RT @hamandcheese: Amazon's corporate tax rate is the same as every other company. Its "effective rate" is only low because they reinvest their profits and spend huge amounts on research and development, behavior that our tax code is explicitly designed to promote. https://t.co/gZaZctakPR
When you have to buy the most expensive house to feel some short-lived superficial happiness... Money is cool and all until you get used to it, and you never have enough if you use it to compensate for a shallow life. How this man doesn't feel shame for doing this is beyond me.
It's not at all ostentatious on the outside. The pictures of the living room had me expecting something entirely different. It's a handsome, classically proportioned house.
I'd probably be happy there if I didn't have to keep it up. Between cutting the grass, painting the trim, and cleaning the pool, there'd never be a moment of peace around the place. You'd definitely need a cleaning lady.
Waze has taken me around there venturing from Beverly Hills back to the valley. The amount of trash bins (green/blue/black) set out per property on trash day is staggering. Like one house might have 18 bins set out.
It's reddit. Hating on rich people is the official pastime. I'll bet most of the people complaining here will be buying something from Amazon within a week and contributing to Bezo's wealth that they're saying is so obscene.
It's not so much the rich themselves, but that we live in a system that allows and encourages such unequal rewards systems. Is Jeff Bezos really more deserving than someone who earns far less than him? Did he really work that much harder? Certainly he worked hard, but if you compare the hours, the stress levels, the calories burned, the mental attention he spent, his IQ, etc, to a guy making $100,000/year, I don't think it's proportionate at all to his $100 billion net worth.
That's when you have to ask how much of it is pure merit and how much is stuff that was luck-based (being raised in a better community, greater access to business allies growing up, having the money at the time of a digital revolution, possible family wealth, skin color, etc). This doesn't even factor in his moral standards or lack thereof. Shouldn't a person's moral goodness be part of how successful they are? Or is it only about the (economic) value a person brings? What type of person was he growing up? If, let's say, he was a douchebag, and his experience as a douchebag in elementary school helped him learn how to manage and manipulate people, which he used to make money, should we as a society reward that?
This guy literally changed the way shopping is done around the world and shook up the entire retail industry. There are many niche items that are much more accessible thanks to Amazon compared to your brick and mortar stores. Of course, there are good and bad sides / losers and winners to everything, but let's not pretend he is equivalent to a guy making $100k/yr. Did you shop on Amazon recently? Great, so did several hundred million other people around the world. When things are done at this scale, it doesn't surprise me that insane amounts of wealth accumulates too. He just has to take $1 from every order and he'll already be insanely wealthy.
I'm not even touching your second paragraph. It sounds like you're just trying to discredit him by suggesting that his morals are subpar or that he only got to where he was due to his 'privilege' without citing any sources.
And the bottom line is... guess what? Life is a game, you have to play by its rules, and those rules aren't fair and never will be. There will always be an accumulation of wealth and power at the top of the pyramid with the majority below it. If it's not Bezos, it's just going to be another businessman or politician, perhaps someone worse than him who was simply handed wealth from his parents and didn't work for any of it. The way our society is structured, this is what keeps it stable while maintaining the ability to move things forward / get things done. Converting wealth to power in society has already made the system more 'fair' in the sense that wealth is transferable whereas power in the old monarchy-type systems is not.
> Is Jeff Bezos really more deserving than someone who earns far less than him? Did he really work that much harder?
Let's ask it the other way. What makes *you* more deserving of that money than him? I'm not suggesting that you don't work hard, all of us think that we do. But did you change the world at the scale that he did? That is the difference.
There should be a rich fucker tax. Anyone who buys residential property over $50m should pay an additional 1% tax for every million above $50m. There are people dying in the streets while billionaires are chasing immortality with money.
Because you're going to run into a ton of other issues. There's going to be a huge administrative burden to do valuations on all the property that the rich own. Additionally there's going to be people who straight up leave or others who won't bother to come here. There's other countries that have tried what you're suggesting and many have repealed the tax.
Yeah, fuck those 750,000 jobs he created, the tens of billions of dollars in salaries he pays, billions in taxes, and the convenience of getting any item I want delivered to my door in 2 days. And fuck him for investing billions of dollars into massive production studios and offices in LA, creating high paying jobs.
You mean the same company that just barley paid [1.2% on their federal income tax when the average american pays closer to 14%](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/amazon-taxes-1-2-percent-13-billion-2019/). You read the article, it also says that of the 1.1 billion they declared that they paid..they've only paid 162 million. The rest is "deferred".
You can defer taxes to, if you’re making investments in your own growth.
Amazon lost tens of billions of dollars for almost two decades while it grew. Like any taxpayer, including you, you can use past losses to reduce current tax liability.
How many jobs were lost because of Amazon, though? Jobs existed before Amazon... Are they better jobs now? There are those low-paying amazon truck jobs...Mayhaps he created some jobs that pay a lot, but concentrate that money into the hands of fewer people, contributing to wealth/income inequality. Also, he's collected more power into the hands of a single entity, Amazon, which isn't necessarily a good thing as we've seen (purchase of WaPo) and reduces effective competition.
That said, I do appreciate the convenience of Amazon, so I'm not complaining. But let's not pretend capitalism is a good thing. It's reduced us all to numbers and arbitrary values that are spiritually meaningless.
The economy isn’t a zero sum game. This is the number one thing socialists don’t seem to understand. Retail jobs are higher today than they were when amazon launched, the overall market has been expanded by companies like amazon. Amazon also created AWS, which power this site and about half the rest of the internet, and has invested billions in the entertainment industry in LA.
Capitalism has brought us a service that can deliver any product to your door in 2 days at lower prices than traditional retail. It also forced retail to specialize, improve offerings and improve quality. Before Amazon, Walmart owned the market, more competion now exists.
That is objectively better than what we had before. Capitalism brought us more selection, more choices in how we shop, and lower prices. No other economic system does that.
EDIT: Here are the numbers straight from the Bureau of Labour Statistics. [Amazon opened in 1994, check the retail trade employment growth since then.](https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet) Looking at same month comparables, there are 15.9m workers in retail today vs 13.7m in Dec 1994. Retail employment has grown rapidly since 2009, while Amazon has surged.
I know it’s a lot of money people, but it’s not like he has his net worth in a bank account. Most of it is theoretical stock wealth and everyone’s Amazon stock would tank if he sold it all for cash value on any given day.
That being said, god damn. I didn’t even realize you could buy that amount of continuous acreage in Beverly Hills nowadays.
Please remember that LSC is a SAFE SPACE for socialist discussion.
LSC is run by communists. We welcome socialist/anti-capitalist news, memes, links, and discussion. This subreddit is not the place to debate socialism. We allow good-faith questions and education but are not a 101 sub; please take 101-style questions elsewhere.
This subreddit is a safe space; we have a zero-tolerance policy for bigotry. We also automatically filter out posts containing certain words and phrases that some users may find offensive. Please respect the safe space, and don't try to slip banned words or phrases past the filter.