zlacker

[return to "Amazon raises overtime pay for warehouse workers"]
1. bdefor+T7[view] [source] 2020-03-21 17:24:59
>>hhs+(OP)
Glad to see this from Amazon, although I see it heading off the inevitable. Wouldn't this be the most powerful moment for employees in 'essential' services to engage in worker strikes? Is there any legal precedent for what governments would do?

With all this war rhetoric thrown around, it seems a reasonable jump to declare essential workers troops on the frontline deserving of what we give other troops (free health care, pension, heavily subsidized secondary education)

◧◩
2. seneca+Ib[view] [source] 2020-03-21 17:53:54
>>bdefor+T7
Striking in order to exploit a global disaster for personal gain would be a great way for organized labor to turn many people against them for a life time. It may work in the short term, but even that is debatable. Many people would gladly see the national guard break a strike if it's between them and basic essentials. Long term, the optics of that kind of move are so damning that it would likely be a net-loss.
◧◩◪
3. Reedx+In[view] [source] 2020-03-21 19:12:30
>>seneca+Ib
There are already enough people unemployed just over the past week that would fill those jobs in a heartbeat...

I'm not sure it's understood yet what kind of devastation is unfolding with small businesses, which make up ~50% of the workforce.

◧◩◪◨
4. Frost1+tt[view] [source] 2020-03-21 19:53:01
>>Reedx+In
This is going to have long term lasting effects that further suppress labor rates and further concentrate wealth/capital in the US. It's accelerating a problem we already had.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. kortil+3z[view] [source] 2020-03-21 20:29:57
>>Frost1+tt
40% of the wealth in the stock market was wiped out over the last few weeks which drastically impacts the upper middle class and rich the most. Negative returns on capital do not promote wealth inequality.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. asdff+oA[view] [source] 2020-03-21 20:38:33
>>kortil+3z
Any good financial manager would have went cash or established a short position. Even if you held, as long as you don't realize your losses you will be right back to pre crash levels in 2-3 years, just like in 2008 or any other recession.

The wealthy have the capital to take advantage of the stock market, but are also insulated from the effects of downturns due to diversified financial investments and cash on hand. Recessions are also when the wealthy expand their property holdings.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. simonh+tJ[view] [source] 2020-03-21 21:41:37
>>asdff+oA
Real people lost a lot of real money. Bear in mind most of the wealth of most well off people is held in shares. It's just not possible that all shareholders all sold before the crash. A lot of people lost a lot of money.

The problem is not so much that some rich people are now somewhat less rich. Boo hoo. Let's rephrase that another way though.

A lot of people that previously had the wealth and assets to invest in new businesses, grow existing businesses, create jobs and fund the development of new technology now don't. These are the primary ways wealth is actually used, and now there is less of it around to do those things. So a lot less of those things are going to happen now. If you either work for a company that pays you, or have customers that buy your stuff, this is a bad thing to happen. Companies will have less to pay you with, and customers will have less money to buy stuff with because the same applies to them too.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. chiefa+MO[view] [source] 2020-03-21 22:26:13
>>simonh+tJ
Or employee ownership is allowed to expand as a means to grow a biz. True, that won't fill all the gaps. But it's certainly an option worthy of more attention.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. simonh+lM3[view] [source] 2020-03-23 08:33:12
>>chiefa+MO
How does employee ownership through stock giveaways generate capital for investment?
[go to top]