Democracy At Work Is The Only Way To Stop Billionaires Like Bezos

On Wednesday morning, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) introduced the Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies (BEZOS) Act, new legislation to pressure large corporations to pay their workers a living wage. The proposed bill imposes a “corporate welfare tax” on companies with 500 or more employees whose workers receive federal assistance such as food stamps (i.e., SNAP), public housing or Medicaid.

“Despite low unemployment, we end up having tens of millions of Americans working at wages that are just so low that they can’t adequately take care of their family,” Sanders said in a press conference announcing the bill. “And today, we have the three wealthiest people in America who own more wealth than the bottom 50%.”

Source

While everyone focuses on the hearing for Kavanaugh, Woodward's book, and the NYT article, Bernie Sanders has introduced a new bill that is certainly interesting.

It's no secret that companies like Amazon and Walmart pay their workers so little that many of them have to rely on welfare. Meanwhile their owners are some of the richest people in the world. In response to this disparity Sanders has introduced the Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies (BEZOS) Act.

This law would specifically target companies that employ over 500 people and fail to pay them a living wage. These companies would be required to reimburse the government for any welfare money used by their employees.

While I'm sure there are plenty on the Right that will oppose this, calling it wealth distribution, it seems like this opinion is not unanimous. Tucker Carlson agreed that Sanders' bill may be the only way to stop these megacorps from exploiting the American people.

What are ATS thoughts on this bill? A necessary step in saving a market that is quickly becoming less and less free? Or a Communist ploy to get back at the wealthy?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

I wonder what tucker Carlson gets paid compared to the guy cleaning the set after the show?

And what is a living wage exactly?

Give me an actual number, not a paragraph droning on and on... actual dollar amounts.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

One thing about today's world; The mega corps are untouchable by government. It's a corptatracy and we might as well get used to it or move. I'm currently looking at the west coast of Mexico, perhaps Sayulita, bit expensive but beautiful.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254

On Wednesday morning, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) introduced the Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies (BEZOS) Act, new legislation to pressure large corporations to pay their workers a living wage. The proposed bill imposes a “corporate welfare tax” on companies with 500 or more employees whose workers receive federal assistance such as food stamps (i.e., SNAP), public housing or Medicaid.

“Despite low unemployment, we end up having tens of millions of Americans working at wages that are just so low that they can’t adequately take care of their family,” Sanders said in a press conference announcing the bill. “And today, we have the three wealthiest people in America who own more wealth than the bottom 50%.”

Source

While everyone focuses on the hearing for Kavanaugh, Woodward's book, and the NYT article, Bernie Sanders has introduced a new bill that is certainly interesting.

It's no secret that companies like Amazon and Walmart pay their workers so little that many of them have to rely on welfare. Meanwhile their owners are some of the richest people in the world. In response to this disparity Sanders has introduced the Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies (BEZOS) Act.

This law would specifically target companies that employ over 500 people and fail to pay them a living wage. These companies would be required to reimburse the government for any welfare money used by their employees.

While I'm sure there are plenty on the Right that will oppose this, calling it wealth distribution, it seems like this opinion is not unanimous. Tucker Carlson agreed that Sanders' bill may be the only way to stop these megacorps from exploiting the American people.

What are ATS thoughts on this bill? A necessary step in saving a market that is quickly becoming less and less free? Or a Communist ploy to get back at the wealthy?

As a consumer, you'd have to also accept the higher prices that will come with higher wages... this also may not work unless you also back it up with tariffs to make it too costly to just move to other low cost countries.

In some ways I can kind of agree with this bill in that I don't think government should be subsidizing any business either directly or indirectly. However, you also don't want to create a situation where companies simply use tech or other ways to eliminate these jobs entirely.

The problem with this type of legislation is that while it may attempt to fix one problem, it can lead to other issues.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Someone needs to define "living wage" and exactly what that means in relationship to prevailing wages.

a reply to: Bluntone22

I'm trying to find the actual text of the bill. Some of the articles I'm reading don't mention anything about wage and that the bill just applies to companies that employee more than 500 people.

As long as they don't try to say what a living wage is cause whats considered a living wage on the coast would wreck things in the middle part of the country, on the surface it doesn't look to bad.

As for the higher cost argument, we already do pay more every year cost goes up on pretty much everything so they can keep their profit margin where they like it.

This should be done at the state level because the cost of living varies greatly depending on the area you live in. I used to live in Connecticut and the cost of living was about double it is here in the mid-west. As an example, my ex-wife started working at Amazon here in Indiana when we moved. She went around gathering items to be shipped that day, which I'm assuming is one of the entry-level jobs there. Problem is she was paid enough to not be eligible for any type of assistance.

Higher wages for people doing crappy jobs?
I think storming the elite’s palaces with pitchforks and torches would bring about a much greater sense of satisfaction and accomplishment.

Let’s start the P&T act? Please..?


On a side note - storming area 51 with thousands of people has always been a dream of mine. I know it’s off topic. I’m sorry mods.

I don't object to this, actually, although it does sound a little out-of-the-box for us.

Slave wages shouldn't be a part of our economy. And anybody who works hard 40 hours a week should be able to pay rent and bills, and have some disposable income left to take the family out for pizza on Friday night, and take a vacation once a year.. and still have some left to put in the savings account.

Living from paycheck to paycheck is so depressing. I remember those days, and I hated them. Do without things for a month because you know the car insurance is coming due.

Nope.

originally posted by: Edumakated
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Someone needs to define "living wage" and exactly what that means in relationship to prevailing wages.

How can you ask for a figure on this? It's unreasonable. Too many variables beginning with which state you live in, how many kids you have, etc. And no, we can't dictate those things.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Well, you can pay it with all of your federal, state an local taxes out of pocket, and have no choice, regardless if you shop with these companies, or the taxes can come from the companies directly if their employees receive these benefits. So if you have employee John Doe, and he get $200 dollars from combine assistance each month, either we are paying as taxpayers, or make the company pay it?

I know which one I would go for.

a reply to: GreenGunther

There's no such thing as crappy jobs.

Every job contributes to something as a society.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

I've also seen articles that say the cut off is 500 employees and others say 500,000 employees.

It doesn't look like the text of the bill is online yet. It should be up by tomorrow though.

a reply to: angeldoll

That all sounds fine and dandy but I can tell you that as a landlord myself, rent will go up with wages. Not because I would want to raise the rent but because all my expenses will rise to cover the wage increase.
Right back to living week to week.

originally posted by: vinifalou
a reply to: GreenGunther

There's no such thing as crappy jobs.

Every job contributes to something as a society.

Then let's just say some jobs require a higher set of skills and those jobs get better pay because they are harder to fill.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Agreed 100%.

Not hard to be polite and respectful with other people's way of living, huh.

a reply to: Bluntone22

How would your expenses go up as a landlord? Do you hire underpaid workers to maintain your properties?

Or are you saying after a time all cost would go up to support a living wage for all Americans?

Asking for myself, not a friend.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: angeldoll

That all sounds fine and dandy but I can tell you that as a landlord myself, rent will go up with wages. Not because I would want to raise the rent but because all my expenses will rise to cover the wage increase.
Right back to living week to week.

Of course you increase rent when your own expenses increase. That's business.

But why make it sound so futile? Don't be a defeatist. There's a way for people to be treated fairly when it comes to paying them. It begins with greed reduction.

Meanwhile. at The Company executive meeting:

CEO: OK, what are our options, here.

VP: Well, in the long run, this could cost us billions. I recommend we buy a few Congressmen for a few hundred million and have them vote against this.

CEO: That sounds cost effective. All in favor ...