In early October, Amazon announced that they would be raising their minimum wage to USD 15.00 an hour, for all employees in the United States, and to £9.50 for British workers. If examined at face value, this may seem to make no sense, as this would only create more cost for the employer and reduce profits for the company. In this article, I will aim to argue the opposite: this decision by Jeff Bezos is a potentially manipulative move.
News organisations like MSNBC and Business Insider tell their audiences of the extent to which Amazon workers suffer, with stories of 80-hour work weeks, missing wages and gruelling shifts. Prominent socialist senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has been a vocal critic of the company. In one speech, he stated that "Thousands of Amazon employees are forced to rely on food stamps, Medicaid [a healthcare programme for low-income Americans] and public housing because their wages are too low..." On the 2nd of October, the company said that it had "listened to critics". In reality, this is a carefully crafted plan to remove all competition and to create a monopoly; the timing of the wage increases (after high levels of criticism) is a devious front. While some might state that this is just an example of business philanthropy similar to that practised by Henry Ford in the 1920s, Bezos' decision has been enacted a time where debate around the minimum wage has escalated, whereas Ford instituted his decision long before minimum wage laws were first introduced.
Washington, the state in which Amazon is headquartered, is currently increasing its minimum wage. It is currently $11.50 and is set to rise to $13.50 by 2020. Amazons' public announcement of their company $15 minimum wage is, in fact, a direct call to Washington's state legislature to increase their state minimum wage further. They benefit by eliminating new, small businesses that might force Amazon to reduce profits. To some extent, it could be argued that these wage increases are a long-term investment to keep control of the electronic commerce market for many years to come. Amazon's decision must be viewed with suspicion, as all decisions and statements must be. Amazon's decision may be as innocent as it seems at face value, but it may be an attempt to collude with the government, with the objective being maximising profit and exploiting the consumer. Bezos may plan to take Amazon from America's second largest private employer to a corporatist giant, exempt from taxation and competition. To combat Amazon's attempt to seize the government, we must ensure that politicians serve people, not corporations, workers' unions and other special interest groups. We must ensure that our politicians are public servants, not corporate servants.
News organisations like MSNBC and Business Insider tell their audiences of the extent to which Amazon workers suffer, with stories of 80-hour work weeks, missing wages and gruelling shifts. Prominent socialist senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has been a vocal critic of the company. In one speech, he stated that "Thousands of Amazon employees are forced to rely on food stamps, Medicaid [a healthcare programme for low-income Americans] and public housing because their wages are too low..." On the 2nd of October, the company said that it had "listened to critics". In reality, this is a carefully crafted plan to remove all competition and to create a monopoly; the timing of the wage increases (after high levels of criticism) is a devious front. While some might state that this is just an example of business philanthropy similar to that practised by Henry Ford in the 1920s, Bezos' decision has been enacted a time where debate around the minimum wage has escalated, whereas Ford instituted his decision long before minimum wage laws were first introduced.
Washington, the state in which Amazon is headquartered, is currently increasing its minimum wage. It is currently $11.50 and is set to rise to $13.50 by 2020. Amazons' public announcement of their company $15 minimum wage is, in fact, a direct call to Washington's state legislature to increase their state minimum wage further. They benefit by eliminating new, small businesses that might force Amazon to reduce profits. To some extent, it could be argued that these wage increases are a long-term investment to keep control of the electronic commerce market for many years to come. Amazon's decision must be viewed with suspicion, as all decisions and statements must be. Amazon's decision may be as innocent as it seems at face value, but it may be an attempt to collude with the government, with the objective being maximising profit and exploiting the consumer. Bezos may plan to take Amazon from America's second largest private employer to a corporatist giant, exempt from taxation and competition. To combat Amazon's attempt to seize the government, we must ensure that politicians serve people, not corporations, workers' unions and other special interest groups. We must ensure that our politicians are public servants, not corporate servants.
However, what in the end determines which symbol combinations will come 1xbet up on every spin is the random number generator . At land-based casinos, a slot machine's payback is determined by the EPROM chip. That means any playing institution can change the payout share, lengthy as|so lengthy as} they have the EPROM chip. However, in your safety, playing jurisdictions require that casinos report every time they alter the game’s Return to Player Percentage. When shopping for the best online slots machine, it’s crucial you choose one with a high payout share and low volatility to get more wins.
ReplyDelete