3 ms·

This line of argument is so completely unhinged. Bezos paid roughly $1B in taxes in 2018, and Amazon warehouses pay well above the minimum wage. I understand p

by cactus2093 5y ago

This line of argument is so completely unhinged. Bezos paid roughly $1B in taxes in 2018, and Amazon warehouses pay well above the minimum wage. I understand progressives wanting to raise taxes and raise minimum wage, but why in the world would you blame someone personally for just paying the going rate? That's what we all do for the taxes and service providers we pay.

asciimov 5y ago
Bezos makes an easy identifiable target, much easier to call out Bezos than any of the Walton's of Walmart. The real issue is that major corporations aren't paying their fair share of the costs of running this country. From underpaying workers (who have to use public assistance) to getting sweetheart deals to build in your area. Thanks to amazon I have more heavy delivery trucks running up and down my street. Meaning that street wears out faster, meaning my tax money is gonna have to repave it.
- bpt3 5y ago
  > major corporations aren't paying their fair share Define fair share. > From underpaying workers (who have to use public assistance) I'll never understand this line of reasoning. Would you rather have people who can't earn enough to support themselves earn $0 and rely entirely on public assistance? That's what will happen if you require employers to pay people more than the value they generate. > Thanks to amazon I have more heavy delivery trucks running up and down my street. Meaning that street wears out faster, meaning my tax money is gonna have to repave it. Presumably Amazon delivery trucks are using gasoline, and fuel/sales taxes should cover some of those repairs. Also, presumably those trucks are using those roads because members of the community are asking Amazon to deliver stuff to them, so I don't see why the community shouldn't bear some of the burden of repairing the roads as well.
  - asciimov 5y ago
    > Define fair share. Fair share, the cost to run the country. For most people that's 33% of what we make a year. For megacorps that can be as much as nothing. > I'll never understand this line of reasoning. While I understand how some people don't want to give individuals handouts, I don't understand how those same people are ok giving large corporations handouts. Take Walmart. If the poverty line where the local government steps up to help people out is $12.25 an hour (for 40 hours worked a week), and Walmart only pays out $7.25 per hour (for 40 hours), the it's on the local government to help those people out by giving them that extra $5 an hour. Well that means that walmart didn't pay the real rate for local wages, and the local tax payers got stuck with the bill. > Would you rather have people who can't earn enough to support themselves earn $0 and rely entirely on public assistance? Maybe, at least I'm subsidizing individuals and not the shareholders of Walmart. If we free up that person from the burden of working their dead end Walmart job, they would have an opportunity to improve themselves. Sure, many wont, but some will. I don't see how giving that same handout to Walmart helps any individual, those who own Walmart already have plenty. > Presumably Amazon delivery trucks are using gasoline, and fuel/sales taxes should cover some of those repairs. We could debate how fair those gas taxes are, and if they pay for themselves. I don't mind paying for the right to use the road, but many roads weren't built to handle the increased delivery traffic. That delivery traffic is a new burden that Bezos created and got rich off of. Surely the company that gained the most from using the public roads deserves to be billed for their upkeep.
    - bpt3 5y ago
      > Fair share, the cost to run the country. For most people that's 33% of what we make a year. For megacorps that can be as much as nothing. That's your guess at what people pay now, not what their fair share is. Also, most people in the US don't have an effective tax rate anywhere close to 33%. > While I understand how some people don't want to give individuals handouts, I don't understand how those same people are ok giving large corporations handouts. I have no issue at all with individual handouts and think we should eliminate almost all corporate subsidies. The assistance given to people who aren't employable at a wage that allows them to support themselves are individual handouts, not corporate ones. > Take Walmart. If the poverty line where the local government steps up to help people out is $12.25 an hour (for 40 hours worked a week), and Walmart only pays out $7.25 per hour (for 40 hours), the it's on the local government to help those people out by giving them that extra $5 an hour. Well that means that walmart didn't pay the real rate for local wages, and the local tax payers got stuck with the bill. The poverty line (or whatever other metric is used to set the threshold for public assistance) is set based on the cost of living, and doesn't set the rate for wages. > I don't mind paying for the right to use the road, but many roads weren't built to handle the increased delivery traffic. That delivery traffic is a new burden that Bezos created and got rich off of. Surely the company that gained the most from using the public roads deserves to be billed for their upkeep. Jeff Bezos isn't sending trucks out on the roads unilaterally. His company is satisfying your area's demand for convenient shopping (that seems limitless). It's just as easy to claim you and your neighbors created the traffic, which is why everyone (including Amazon) should pay for road maintenance. Also, I have no idea how you determined that amazon has benefited the most from public roads, but that seems like a questionable claim.
- cactus2093 5y ago
  I mean the road argument is really reaching here. Roads are never subsidized fairly. My neighbor doesn’t pay any extra for their huge pickup truck that generates a lot more wear on the roads day to day than my bicycle. I’d rather subsidize the cost of delivery trucks than people’s massive personal trucks, at least I can order things and get some benefit from delivery trucks.
- cma 5y ago
  One commercial van comes by and delivers packages to 20 residents vs 20 people drive 2-4ton vehicles to the store and back. Due to scaling laws the delivery truck maybe does similar road damage, but you've saved fuel and lots of valuable time, better for the climate, and less contribution to traffic. Are passenger busses ok? They are in a pretty similar place.

asciimov 5y ago

Bezos makes an easy identifiable target, much easier to call out Bezos than any of the Walton's of Walmart. The real issue is that major corporations aren't paying their fair share of the costs of running this country. From underpaying workers (who have to use public assistance) to getting sweetheart deals to build in your area. Thanks to amazon I have more heavy delivery trucks running up and down my street. Meaning that street wears out faster, meaning my tax money is gonna have to repave it.

bpt3 5y ago
> major corporations aren't paying their fair share Define fair share. > From underpaying workers (who have to use public assistance) I'll never understand this line of reasoning. Would you rather have people who can't earn enough to support themselves earn $0 and rely entirely on public assistance? That's what will happen if you require employers to pay people more than the value they generate. > Thanks to amazon I have more heavy delivery trucks running up and down my street. Meaning that street wears out faster, meaning my tax money is gonna have to repave it. Presumably Amazon delivery trucks are using gasoline, and fuel/sales taxes should cover some of those repairs. Also, presumably those trucks are using those roads because members of the community are asking Amazon to deliver stuff to them, so I don't see why the community shouldn't bear some of the burden of repairing the roads as well.
- asciimov 5y ago
  > Define fair share. Fair share, the cost to run the country. For most people that's 33% of what we make a year. For megacorps that can be as much as nothing. > I'll never understand this line of reasoning. While I understand how some people don't want to give individuals handouts, I don't understand how those same people are ok giving large corporations handouts. Take Walmart. If the poverty line where the local government steps up to help people out is $12.25 an hour (for 40 hours worked a week), and Walmart only pays out $7.25 per hour (for 40 hours), the it's on the local government to help those people out by giving them that extra $5 an hour. Well that means that walmart didn't pay the real rate for local wages, and the local tax payers got stuck with the bill. > Would you rather have people who can't earn enough to support themselves earn $0 and rely entirely on public assistance? Maybe, at least I'm subsidizing individuals and not the shareholders of Walmart. If we free up that person from the burden of working their dead end Walmart job, they would have an opportunity to improve themselves. Sure, many wont, but some will. I don't see how giving that same handout to Walmart helps any individual, those who own Walmart already have plenty. > Presumably Amazon delivery trucks are using gasoline, and fuel/sales taxes should cover some of those repairs. We could debate how fair those gas taxes are, and if they pay for themselves. I don't mind paying for the right to use the road, but many roads weren't built to handle the increased delivery traffic. That delivery traffic is a new burden that Bezos created and got rich off of. Surely the company that gained the most from using the public roads deserves to be billed for their upkeep.
  - bpt3 5y ago
    > Fair share, the cost to run the country. For most people that's 33% of what we make a year. For megacorps that can be as much as nothing. That's your guess at what people pay now, not what their fair share is. Also, most people in the US don't have an effective tax rate anywhere close to 33%. > While I understand how some people don't want to give individuals handouts, I don't understand how those same people are ok giving large corporations handouts. I have no issue at all with individual handouts and think we should eliminate almost all corporate subsidies. The assistance given to people who aren't employable at a wage that allows them to support themselves are individual handouts, not corporate ones. > Take Walmart. If the poverty line where the local government steps up to help people out is $12.25 an hour (for 40 hours worked a week), and Walmart only pays out $7.25 per hour (for 40 hours), the it's on the local government to help those people out by giving them that extra $5 an hour. Well that means that walmart didn't pay the real rate for local wages, and the local tax payers got stuck with the bill. The poverty line (or whatever other metric is used to set the threshold for public assistance) is set based on the cost of living, and doesn't set the rate for wages. > I don't mind paying for the right to use the road, but many roads weren't built to handle the increased delivery traffic. That delivery traffic is a new burden that Bezos created and got rich off of. Surely the company that gained the most from using the public roads deserves to be billed for their upkeep. Jeff Bezos isn't sending trucks out on the roads unilaterally. His company is satisfying your area's demand for convenient shopping (that seems limitless). It's just as easy to claim you and your neighbors created the traffic, which is why everyone (including Amazon) should pay for road maintenance. Also, I have no idea how you determined that amazon has benefited the most from public roads, but that seems like a questionable claim.
cactus2093 5y ago
I mean the road argument is really reaching here. Roads are never subsidized fairly. My neighbor doesn’t pay any extra for their huge pickup truck that generates a lot more wear on the roads day to day than my bicycle. I’d rather subsidize the cost of delivery trucks than people’s massive personal trucks, at least I can order things and get some benefit from delivery trucks.
cma 5y ago
One commercial van comes by and delivers packages to 20 residents vs 20 people drive 2-4ton vehicles to the store and back. Due to scaling laws the delivery truck maybe does similar road damage, but you've saved fuel and lots of valuable time, better for the climate, and less contribution to traffic. Are passenger busses ok? They are in a pretty similar place.