In the past 24 hours, Jeff Bezos added $405 million to his net worth. In the past year, Jeff Bezos added $41 billion to his net worth. And yet somehow, Amazon can't throw a $50 million peanut at the epidemic of homelessness ravaging their hometown.
> Amazon can't throw a $50 million peanut at the epidemic of homelessness ravaging their hometown
This is an unfair framing. The tax did far more damage than impair Amazon's bottom line. Your complaint, moreover, could be leveled against every public service in the city. There are simply better ways to solve this problem. Seattle's government chose pot shots over progress.
Sure there are simply better ways, there are always better ways, and those better ways will be likewise crushed by the muscle at Amazon who make sure the company can extract as much value out of Seattle without having to pay its fair share in taxes.
> those better ways will be likewise crushed by the muscle at Amazon
This tax was predominantly opposed by small business owners. (I think it was $25,000 donated by Amazon and close to $300,000 by small businesses.)
The proposed tax was a flat payroll tax. That burdens lower-wage employees and employers much more than tech companies. There is perfect being the enemy of good, and then there is cutting off the nose to spite the face. This was the latter.
The US government spends 9 billion per DAY. Perhaps you could ask your elected representative if they could divert 0.1 percent of it towards this problem instead of on spending on bombing brown people in far away lands -you realize the US spends more on military than next 14 countries with larger populations combined
You exaggerate the reach of Seattle's city council if you think they are capable of ending the US' military-industrial complex. But I think that defense spending is a red herring here.
Everyone says Amazon, Amazon, Amazon but the head tax also would have affected every business doing $20mm/year like grocery, drug stores and even gasp Starbucks! Places where employees are definitely not making six figures on average.
Plus government spending here like many other cities is not well managed. See bike lanes. See the fact that they fired Wells Fargo and then re-hired Wells Fargo because no one else would take their business.
Homelessness is a real problem, but there needs to be more dialogue and better planning before rushing in and taxing growth.
Probably a better idea to look at how the tax system is setup here to favor the wealthy versus low income.
Amazon is not the government. They don't have the expertise or even authority to tackle civic issues.
I don't want them tackling civic issues because Amazon is a company. It is a profit algorithm in a capitalist system. Humans inside can steer it to Do Nice Things here and there but ultimately its lives because Profit.
The government's ONLY job is to Do Nice Things (maintain nice status of life). Therefore, it is the government's failure to leverage its own powers to solve the homeless issue. Because it's a representative plutocratic democracy, the people are partially to blame as well, although class disparity is a major obstacle.
1. Homelessness wasn't caused by Amazon.
2.The govt has a restrictive zoning policy not caused by Amazon but is the definitive cause of the housing shortage.
3.You give an easy pass to those whose exclusive job is to solve these problems by blaming it on those whose job it is not.
4.Govt takes the easy way out and comes up with the default hammer to every nail-more taxes and sensible people oppose it and somehow it's the sensible person's problem?
Do you even logic,bro?
Sure, Jeff Bezos isn't walking around the streets of Seattle stealing people's chequebooks and ratting to their bosses so they can't make rent. But he and Amazon are exacerbating INSANE wealth inequality in Seattle. Amazon is the seat of economic power in the city, and its employees are the ones bidding up property prices. It's great that Bezos is giving high-paying jobs to thousands of people, but those same people (following the "bro logic" you espouse) are bidding up property prices, and then lobbying for NIMBY policies that reduce housing supply—which DEFINITELY drive up rents and force people out of their homes and onto the streets.
If you're an affluent techie in Seattle it's easy to say "not my problem bro", work your great job, buy your expensive house, lobby your local councilman to curb new developments and head taxes, watch your property value rise and your chequing account blossom. But there are swathes of other people for whom affluent tech jobs aren't desirable or possible, and there's no need for those people to be priced out of Seattle. Building homes isn't hard.
Is the solution to be companies to throw their hands up in the air and say "municipal governments can't solve gentrification, so let's not become big"?
Do you think the swaths of tech workers moving to be close to work enjoy their rent prices skyrocketing? Do you think they enjoy rising homeless rates?
Nobody wants gentrification. If you can find me a tech worker kicking sand in a homeless person's face I'll lambast him with you. I want to solve gentrification as well but the solution isn't to choke an economy to prevent companies from moving in. That just pushes the problem to some other city. We need the government to step in and do its job, and that means we have to participate and steer the government.
Attacking Amazon for operating within its constraints to maximize profit seems silly to me. It is programmed to do nothing else.
I say instead, attack the concept of capitalism (infeasible) or fight the fight in the battleground of the political sphere - vote and openly support candidates that want money out of government.
I agree that it's insane to expect Amazon to behave differently than what's expected of a contemporary American corporation™ (aka: pure profit extraction, no consideration for local social conditions or the greater social contract.)
But rather than accepting Amazon's mundane corporate naughtiness, we should be vigilant and outspoken about it. The corporate norms we have now in North America are not etched in stone; we can inveigh against shitty behaviour while also doing what you suggest: electing better politicians and pursuing fairer tax policy.
