8y ago
    Rural economies are too small to matter, there are more people who stand to benefit in cities and generate more economic prosperity in cities. Why should I care about a dying small town in the rust belt?