[plutaniano]

Doesn't Amazon have to compete with welfare for workers, instead of benefiting from it?

The more welfare pays, the worse a job at Amazon is in comparison, is it not? How does Amazon benefit from this?

[itslennysfault]

The point is that they pay such low wages that their workers are still eligible for welfare when working there (despite being hugely profitable). This essentially means that tax dollars are subsidizing their profits.

[plutaniano]

> The point is that they pay such low wages that their workers are still eligible for welfare when working there (despite being hugely profitable)

I'm not contesting this. This is a valid point.

> This essentially means that tax dollars are subsidizing their profits.

I don't see how this would be the case.

Two scenarios:

1:

- Welfare is now $0/month

- Some people that could get by with welfare now can't. They start looking for jobs.

- Increase in the supply of workers.

- Decrease in wages. (good for amazon)

2:

- Welfare is now $3k/month

- Some people decide that it's no longer worth it to work. They'd rather just live off of welfare.

- Decrease in the supply of workers.

- Increase in wages. (bad for amazon)