ericjmorey

From Amazon:

In 2023, FBA had been the preferred choice of 82% of Amazon sellers to deliver their products.

They dictate the operations of their suppliers. They force large expansions in capital investment and then decide that they don't want to renew the supplier relationship before the financing for the capital investments can be paid back. The only way suppliers can hope avoid this is to do what Walmart wants or constantly change their products in often superficial ways with branding agreements for IP of entertainment companies.

All of those laws include a provision that the employer must pay at least the minimum wage of a non-tipped worker in any pay period where the tips received don't account for the difference between the tipped minimum wage and the non-tipped minimum wage. Thus, everyone is receiving at least the non-tipped minimum wage unless the employer is breaking the law.

Amazon doesn’t handle shipping for a lot of the things they sell.

This is false. Very few products sold via Amazon are shipped independently from Amazon's logistics services.

no sketchy pricing based on bullwhip procurement.

Walmart's procurement has been abusive to their suppliers (who often go out of business because of their relationship with Walmart) for decades. I think you may need to reassess your perception of their procurement strategy.

You don't seem to understand the retail operations of Amazon. They provide logistics and marketing services to retailers, they also directly compete against those retailers because those retailers can't do better at logistics and marketing without using Amazon's services.

everybody already gets at least minimum wage unless the employer is breaking the law.

Your suggestions seem hellbent on making life worse for millions because of an aversion to cusom.

Since when was Bezos liberal?

Not legally, but it seems that he has the ability to stop payments from a techical perspective. The government has put employees on furlough before, but never during a time when money was appropriated by Congress. I would predict that it will cost much more in the longer run to simply shut down payments illegally than to go through Congress. I fear that Congress is on board with removing appropriated funds for no other reason than tribal loyalty to the leader of the cult of personality.

The problem is that you're proposing getting rid of one of the few ways to make a living wage as an incentive to possibly change to a better system. Gotta find a way that doesn't require taking good pay away from people or you're just being cruel because of a fixation on not wanting to pay tips.

employees shouldn’t be thriving off of an almost mandatory donation, but should be fairly compensated in the first place

This seems callous and cruel. What are you even saying?

You can’t treat the root cause without addressing the symptoms first.

What? No. This is absolutely false.