• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Taxes, Subsidies, Amazon, and Walmart

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
Below is the text of an email I got from Bernie Sanders' organization. The summary is that many of our country's wealthiest people run companies that don't pay their employees living wages. So taxpayers monies are used to support these underpaid workers. In effect, taxpayers are subsidizing Jeff Bezo's wealth. So Sanders is proposing legislation that would tax corporations who don't pay their workers a living wage.

While I don't support all of Sanders' ideas, this one seems like an idea that's headed in the right direction. While the details might be flawed, I think the premise is sound.

== Email from the Bernie Sanders organization:

How does it happen, icehorse, that the wealthiest man in the history of the world, Jeff Bezos, is also one of the largest welfare recipients in America?

It is quite simple, really.

Jeff Bezos and his company, Amazon, make huge profits by paying their employees wages that are so inadequate that many of them need public assistance just to get by. Today in America, thousands of Amazon workers are forced to rely on food stamps, Medicaid and public housing because they can't survive on the wages they receive. Meanwhile, Jeff Bezos is now worth $158 billion, and his wealth increases by $260 million - every single day. How absurd is that?

And who pays for the public assistance subsidizing Mr. Bezos’ wealth? You do. The middle class subsidizes the wealthiest person in the world, while his workers struggle to put food on the table. That is what the rigged economy is all about. And in my view, that has got to end.

That is why I introduced a piece of legislation that aims to end corporate welfare by establishing a 100 percent tax on corporations with 500 or more employees equal to the amount of federal benefits received by their low-wage workers.

So, if a worker at Amazon receives $1,000 in food stamps, Amazon would be taxed $1,000 to cover that cost.

The bill gives large, profitable employers a choice: pay your workers a living wage or pay for the public assistance they need to get by. It’s common sense. Now I want you to send a message to my colleagues that it has your support, as well:

Add your name as an original Citizen Co-Sponsor of my Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies (BEZOS) Act and send a message that taxpayers should not have to expend huge sums of money subsidizing profitable corporations owned by some of the wealthiest people in America.

Make no mistake about it, Jeff Bezos is not alone in this regard. Some of the most profitable businesses in America sustain their wealth through this kind of corporate welfare.

According to one report, in 2014, Walmart employees received at least $6.2 billion in public aid every year. Walmart is owned by the Walton family, the wealthiest family in the country.

More than half of employees in the fast food industry rely on some kind of public assistance.

McDonald’s workers are actually encouraged to sign up for assistance, and the co-owner of Burger King has a net worth of $25 billion, while his workers receive an estimated $356 million in subsidies each year.

According to a study from the University of California, low wages cost American taxpayers $150 billion every single year.

So let me be as clear as I can be: The government has a moral responsibility to make certain that every man, woman and child in this country has a decent standard of living and that we provide for the vulnerable in this country — our kids, the sick, the elderly and the disabled. It is not acceptable, however, that the American taxpayer is being asked to subsidize the wealth of some of the wealthiest people in the history of the world.

And it must end.

Please add your name as an original Citizen Co-Sponsor of my Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies (BEZOS) Act and send a message that taxpayers should not have to expend huge sums of money subsidizing profitable corporations owned by some of the wealthiest people in America.

The economic and political systems of this country are stacked against ordinary Americans and in the favor of the most powerful among us.

The rich get richer and use their wealth to buy elections — just recently, it was announced that Jeff Bezos made a $10 million donation to a Super PAC that in one place is running ads supporting a candidate who will “work with President Trump to fight for Florida’s conservative values.”

For the rest of us, who don’t have the wealth it takes to buy the legislative outcomes they want, it’s survival of the fittest.

That is not democracy. That is oligarchy. Let's work together to end it.

In solidarity,

Bernie Sanders
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Corporations are immune to taxation. There is not been a single Corporation in history that has ever paid taxes.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
The bill misses the mark. Amazon is around 1.2 billion in subsidies, exemptions and tax breaks in the US alone. This bill can easily be absorbed by Amazon by taxes or wage increases. Treating the symptom not the disease...
 

suncowiam

Well-Known Member
Amazon is rich and prosperous for many other reasons besides maintaining a bottom line. Name one person that doesnt use any of the many services provided by Amazon. The value it brings to the American public is in part due to the type of services and how it has streamlined it's systems and processes.

Frankly, no one is forced to work for Amazon so by CHOOSING to work for Amazon then you accept it's systems and processes. Don't blame anyone else but yourself if you accepted a wage that is substandard to the cost of your living.

The government cannot place blame on private entities that have not done anything illegal. Doing so is just a subjective assertion by one politician who didn't highlight how Amazon in other ways actually strengthen and boost the American economy. He has his points but let's be clear, he's not speaking the whole truth.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
The bill misses the mark. Amazon is around 1.2 billion in subsidies, exemptions and tax breaks in the US alone. This bill can easily be absorbed by Amazon by taxes or wage increases. Treating the symptom not the disease...

Agreed that this is treating a symptom. But I'd say that the perfect should not be the enemy of the good.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
Amazon is rich and prosperous for many other reasons besides maintaining a bottom line. Name one person that doesnt use any of the many services provided by Amazon. The value it brings to the American public is in part due to the type of services and how it has streamlined it's systems and processes.

Frankly, no one is forced to work for Amazon so by CHOOSING to work for Amazon then you accept it's systems and processes. Don't blame anyone else but yourself if you accepted a wage that is substandard to the cost of your living.

The government cannot place blame on private entities that have not done anything illegal. Doing so is just a subjective assertion by one politician who didn't highlight how Amazon in other ways actually strengthen and boost the American economy. He has his points but let's be clear, he's not speaking the whole truth.

I don't think the proposed tax is "placing the blame". I think it simply recognizes that these corporations are using "the commons" and ought to pay for the privilege.

As for "accepting a wage". That argument assumes that folks have employment options. Many do not.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
So, if a worker at Amazon receives $1,000 in food stamps, Amazon would be taxed $1,000 to cover that cost.
...
According to one report, in 2014, Walmart employees received at least $6.2 billion in public aid every year.
...
McDonald’s workers are actually encouraged to sign up for assistance

Those companies are getting in effect a gigantic government subsidy to avoid paying a living wage to their employees. I agree with Sanders' basic thesis that it's time for that to change.

As to people having a choice to work there or not: that shows ignorance of what the work world is like these days and the terrible choices people have when it comes to jobs.

It's useful to look to history here. For example, Adam Smith who is often cited by the right:

Servants, labourers and workmen of different kinds, make up the far greater part of every great political society. But what improves the circumstances of the greater part can never be regarded as an inconvenience to the whole. No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable. It is but equity, besides, that they who feed, clothe, and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labour as to be themselves tolerably well fed, clothed and lodged. — Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations

Living wage - Wikipedia


That written, I'm open to other solutions that achieve the same end. What I don't accept is the system that throws the poor under the bus and on top of it wants to destroy government support for the "least of these".
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
The bill misses the mark. Amazon is around 1.2 billion in subsidies, exemptions and tax breaks in the US alone. This bill can easily be absorbed by Amazon by taxes or wage increases. Treating the symptom not the disease...
Now if it had been a proposal for maximum wage, that would go for treating the disease.

It was likely the only thing I really liked about Bernie Sanders. Apparently he dropped that like a hot potato after supporting and championing the proposal.
 

BSM1

What? Me worry?
Below is the text of an email I got from Bernie Sanders' organization. The summary is that many of our country's wealthiest people run companies that don't pay their employees living wages. So taxpayers monies are used to support these underpaid workers. In effect, taxpayers are subsidizing Jeff Bezo's wealth. So Sanders is proposing legislation that would tax corporations who don't pay their workers a living wage.

While I don't support all of Sanders' ideas, this one seems like an idea that's headed in the right direction. While the details might be flawed, I think the premise is sound.

== Email from the Bernie Sanders organization:

How does it happen, icehorse, that the wealthiest man in the history of the world, Jeff Bezos, is also one of the largest welfare recipients in America?

It is quite simple, really.

Jeff Bezos and his company, Amazon, make huge profits by paying their employees wages that are so inadequate that many of them need public assistance just to get by. Today in America, thousands of Amazon workers are forced to rely on food stamps, Medicaid and public housing because they can't survive on the wages they receive. Meanwhile, Jeff Bezos is now worth $158 billion, and his wealth increases by $260 million - every single day. How absurd is that?

And who pays for the public assistance subsidizing Mr. Bezos’ wealth? You do. The middle class subsidizes the wealthiest person in the world, while his workers struggle to put food on the table. That is what the rigged economy is all about. And in my view, that has got to end.

That is why I introduced a piece of legislation that aims to end corporate welfare by establishing a 100 percent tax on corporations with 500 or more employees equal to the amount of federal benefits received by their low-wage workers.

So, if a worker at Amazon receives $1,000 in food stamps, Amazon would be taxed $1,000 to cover that cost.

The bill gives large, profitable employers a choice: pay your workers a living wage or pay for the public assistance they need to get by. It’s common sense. Now I want you to send a message to my colleagues that it has your support, as well:

Add your name as an original Citizen Co-Sponsor of my Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies (BEZOS) Act and send a message that taxpayers should not have to expend huge sums of money subsidizing profitable corporations owned by some of the wealthiest people in America.

Make no mistake about it, Jeff Bezos is not alone in this regard. Some of the most profitable businesses in America sustain their wealth through this kind of corporate welfare.

According to one report, in 2014, Walmart employees received at least $6.2 billion in public aid every year. Walmart is owned by the Walton family, the wealthiest family in the country.

More than half of employees in the fast food industry rely on some kind of public assistance.

McDonald’s workers are actually encouraged to sign up for assistance, and the co-owner of Burger King has a net worth of $25 billion, while his workers receive an estimated $356 million in subsidies each year.

According to a study from the University of California, low wages cost American taxpayers $150 billion every single year.

So let me be as clear as I can be: The government has a moral responsibility to make certain that every man, woman and child in this country has a decent standard of living and that we provide for the vulnerable in this country — our kids, the sick, the elderly and the disabled. It is not acceptable, however, that the American taxpayer is being asked to subsidize the wealth of some of the wealthiest people in the history of the world.

And it must end.

Please add your name as an original Citizen Co-Sponsor of my Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies (BEZOS) Act and send a message that taxpayers should not have to expend huge sums of money subsidizing profitable corporations owned by some of the wealthiest people in America.

The economic and political systems of this country are stacked against ordinary Americans and in the favor of the most powerful among us.

The rich get richer and use their wealth to buy elections — just recently, it was announced that Jeff Bezos made a $10 million donation to a Super PAC that in one place is running ads supporting a candidate who will “work with President Trump to fight for Florida’s conservative values.”

For the rest of us, who don’t have the wealth it takes to buy the legislative outcomes they want, it’s survival of the fittest.

That is not democracy. That is oligarchy. Let's work together to end it.

In solidarity,

Bernie Sanders

How about some proof to back up Ol' Bernies claims? Also, as someone just mentioned, corporations do not pay taxes--period. Also, you start placing these arbitrary and restrictive taxes on corporations they could (and probably would) go offshore or simply shut down; then no one would work there (yeah, good thinking). This, as Margaret Thatcher said, is the problem with Socialism. It works until you run out of someone else's money.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Agreed that this is treating a symptom. But I'd say that the perfect should not be the enemy of the good.

Do not confuse lack of support for the bill with rejection of the sentiment behind it. I just find the bill is easy to avoid or at least minimize by benefit income cliffs. Often these cliffs are not aligned with burdens on the ground which vary locally, state and region, etc.. A slight wage increase can push an individual outside the range for a benefit but cost less than the cost of said benefit. It's weak legislation.

I did get a laugh as it is targeting as primary examples two companies which talk out of both sides of their mouth about these issues.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Below is the text of an email I got from Bernie Sanders' organization. The summary is that many of our country's wealthiest people run companies that don't pay their employees living wages. So taxpayers monies are used to support these underpaid workers. In effect, taxpayers are subsidizing Jeff Bezo's wealth. So Sanders is proposing legislation that would tax corporations who don't pay their workers a living wage.

While I don't support all of Sanders' ideas, this one seems like an idea that's headed in the right direction. While the details might be flawed, I think the premise is sound.

== Email from the Bernie Sanders organization:

How does it happen, icehorse, that the wealthiest man in the history of the world, Jeff Bezos, is also one of the largest welfare recipients in America?

It is quite simple, really.

Jeff Bezos and his company, Amazon, make huge profits by paying their employees wages that are so inadequate that many of them need public assistance just to get by. Today in America, thousands of Amazon workers are forced to rely on food stamps, Medicaid and public housing because they can't survive on the wages they receive. Meanwhile, Jeff Bezos is now worth $158 billion, and his wealth increases by $260 million - every single day. How absurd is that?

And who pays for the public assistance subsidizing Mr. Bezos’ wealth? You do. The middle class subsidizes the wealthiest person in the world, while his workers struggle to put food on the table. That is what the rigged economy is all about. And in my view, that has got to end.

That is why I introduced a piece of legislation that aims to end corporate welfare by establishing a 100 percent tax on corporations with 500 or more employees equal to the amount of federal benefits received by their low-wage workers.

So, if a worker at Amazon receives $1,000 in food stamps, Amazon would be taxed $1,000 to cover that cost.

The bill gives large, profitable employers a choice: pay your workers a living wage or pay for the public assistance they need to get by. It’s common sense. Now I want you to send a message to my colleagues that it has your support, as well:

Add your name as an original Citizen Co-Sponsor of my Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies (BEZOS) Act and send a message that taxpayers should not have to expend huge sums of money subsidizing profitable corporations owned by some of the wealthiest people in America.

Make no mistake about it, Jeff Bezos is not alone in this regard. Some of the most profitable businesses in America sustain their wealth through this kind of corporate welfare.

According to one report, in 2014, Walmart employees received at least $6.2 billion in public aid every year. Walmart is owned by the Walton family, the wealthiest family in the country.

More than half of employees in the fast food industry rely on some kind of public assistance.

McDonald’s workers are actually encouraged to sign up for assistance, and the co-owner of Burger King has a net worth of $25 billion, while his workers receive an estimated $356 million in subsidies each year.

According to a study from the University of California, low wages cost American taxpayers $150 billion every single year.

So let me be as clear as I can be: The government has a moral responsibility to make certain that every man, woman and child in this country has a decent standard of living and that we provide for the vulnerable in this country — our kids, the sick, the elderly and the disabled. It is not acceptable, however, that the American taxpayer is being asked to subsidize the wealth of some of the wealthiest people in the history of the world.

And it must end.

Please add your name as an original Citizen Co-Sponsor of my Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies (BEZOS) Act and send a message that taxpayers should not have to expend huge sums of money subsidizing profitable corporations owned by some of the wealthiest people in America.

The economic and political systems of this country are stacked against ordinary Americans and in the favor of the most powerful among us.

The rich get richer and use their wealth to buy elections — just recently, it was announced that Jeff Bezos made a $10 million donation to a Super PAC that in one place is running ads supporting a candidate who will “work with President Trump to fight for Florida’s conservative values.”

For the rest of us, who don’t have the wealth it takes to buy the legislative outcomes they want, it’s survival of the fittest.

That is not democracy. That is oligarchy. Let's work together to end it.

In solidarity,

Bernie Sanders

The best way to stick it to people like Bezos is to impose punitive wage/price/rent controls on the private businesses of America. No sympathy for the lifestyles of the rich and cranky.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Those companies are getting in effect a gigantic government subsidy to avoid paying a living wage to their employees. I agree with Sanders' basic thesis that it's time for that to change.

As to people having a choice to work there or not: that shows ignorance of what the work world is like these days and the terrible choices people have when it comes to jobs.

It's useful to look to history here. For example, Adam Smith who is often cited by the right:

Servants, labourers and workmen of different kinds, make up the far greater part of every great political society. But what improves the circumstances of the greater part can never be regarded as an inconvenience to the whole. No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable. It is but equity, besides, that they who feed, clothe, and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labour as to be themselves tolerably well fed, clothed and lodged. — Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations

Living wage - Wikipedia


That written, I'm open to other solutions that achieve the same end. What I don't accept is the system that throws the poor under the bus and on top of it wants to destroy government support for the "least of these".
That would require a change as to how companies are funded.

The main focus and top tier of importance for any corporation will lie with it's investors over the consumer each and every time. It's the way modern corporations work and think now.

Employees are not people whatsoever they are classified as being units of labor
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
It's the same deal in other countries. A big Ayn Rand-quoting banker received a quarter million euros yearly in "welfare". It's always interesting exercise in observing hypocrisy how the people who call welfare-recipients losers get government checks multiple times the people they disdain.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I personally know guys whose businesses are corporations.
They pay income taxes.
You might want to correct Forbes....
What America's Biggest Companies Pay In Taxes
It's clearly the customers that really pay the taxes that a business or individual incurs. That's why corporations never had to pay taxes themselves. It just factors into the end value of the product or service.

Taxes go up , so do prices. Ever higher and higher.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
It's clearly the customers that really pay the taxes that a business or individual incurs. That's why corporations never had to pay taxes themselves. It just factors into the end value of the product or service.

Taxes go up , so do prices. Ever higher and higher.
Of course taxes paid come from revenue.
That's true for all of business, not just corporations.
Rent I receive goes towards taxes I pay.

By your rationale, employees don't pay any taxes...only the employer does.
I don't find this a useful perspective.
Tis better to look at who is liable, ie, if taxes owed are unpaid,
the one to pay is the one the government pursues.
 

suncowiam

Well-Known Member
I don't think the proposed tax is "placing the blame". I think it simply recognizes that these corporations are using "the commons" and ought to pay for the privilege.

As for "accepting a wage". That argument assumes that folks have employment options. Many do not.

Employment options can only be enabled if the employee can offer skills that can be differentiated from the common public.

Bernie specifically asserts responsibilities on these companies which is the same as placing blame. What he didn't assert was the responsibilities of his own government to create jobs.

Let us be clear: Creating jobs doesn't start by forcing companies to pay "livable wages." For government, It starts by installing programs that will enable its citizens to be successful. Education, specifically, will help all people in various aspects, specifically to their skills of labor and then to manage their own finances.

The problem here is that Bernie is not an economist. He is a socialist who's plans sound great on paper but I bet that if his plans are implemented, the economy will continue to push the living wages up and up so we will never reach it because of inflation and the devalue of currency versus labor. Remember, corporations have choices too and we would be better served to keep corporations in the US than abroad.

We know what happens when we place a common value on all citizens from Communism. Traditional communist economies do not work. Modern communist states like China and Vietnam now are finding success by not forcing a common value on its citizens.

The poor will continue to be poor because the specific root issues of being poor has not been addressed. Bernie is being disingenuous by pointing the finger elsewhere. The corporations can help in various areas but if it's simply throwing money around blindly, then that will always be just a temporary patch to the real problem.

"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. "

What I like to see is that both government and corporations help their respective citizens and workers overcome these root issues of knowledge and skills. Government should providing ongoing education for everyday management. While corporations should provide education for a career track.

People will have to learn to add back to society too instead of expecting that society only gives to them.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
@suncowiam While I agree with some of your conclusions, I think you're dodging a few aspects of this particular situation. I agree that we don't want to evolve towards communist solutions, they don't work, and they are also counter to our nature.

Let me ask you this question: Do you agree that as it stands right now, your personal tax dollars are subsidizing Bezos' wealth? If you do believe that, are you okay with that? If you're not okay with that, then what do you propose?

I also suspect Bernie's plan is unworkable, but I also suspect he knows that, and what he's really trying to do is spread some sunlight on a serious problem.
 
Last edited:

suncowiam

Well-Known Member
@suncowiam While I agree with some of your conclusions, I think you're dodging a few aspects of this particular situation. I agree that we don't want to evolve towards communist solutions, they don't work, and they are also counter to our nature.

Let me ask you this question: Do you agree that as it stands right now, your personal tax dollars are subsidizing Bezos' wealth? If you do believe that, are you okay with that? If you're not okay with that, then what do you propose?

I also suspect Bernie's plan is unworkable, but I also suspect he knows that, and what he's really trying to do hear is spread some sunlight on a serious problem.

I do not. My taxes solely goes to the government. How that money further goes to Amazon from the government is by fault of the government. The government is a business entity with more rights and power than actual businesses. I generally view government entities as absurdly inefficient due to waste and corruption. I see another politician pointing the blame to something else while trying to bolster his political stance.

I directly pay Amazon for the services it provides me which, frankly, I'm happy to because of the value it brings me.

If you think Bernie is not telling the whole truth then why is there a debate being based on his potential lies?

@icehorse
[Edited] I'm ok with Bezo's wealth being the way it is. He actually has brought more value to my life than Bernie. IMO, he'll continue to bring more value to my life than Bernie. Should he be a billionaire? I don't know. That's just subjective to how much money he should own. I just know he should be rewarded for bringing a service that most to all Americans can benefit from.
 
Last edited:

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
If you think Bernie is not telling the whole truth then why is there a debate being based on his potential lies?

I don't think Bernie is lying. I don't think ANYONE really knows how economic policies will pan out.

Let's take your concerns of waste and corruption out of the conversation for now. I agree they are a problem, but I think they're obscuring the point. Are you okay with the fact that Bezos is worth billions and you and I help pay to feed his workers?
 
Top