Amazon HQ2 and other news
Comments
-
This is what is obscene.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/22/heres-how-much-ceo-pay-has-increased-compared-to-yours-over-the-years.html
09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
36 Reasons Why You Should Thank a Union
Weekends
All Breaks at Work, including your Lunch Breaks
Paid Vacation
FMLA
Sick Leave
Social Security
Minimum Wage
Civil Rights Act/Title VII (Prohibits Employer Discrimination)
8-Hour Work Day
Overtime Pay
Child Labor Laws
Occupational Safety & Health Act (OSHA)
40 Hour Work Week
Worker's Compensation (Worker's Comp)
Unemployment Insurance
Pensions
Workplace Safety Standards and Regulations
Employer Health Care Insurance
Collective Bargaining Rights for Employees
Wrongful Termination Laws
Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
Whistleblower Protection Laws
Employee Polygraph Protect Act (Prohibits Employer from using a lie detector test on an employee)
Veteran's Employment and Training Services (VETS)
Compensation increases and Evaluations (Raises)
Sexual Harassment Laws
Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
Holiday Pay
Employer Dental, Life, and Vision Insurance
Privacy Rights
Pregnancy and Parental Leave
Military Leave
The Right to Strike
Public Education for Children
Equal Pay Acts of 1963 & 2011 (Requires employers pay men and women equally for the same amount of work)
Laws Ending Sweatshops in the United States0 -
You're right, that does summarize it nicely!bootlegger10 said:benjs said:
It's not obscene, it's capitalism. Say today I'm a small business owner (~$20K salary because I'm a startup), I do my research on working wages for a warehouse worker, and decide on $15 an hour targeting low end of the wage spectrum for that role (aka pricing the worth of the labour based on the market). A lucrative year goes by, and I commit to a $90K salary. Another, and I'm at $300K (24x my Y1 income). I keep up with cost of living wages for my worker, and I still feel that that I'm looking to hire someone in that role from the low end of the wage spectrum. When and why does my obligation change from being fair relative to the market, to being 'fair relative to my income' (which in itself seems arbitrary)?Halifax2TheMax said:
That’s knowing how to talk like locals, nuance. Staten Island or Long Island, does it matter? Amazon is fiercely anti union. Drivers, teamsters, and warehouse workers. The thing is, they don’t have to be. They could pay $30 an hour to the picker, build and pay for their HQ and not miss a dinner, a yacht, a fifth home, or anything. It’s obscene.mrussel1 said:
Wasn't it Staten Island?Halifax2TheMax said:It also seems like the discussion of non-interference with a potential unionization effort of the Long Island warehouse/distribution center was an issue. It wasn’t all about the HQ but rather all of the ancillary issues, as well as the arrogance exhibited by Amazon executives in that they hired no locals to negotiate in NYC.
Kind of reminds me of being in Seattle in 2013 for Pearl Jam and how the locals had so much swagger because of their super bowl victory, how cocky they all were. Well, we all know what happened the following year ( Malcolm Butler). Guess Bezos and Amazon ought to learn how to “play the game?” Or be petulant like Team Trump Treason. And guess what? LIC will be fine.
Hired no locals to negotiate?? What is that... greasing palms? Why would they need "consultants"? That's corrupt NY politics.
This is expecting a lot of ethical behaviour from corporations, in addition to asking CEOs to raise costs without tying that back to an eventual bottom line increase - ignoring fiduciary responsibilities to shareholders to not tank the stock prices. It's the responsibility of the government to form laws to produce fair and equitable for its citizens. It's the responsibility of the corporations to adhere to those laws - not to be their own ethical watchdogs.You could just have easily said, "It's not obscene, it's greed". Bono (who is no fan of taxes, full disclosure) sang "What you thought was freedom was just greed". We get that public companies must build value for their shareholders. No one is arguing against that. But perhaps those shareholders have a higher estate tax when they pass away (hence your point on changing laws).
Perhaps the option is that the government does not get it but your favorite non-profit organization or foundation. Perhaps to keep the family business or family farm in the family there is a requirement when a generation passes that the portion of the value that would go to the government is transferred to a foundation so the company does not need to sell its assets to pay the estate tax but the foundation can use dividends to do some good for the community.
If the government can somehow execute on that vision you outlined, I'd be all for it. I like the idea of a government applying it across the board because a business doesn't have to accept a competitive disadvantage compared to its peers to be good. I'm sure there are tons of challenges to work through to make that work but it's probably possible to find a way.'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 10 -
Are CEO's 271 times more valuable than the average employee? Do they work 271 times harder, put in 271 times more hours? Maybe they are 271 times smarter than the average employee? Maybe they contribute 271 times more to society?Halifax2TheMax said:0 -
dignin said:
Are CEO's 271 times more valuable than the average employee? Do they work 271 times harder, put in 271 times more hours? Maybe they are 271 times smarter than the average employee? Maybe they contribute 271 times more to society?Halifax2TheMax said:
If they think that compensation is appropriate then they are 271 times greedier than the average employee.0 -
Then this is what should be shown to the politicians that this is the future normalization we're looking to achieve! The onus is on them, not corporations. From a business perspective, I feel companies that behave the right (and righteous) way and give a great employee and customer experience, will always feel better and do better, but I think we'll be disappointed if we expect that of businesses across the board. If we as customers are more withholding and refuse to work with businesses behaving unethically and often bear higher costs elsewhere, maybe that's how we can threaten that power and force that accountability though.Halifax2TheMax said:
What is obscene is Amazon and Bezos begging for $3BB in handouts.benjs said:
It's not obscene, it's capitalism. Say today I'm a small business owner (~$20K salary because I'm a startup), I do my research on working wages for a warehouse worker, and decide on $15 an hour targeting low end of the wage spectrum for that role (aka pricing the worth of the labour based on the market). A lucrative year goes by, and I commit to a $90K salary. Another, and I'm at $300K (24x my Y1 income). I keep up with cost of living wages for my worker, and I still feel that that I'm looking to hire someone in that role from the low end of the wage spectrum. When and why does my obligation change from being fair relative to the market, to being 'fair relative to my income' (which in itself seems arbitrary)?Halifax2TheMax said:
That’s knowing how to talk like locals, nuance. Staten Island or Long Island, does it matter? Amazon is fiercely anti union. Drivers, teamsters, and warehouse workers. The thing is, they don’t have to be. They could pay $30 an hour to the picker, build and pay for their HQ and not miss a dinner, a yacht, a fifth home, or anything. It’s obscene.mrussel1 said:
Wasn't it Staten Island?Halifax2TheMax said:It also seems like the discussion of non-interference with a potential unionization effort of the Long Island warehouse/distribution center was an issue. It wasn’t all about the HQ but rather all of the ancillary issues, as well as the arrogance exhibited by Amazon executives in that they hired no locals to negotiate in NYC.
Kind of reminds me of being in Seattle in 2013 for Pearl Jam and how the locals had so much swagger because of their super bowl victory, how cocky they all were. Well, we all know what happened the following year ( Malcolm Butler). Guess Bezos and Amazon ought to learn how to “play the game?” Or be petulant like Team Trump Treason. And guess what? LIC will be fine.
Hired no locals to negotiate?? What is that... greasing palms? Why would they need "consultants"? That's corrupt NY politics.
This is expecting a lot of ethical behaviour from corporations, in addition to asking CEOs to raise costs without tying that back to an eventual bottom line increase - ignoring fiduciary responsibilities to shareholders to not tank the stock prices. It's the responsibility of the government to form laws to produce fair and equitable for its citizens. It's the responsibility of the corporations to adhere to those laws - not to be their own ethical watchdogs.
I think you mentioned your family having 5 brick and mortar stores, right? Now let’s say your family decides to open a sixth store in an economically depressed part of town but the area needs some infrastructure improvements and you don’t quite have the financing for what it takes. I’d be supportive of your family receiving a similarly ratioed tax incentive/break as Amazon. But once you’ve reached the wealth attainment like amazon and Bezos, you’re on your own.
I’d also like to think as your family income increases, the pay of your employees would increase beyond the rate of inflation, or in the form of healthcare/retirement/education benefits or bonuses. Business schools need to reintroduce ethics and morals into the curriculum. The disparity in pay between workers and owners or ceos is what is obscene.
One example: caterpillar won a six year wage freeze from their union despite $37k in profits per employee. They have 55k employees who average $50k per year. That’s obscene.
Edit: The point is, Amazon and the city both had their sense of value from this. Both sides were willing to make concessions in return for certain benefits. One side decided they'd lose the battle (taxes) to win the war (economic growth) with their offer and I don't see what the problem with that is. And what negotiation in life doesn't have power dynamics involved? Isn't that always a component?Post edited by benjs on'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 10 -
From 30Xs to 271Xs. Now imagine the economic impact if that 30Xs only went to 50Xs, wouldn’t that have a larger societal benefit or “trickle down” if some of that ceo pay went to workers?dignin said:
Are CEO's 271 times more valuable than the average employee? Do they work 271 times harder, put in 271 times more hours? Maybe they are 271 times smarter than the average employee? Maybe they contribute 271 times more to society?Halifax2TheMax said:09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
If Amazon wants, we will take them here in Ontario...no problem. We could use the 25 000 jobs, plus spinoff jobs and decades of taxes that these jobs bring.Give Peas A Chance…0
-
I personally don't think that multiplier makes sense, but I think someone has the right to arrive at it if they choose.dignin said:
Are CEO's 271 times more valuable than the average employee? Do they work 271 times harder, put in 271 times more hours? Maybe they are 271 times smarter than the average employee? Maybe they contribute 271 times more to society?Halifax2TheMax said:
How many times more does a CEO multiply the wealth of a business over time than the average employee? I know that's an un-answerable question, but a CEO's worth to a company isn't as quantifiable as 'hardness' of work, hours contributed, etc. Some of a CEO's responsibilities including synthesizing vast amounts of knowledge and helping activate peoples' energies within the business, distilling complicated realities and arriving at simple strategies. Those aren't commoditized skills.'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 10 -
Agreed, but this isn't even the calculus that business owners use, whether private or a CEO. They don't say.. okay, how much do I need to be comfortable and then I'll distribute the rest to employees. That's not market economics nor is it human nature. They say "what is FMV for a person doing this job, in this market, and what do I need to pay on top of that to ensure retention?" That's how much they pay. In other words, if FMV for a statistician is 100k, I'm not going to pay 150k just because I can. I'm going to be 110k. Now if this person becomes management and adds unique value, then that person will be able to negotiate for more. But no one pays, nor have they ever paid, "what is possible". They pay what the work is worth.benjs said:
I personally don't think that multiplier makes sense, but I think someone has the right to arrive at it if they choose.dignin said:
Are CEO's 271 times more valuable than the average employee? Do they work 271 times harder, put in 271 times more hours? Maybe they are 271 times smarter than the average employee? Maybe they contribute 271 times more to society?Halifax2TheMax said:
How many times more does a CEO multiply the wealth of a business over time than the average employee? I know that's an un-answerable question, but a CEO's worth to a company isn't as quantifiable as 'hardness' of work, hours contributed, etc. Some of a CEO's responsibilities including synthesizing vast amounts of knowledge and helping activate peoples' energies within the business, distilling complicated realities and arriving at simple strategies. Those aren't commoditized skills.0 -
Exactly. And I don't think a person's obligated to pay above or under market value because of who they are.mrussel1 said:
Agreed, but this isn't even the calculus that business owners use, whether private or a CEO. They don't say.. okay, how much do I need to be comfortable and then I'll distribute the rest to employees. That's not market economics nor is it human nature. They say "what is FMV for a person doing this job, in this market, and what do I need to pay on top of that to ensure retention?" That's how much they pay. In other words, if FMV for a statistician is 100k, I'm not going to pay 150k just because I can. I'm going to be 110k. Now if this person becomes management and adds unique value, then that person will be able to negotiate for more. But no one pays, nor have they ever paid, "what is possible". They pay what the work is worth.benjs said:
I personally don't think that multiplier makes sense, but I think someone has the right to arrive at it if they choose.dignin said:
Are CEO's 271 times more valuable than the average employee? Do they work 271 times harder, put in 271 times more hours? Maybe they are 271 times smarter than the average employee? Maybe they contribute 271 times more to society?Halifax2TheMax said:
How many times more does a CEO multiply the wealth of a business over time than the average employee? I know that's an un-answerable question, but a CEO's worth to a company isn't as quantifiable as 'hardness' of work, hours contributed, etc. Some of a CEO's responsibilities including synthesizing vast amounts of knowledge and helping activate peoples' energies within the business, distilling complicated realities and arriving at simple strategies. Those aren't commoditized skills.'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 10 -
mrussel1 said:
The problem isn't billionaires, the problem is the tax code that renders useless the theory of progressive taxes. Now billionaires certainly influence the tax code, so I'm not arguing that. But I don't have an issue with Bezos or Gates being fabulously wealthy because they had fabulous ideas and executed on them. That's a lot harder than people think.bootlegger10 said:cincybearcat said:
I think a nice balance of business and government “checks” are appropriate. Certainly a need for oversight.bootlegger10 said:cincybearcat said:
Of course. Business are to blame for everything and only politicians can save us!mrussel1 said:
You think Seattle's homeless issue is due to Amazon's proximity?bootlegger10 said:The home of Amazon has a huge homeless problem. A rising tide raises all ships my ass...
If you like no soul for your town and trendy condos then Amazon is your gig.
What do you think the US would look like without government intervention? I would say you'd have polluted rivers, smog, vast monopolies, event greater wealth disparity, etc.... On the flip side, with total government power you have Russia and China which is not good either.
What I was saying is that Amazon's presence provides jobs for that city, but that city like San Francisco is losing its soul (chain stores and restaurants, rising property values that force existing residents out, etc...). It is a trade off and that is all I was saying.
But with Seattle's homeless problem, how did it go when they tried to increase taxes to pay for it? Yeah, Amazon whined like a little baby and said they would take their ball and go home. Amazon only takes. Green Disease.
Right. The wealth disparity is just despicable right now. There is clearly a problem. Yeah, Bezos had a great idea, but should he be compensated billions for it? I am turning into a liberal as I age because the inequity of all of this is absurd. Where the line is drawn I can't say.
130 billion is beyond fabulously wealthy... its fucking absurd, I don't give AF if he sold books online or not
0 -
#TeamBootlegger10 on this one0
-
mrussel1 said:
If you take the financial incentive out of innovation, why would one choose to innovate? Why not be lazy and wait for the handout? You know communism has been tried a few times, without success.CM189191 said:
That's one person. Now do the top 10%.pjl44 said:If you liquidated Bezos's entire net worth and redistributed it evenly amongst Americans, each person would get $300. Distribute it amongst everyone in the world and it's about $15. There's a problem with scale when people get all red-assed over billionaires.
The power and influence that comes with wealth, though, can certainly be a problem. If we want to solve that, it's about decentralizing power and influence so there's little to be bought. Just using the force of the state to rob someone has no impact on the actual problem.
You're confusing net worth with income, so the whole point is moot anyhow.
Counterpoint: redistributing income has a direct positive impact on homelessness, hunger, poverty community health and infant mortality rates.
No one is removing the financial incentive to innovate. We're not nationalising industry and removing profit. This isn't communism ooga booga
By ensuring society is able to provide fundamental physiological needs, you are freeing up resources for people to innovate.
Sure, some people are lazy and will wait for the handout. But how is that different than now? These people will always be a burden on society, this is a different way of dealing with that problem.
0 -
Maslow pyramid always comes in handy.CM189191 said:mrussel1 said:
If you take the financial incentive out of innovation, why would one choose to innovate? Why not be lazy and wait for the handout? You know communism has been tried a few times, without success.CM189191 said:
That's one person. Now do the top 10%.pjl44 said:If you liquidated Bezos's entire net worth and redistributed it evenly amongst Americans, each person would get $300. Distribute it amongst everyone in the world and it's about $15. There's a problem with scale when people get all red-assed over billionaires.
The power and influence that comes with wealth, though, can certainly be a problem. If we want to solve that, it's about decentralizing power and influence so there's little to be bought. Just using the force of the state to rob someone has no impact on the actual problem.
You're confusing net worth with income, so the whole point is moot anyhow.
Counterpoint: redistributing income has a direct positive impact on homelessness, hunger, poverty community health and infant mortality rates.
No one is removing the financial incentive to innovate. We're not nationalising industry and removing profit. This isn't communism ooga booga
By ensuring society is able to provide fundamental physiological needs, you are freeing up resources for people to innovate.
Sure, some people are lazy and will wait for the handout. But how is that different than now? These people will always be a burden on society, this is a different way of dealing with that problem.
Progressive taxes is the way to go, not some arbitrary cap on wealth.0 -
What if trump signs an executive order to break up Amazon and the stock tanks to a third. Considering the vast majority of his wealth is in stocks, not liquid, he'd be just a normal billionaire. Would you celebrate Trump's EO? Does it matter to you that almost all of his wealth is on paper and dependent on share price?my2hands said:mrussel1 said:
The problem isn't billionaires, the problem is the tax code that renders useless the theory of progressive taxes. Now billionaires certainly influence the tax code, so I'm not arguing that. But I don't have an issue with Bezos or Gates being fabulously wealthy because they had fabulous ideas and executed on them. That's a lot harder than people think.bootlegger10 said:cincybearcat said:
I think a nice balance of business and government “checks” are appropriate. Certainly a need for oversight.bootlegger10 said:cincybearcat said:
Of course. Business are to blame for everything and only politicians can save us!mrussel1 said:
You think Seattle's homeless issue is due to Amazon's proximity?bootlegger10 said:The home of Amazon has a huge homeless problem. A rising tide raises all ships my ass...
If you like no soul for your town and trendy condos then Amazon is your gig.
What do you think the US would look like without government intervention? I would say you'd have polluted rivers, smog, vast monopolies, event greater wealth disparity, etc.... On the flip side, with total government power you have Russia and China which is not good either.
What I was saying is that Amazon's presence provides jobs for that city, but that city like San Francisco is losing its soul (chain stores and restaurants, rising property values that force existing residents out, etc...). It is a trade off and that is all I was saying.
But with Seattle's homeless problem, how did it go when they tried to increase taxes to pay for it? Yeah, Amazon whined like a little baby and said they would take their ball and go home. Amazon only takes. Green Disease.
Right. The wealth disparity is just despicable right now. There is clearly a problem. Yeah, Bezos had a great idea, but should he be compensated billions for it? I am turning into a liberal as I age because the inequity of all of this is absurd. Where the line is drawn I can't say.
130 billion is beyond fabulously wealthy... its fucking absurd, I don't give AF if he sold books online or not0 -
cincybearcat said:
These were mostly white collar jobs. Exactly what union did you expect?Lerxst1992 said:Meltdown99 said:
I'm not sure where the union fits in here. Why would white colour workers want a union? It now seems that the people who were opposed are just grasping at air now.cincybearcat said:
These NY politicians and apparent labor unions are channeling their inner Trumps.Meltdown99 said:
I thought these were white collar jobs. Was Amazon going to violate NY labour laws? Other than government, not many white colour jobs are union jobs? Are they?
Then why did Amazon insist on no union?
If you believe Amazon was serious about coming here telling the strongest union city in the country no unions I got a bridge to sell you about 5 miles from where their alleged HQ2 was supposed to go.
Sale! Enjoy the bridge!
You know there's more to this story that the national MSM is not picking up on?
The day before Amazon cancelled their NYC HQ their executives had a meeting.
Wanna take a guess with who?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/14/business/economy/amazon-union-cuomo.html
0 -
I read this the other day. It's about Staten Island, an existing site. I don't understand your implication. Plus the article throws cold water on the notion that Amazon wants to "ban" unions. Rather, they wouldn't commit go being neutral. And why should they? Are the union leaders vowing to remain neutral as well?Lerxst1992 said:cincybearcat said:
These were mostly white collar jobs. Exactly what union did you expect?Lerxst1992 said:Meltdown99 said:
I'm not sure where the union fits in here. Why would white colour workers want a union? It now seems that the people who were opposed are just grasping at air now.cincybearcat said:
These NY politicians and apparent labor unions are channeling their inner Trumps.Meltdown99 said:
I thought these were white collar jobs. Was Amazon going to violate NY labour laws? Other than government, not many white colour jobs are union jobs? Are they?
Then why did Amazon insist on no union?
If you believe Amazon was serious about coming here telling the strongest union city in the country no unions I got a bridge to sell you about 5 miles from where their alleged HQ2 was supposed to go.
Sale! Enjoy the bridge!
You know there's more to this story that the national MSM is not picking up on?
The day before Amazon cancelled their NYC HQ their executives had a meeting.
Wanna take a guess with who?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/14/business/economy/amazon-union-cuomo.html0 -
I think the implication is pretty obvious.mrussel1 said:
I read this the other day. It's about Staten Island, an existing site. I don't understand your implication. Plus the article throws cold water on the notion that Amazon wants to "ban" unions. Rather, they wouldn't commit go being neutral. And why should they? Are the union leaders vowing to remain neutral as well?Lerxst1992 said:cincybearcat said:
These were mostly white collar jobs. Exactly what union did you expect?Lerxst1992 said:Meltdown99 said:
I'm not sure where the union fits in here. Why would white colour workers want a union? It now seems that the people who were opposed are just grasping at air now.cincybearcat said:
These NY politicians and apparent labor unions are channeling their inner Trumps.Meltdown99 said:
I thought these were white collar jobs. Was Amazon going to violate NY labour laws? Other than government, not many white colour jobs are union jobs? Are they?
Then why did Amazon insist on no union?
If you believe Amazon was serious about coming here telling the strongest union city in the country no unions I got a bridge to sell you about 5 miles from where their alleged HQ2 was supposed to go.
Sale! Enjoy the bridge!
You know there's more to this story that the national MSM is not picking up on?
The day before Amazon cancelled their NYC HQ their executives had a meeting.
Wanna take a guess with who?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/14/business/economy/amazon-union-cuomo.html0 -
Interesting. So the unions we’re trying to use the new deal to get something at a different location?dignin said:
I think the implication is pretty obvious.mrussel1 said:
I read this the other day. It's about Staten Island, an existing site. I don't understand your implication. Plus the article throws cold water on the notion that Amazon wants to "ban" unions. Rather, they wouldn't commit go being neutral. And why should they? Are the union leaders vowing to remain neutral as well?Lerxst1992 said:cincybearcat said:
These were mostly white collar jobs. Exactly what union did you expect?Lerxst1992 said:Meltdown99 said:
I'm not sure where the union fits in here. Why would white colour workers want a union? It now seems that the people who were opposed are just grasping at air now.cincybearcat said:
These NY politicians and apparent labor unions are channeling their inner Trumps.Meltdown99 said:
I thought these were white collar jobs. Was Amazon going to violate NY labour laws? Other than government, not many white colour jobs are union jobs? Are they?
Then why did Amazon insist on no union?
If you believe Amazon was serious about coming here telling the strongest union city in the country no unions I got a bridge to sell you about 5 miles from where their alleged HQ2 was supposed to go.
Sale! Enjoy the bridge!
You know there's more to this story that the national MSM is not picking up on?
The day before Amazon cancelled their NYC HQ their executives had a meeting.
Wanna take a guess with who?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/14/business/economy/amazon-union-cuomo.htmlhippiemom = goodness0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help