- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Our President tweets on Amazon
Posted on 3/29/18 at 1:22 pm to Korkstand
Posted on 3/29/18 at 1:22 pm to Korkstand
quote:
don't pay living wages
That's moronic.
It's a free market. If that employee has the skill set to earn more somewhere else they are free to hit the door. The only thing that should determine the amount of money someone earns is the skill set they bring to the table.
Wal-mart or any other employer owes nothing extra to anyone willing to accept the job for the offering. If you can do better, advance and move.
1
Posted on 3/29/18 at 1:23 pm to mattloc
quote:
So you are confused that a private company can utilize a federally funded organization more cheaply than any other small-business, and profit from it..... obviously you're okay with Bezos becoming the richest man in the world on the back of the US taxpayer ....Trump is not
Are we talking about the Amazon USPS contract or Amazon undermining all carriers by creating their own distribution system?
Because if the former, Amazon is probably keeping USPS afloat, and while they're obviously getting rates than small businesses, that's how things always work.
If the latter, I have no problem with Amazon's proprietary distribution network undercutting any other entity, whether USPS or FedEx/UPS/DHL
Posted on 3/29/18 at 1:23 pm to CDawson
quote:This isn't Amazon's fault
The US Postal Service is losing money on each package shipped by Amazon. So by skirting shipping cost and by not having to charge the consumer sales tax equal to hard retailers they are using government to gain a competitive edge not available to you or me.
Posted on 3/29/18 at 1:25 pm to TrueTiger
Amazon now charges tax on all purchases within Louisiana. Thanks JBE.
Posted on 3/29/18 at 1:59 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
re we talking about the Amazon USPS contract or Amazon undermining all carriers by creating their own distribution system?
Because if the former, Amazon is probably keeping USPS afloat, and while they're obviously getting rates than small businesses, that's how things always work.
If the latter, I have no problem with Amazon's proprietary distribution network undercutting any other entity, whether USPS or FedEx/UPS/DHL
"Amazon is keeping the US postal service afloat"....this cant be serious.... the USPS loses billions a year on their Amazon contract.
Private companies should be free to negotiate whatever rates they desire....but when Amazon is using public resources in the form of distribution centers, planes, trucks and salaries paid by the US taxpayer, they should pay the same as every other taxpaying company and tax paying citizen for that matter.
Trump's tweet is simply warning the richest man in the world, that after 20 years, its time to get off the Public tit.
Posted on 3/29/18 at 1:59 pm to Pettifogger
delete
This post was edited on 3/29/18 at 2:01 pm
Posted on 3/29/18 at 2:05 pm to mattloc
quote:
the USPS loses billions a year on their Amazon contract.
Can you provide a source for that assertion?
Posted on 3/29/18 at 2:11 pm to Seldom Seen
What a stupid tweet from a business man
Posted on 3/29/18 at 2:12 pm to CDawson
quote:No it's not.
That's moronic.
quote:No it's not.
It's a free market.
quote:Well sure.
If that employee has the skill set to earn more somewhere else they are free to hit the door.
quote:Agreed, but that is not always the case. Welfare/entitlements/etc distort the labor market. Employees are willing to work for less, and employers are able to pay less, because the scales are being tipped.
The only thing that should determine the amount of money someone earns is the skill set they bring to the table.
quote:I didn't say they do. What I did say is that taxpayers are subsidizing Walmart's labor force.
Wal-mart or any other employer owes nothing extra to anyone willing to accept the job for the offering. If you can do better, advance and move.
Some here are making the case that taxpayers are indirectly subsidizing Amazon's business via the USPS. If you make that leap, you have to consider that we are doing the same for Walmart via entitlements.
Posted on 3/29/18 at 2:13 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:
Can you provide a source for that assertion
Amazons sweetheart deal with the USPS
quote:
But according to a report published by Josh Sandbulte in the Wall Street Journal, USPS has been picking up the tab for Amazon. The WSJ contributor, whose expertise is in the shipping industry, detailed how Congress prevents USPS, through the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, from changing the parcel price. This law is designed to avoid “unfair competition” with FedEx and UPS. Section 3626 of Title 39 United States Code has become one of the provisions often quoted whenever limits imposed on USPS are being researched.
The report implies that Amazon gets the better end of the deal through the $1.46 subsidy. It is as if the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act served as a loophole for Amazon to exploit.
“The U.S. Postal Service delivers the company’s boxes well below its own costs,” Sandbulte mentioned. “Like an accelerant to the fire, this subsidy is speeding up the collapse of traditional retailers in the U.S. and providing an unfair advantage for Amazon.” He further labeled that $1.46 subsidy as “a gift card from Uncle Sam.”
Posted on 3/29/18 at 2:15 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:
quote:
the USPS loses billions a year on their Amazon contract.
Can you provide a source for that assertion?
Gonna guess he'll link to the Citi study that said Amazon was gifted a dollar or two every single time you get a package.
What he won't mention is that the study included legacy costs (pensions and healthcare) for retirees in the total cost of delivering a parcel, a move for which Citi was roundly criticized and paints a very inaccurate portrait of what the cost per parcel is.
Posted on 3/29/18 at 2:17 pm to mattloc
I think that op ed has been posted 100 times. Is that the only "proof" that exists?
Posted on 3/29/18 at 2:17 pm to mattloc
Ahhh that same old Op-Ed by someone who doesn’t have a lot of room to talk. The below is from your own link
quote:
But before Sandbulte’s claims are taken at face value, an article in Fortune.com noted a conflict. Sandbulte, it turns out, is a co-president of investment firm Greenhaven Associates, which has a financial stake in FedEx stock, MarketWatch.com said.
It is a fact that Amazon itself didn’t miss. In a statement released to Fortune.com, Amazon’s response explained how its partnership with USPS “is reviewed annually by the Postal Regulatory Commission.” It credited the PRC for the decades spent in “reviewing and approving USPS costing and pricing practices.” According to Amazon, it was the PRC that discovered these contracts with USPS are, in Amazon’s term, “profitable.” The response ended with Amazon reiterating its contribution to the U.S. economy resulting in “more efficient processes as well as thousands of jobs and related economic benefits in local communities.”
That closing statement served as a stark contrast to Sandbulte’s claim of how Amazon is killing traditional retailing with the way USPS subsidizes parcel costs.
Posted on 3/29/18 at 2:18 pm to AbuTheMonkey
He didn’t even cite that level of proof.
Posted on 3/29/18 at 2:19 pm to Korkstand
quote:
Some here are making the case that taxpayers are indirectly subsidizing Amazon's business via the USPS. If you make that leap, you have to consider that we are doing the same for Walmart via entitlements.
You think these entitlements make their recipients MORE willing to work than they would be if they didn't receive them?
That'd be the necessary condition for those entitlements to be subsidizing their workforce. I'd expect the exact opposite.
This claim is a very different one from the claim that the existence of a federally-built USPS subsidizes Amazon's distribution.
This post was edited on 3/29/18 at 2:20 pm
Posted on 3/29/18 at 2:25 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:
He didn’t even cite that level of proof.
Interesting that Sandbulte did draw his own "conclusions" from the Citi study, though.
He was also, in effect, arguing that we should be paying more for parcels so the USPS can subsidize their absurd pension and healthcare system.
Posted on 3/29/18 at 2:36 pm to AbuTheMonkey
Of course it is a complicated issue..... and there is little information available to the public to know exactly what Amazon is paying compared to other retailers. We do know they get a sharply discounted rate. Which seems to be Trump's point. Why should taxpayers who, without choice, pay for the right to use the services and assets of the US Postal Service be charged differently. These this is not a private company where the individual companies have a right to establish their own business practices and policies.
Posted on 3/29/18 at 2:36 pm to Seldom Seen
Time after Time, Donnie has shown he is not a real conservative.
Posted on 3/29/18 at 2:38 pm to AbuTheMonkey
Ultimately any discussion about USPS losing money starts and ends there.
Posted on 3/29/18 at 2:40 pm to CorporateTiger
The "free" market president trying to change the market b/c he doesn't like the guy running a very successful company.
Page 10 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News