So. Let me see if I understand this.
He’s the world’s richest man.
The business that made him so rich paid no income taxes in 2018.
Because stores are closed, that business is busier than ever.
And he would like ME to donate to his workers.
I’m persuaded. Let me get my checkbook out. I have almost twelve dollars in my account.
Maybe his ex can shame him by donating $100million or so….
Boy, that would be the ultimate “fuck you,” wouldn’t it?
Actually, if you read the article, Amazon says it is not asking anyone to contribute to this fund. If you believe their statement, legally the type of fund they set up must accept donations from the public, but they (Amazon) have contributed $25 million and are NOT soliciting contributions from the public. Apparently, this fund is to help their workers (or perhaps it’s workers from “partner” businesses) not eligible for Amazon’s sick leave policy. The article didn’t contradict Amazon’s statement by say quoting a press release asking for contributions which makes me tend to believe Amazon here. That of course would make this article’s headline not just misleading but an outright lie.
You’re right. My headline up there sums it up correctly. People can contribute if they care to, but Amazon is not specifically soliciting contributions.
Be that as it may, Amazon didn’t have to set it up that way with that particular type of fund. They could have just quietly created a slush fund for their employees.
If you donate quietly, its charity.
If you donate loudly and very publicly, its advertising.
Uncle Jeff is doing the latter.
It’s ego massage.
Why can’t it be both charity and advertising? Also, the $25 million was donated by Amazon, not Bezos. I think the board and executives of a public company probably have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to publicize that company’s charity and other “good deeds.” Publicizing good works in no way detracts from the good those works do. I have no idea how much Bezos personally gives to charity. Perhaps he donates little or nothing. Perhaps he announces all his charity and I just never heard about it. Or perhaps he makes most or all of his personal charitable contributions quietly.
Bezos is Amazon.
While Bezos may be Amazon’s largest shareholder (or was until his divorce) and definitely makes decisions for the company, he is NOT Amazon. Many regular people own stock in Amazon and many many more own Amazon stock through 401Ks. Bezos has a fiduciary duty to the shareholders to act in the best interest of those shareholders. I think that publicizing what Amazon is doing to aid workers during the pandemic is more about maintaining/improving Amazon’s public image then it is Bezos’ ego. But then again, maybe it’s about both.
The return of the Age of the Robber Barons is upon us (well, has been for awhile now…)
Last week, the LibertyPen YouTube channel posted an excerpt of Ayn Rand talking about robber barons. Her point was that robber barons were in fact great humanitarians. Not because of their charitable work, but because of how the businesses they created improved the standard of living. She also talked about how they didn’t use force, but that people bought their goods and services voluntarily. I think that last part is a bit of a stretch considering the way many of them employed strike breakers. I also don’t believe these “humanitarians” were motivated by a desire to improve the standard of living of humanity. But at the same time there is a good deal of truth in what she said, though as was usually the case with her writings (in my opinion) she took things way too far.
Capitalism has done far far more to improve the lives of every day people than socialists (Democratic or otherwise) understand. But pure capitalism, without any governmental rules or regulation, would not be the paradise she imagines in Atlas Shrugged either. But the thing about Jeff Bezos and Amazon is if he hadn’t created a company that made people’s lives substantially better (or at least easier), he would not be the world’s richest man. It’s also not just Amazon, because Amazon has forced other companies to innovate (or just copy) we now live in a world where we can buy almost anything without getting off our couch. Between that and the availability of streaming (also offered by Amazon) it (almost) makes isolating ourselves in our homes bearable.
You don’t have to scratch very hard at a Randian til you reach the layer where they really would prefer a king or fuehrer, who they would revere as a superior being worthy of power. If your choices are take this guy’s train, walk, or build your own train, it’s a stretch to say you paid voluntarily to use the train. Rand would agree that none of these robber barons were acting for the public interest. It was her root belief that everyone acting like a selfish bastard would produce the best overall outcome.
Capitalism has “done more” because it has been more prevalent through time and space. Monarchies have also “done more” than socialism, that doesn’t mean that the political system enabled innovation.
If Bezos hadn’t done what he did, someone (or ones) else would have. That’s not capitalism, it just supply meeting demand.
“That’s not capitalism, it just supply meeting demand.”
Actually, I think that is the definition of capitalism. There is no system that does a better job of matching supply with demand than the free market.
“If your choices are take this guy’s train, walk, or build your own train, it’s a stretch to say you paid voluntarily to use the train.”
But if the guy hadn’t built the rail road, you’d be stuck walking or building your own. Granted there were all kinds of corporate welfare and corruption even in the 19th Century. But without the “robber barons” (or others in their place) there would be no train to ride in. Unless and until the government got around to building one. The government might even have completed a transcontinental rail road by now.
If Bezos hadn’t created Amazon, others would still have created online commerce sites. But Bezos had an idea, invested in that idea (beginning by selling books out of his garage) and innovated his company into one of the most successful in the world. Does that mean he “deserves” $100 Billion? That depends on how you look at it. But most of that wealth is not cash, it’s the value of the Amazon stock he owns. Does someone else have a better claim to his ownership interest in Amazon? If you look at the cash he has, he purchased the Washington Post and that paper is assured of the necessary financial resources to continue its storied history of political journalism. He’s also founded Blue Origin, a company that (along with Elon Musk’s Space X) allow humanity to become a 2 planet species.
That should be: may allow humanity to be a 2 planet species.
” I think that is the definition of capitalism”. No. Nonononono. No.
Capitalism is putting your money (capital) to work making more money while you sit on your ass not working, like a total Bezos. If anyone gets a thing they need from the process that’s a side effect. Like all these drill bits who call themselves “job creators”. Technically true, same as I’m an “empty can creator” on a Friday night. But they will constantly be looking for ways to eliminate headcount and cut hours. More money that way.
When there is a need fro a train, someone is going to build it. In theory, I have no objection to that guy making a buck. In practice, that guy invariably buys congressmen and gets them to start writing laws that favor him. That’s not a bug of capitalism, it’s a feature. If one guy doesn’t do it, another will, and eat his lunch.
In the end Ayn Rand took Social Security, just like all the Trump lunatics are going to take their socialist bailout checks.
We know the end game of all this supposed ‘rugged individualism’ – its greed no matter the term. If someone poor is close to be destitute, then its rugged individualism and the right to the starve. Otherwise its socialism for the rich.
In the end greedy unethical people without morals that will otherwise rot in hell according to most of their traditions, will always twist and mold their worldview to fit whatever benefits their pocketbooks the most.
Amazon is in too many businesses. They are monopoly in multiple industries. There is no ability to compete with them. And small businesses have no shot.
This isn’t about Bezos being the richest man in the world. It’s about Bezos being the richest man in the world *and* begging others to pay the people he should be paying.
The chutzpah is galling, at best.
I don’t know, “chutzpah” sort of implies some stakes or risk. It can even be admirable at times. I would say it’s more that the depravity is appalling.
Taxes are the price we pay for creating and maintaining a place where companies like Amazon can flourish. Yet Amazon managed to pay nothing for this, while making Bezos the world’s richest individual. Now Bezos wants a handout which will presumably work to his benefit as well, as to his employees.
Color me unenthused, trending toward outraged. What does he take us for? Maybe Greg mc has the right slant on that.
Morons, surrounded and controlled by morons…
He has a lot of bathrooms to maintain and keep stocked with hand sanitizer, though. That can’t be cheap.