• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Amazon is opening the largest family shelter in Washington state right inside its headquarters

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
Amazon is opening the largest family shelter in Washington state right inside its headquarters

It does not of course solve the problem, but it's a great story and a small step forward.

A small dent in an enormous problem — The new shelter will have the capacity to serve approximately 275 people each night. This is only about two percent of the estimated 12,500 homeless people in King County, where Seattle is located.

While this is certainly a minor fix overall, the size of the new space will actually make it the largest family shelter in Washington state. The shelter is also expected to make upwards of 600,000 meals per year.

Amazon’s rise did make Seattle inaccessible — After Amazon built its campus in Seattle in 2010, the city’s rent prices skyrocketed. The city’s median rent increased by 42 percent between 2007 and 2017 — where the average for the U.S. overall was an 18 percent increase. Meanwhile, the rate of homelessness has increased by 9 percent each year since 2014.

The shelter’s owner doesn’t blame Amazon, though — Marty Hartman, the founder of Mary’s Place, is nothing but thankful for Amazon’s generosity. Many have linked Seattle’s homelessness crisis with Amazon’s rise to power, but Hartman disagrees.

“It’s not one entity that’s going to solve this,” she said. “It’s not on corporations. It’s not on congregations. It’s not on government. It’s not on foundations. It’s all of us working together.”
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
It's the equivalent of me throwing two dollars every ten years at a charity. Bezos could buy a homeless person a high quality yacht every day for years with no significant impact to his personal wealth. I'd rather he, you know, paid his fair share of taxes than get too wobbly kneed at gestures like this.

All the same, at least some people will be sleeping indoors out of the cold and that's not nothing
 

BSM1

What? Me worry?
It's the equivalent of me throwing two dollars every ten years at a charity. Bezos could buy a homeless person a high quality yacht every day for years with no significant impact to his personal wealth. I'd rather he, you know, paid his fair share of taxes than get too wobbly kneed at gestures like this.

All the same, at least some people will be sleeping indoors out of the cold and that's not nothing


Yeah, that's right! Screw that 275 people who'll be sheltered, let's make 'em wait until we can stick it another rich person....
 

amorphous_constellation

Well-Known Member
Hm, I wonder what's the motivation behind this, I don't really get it. I've heard the company has such a strict philosophy toward its workforce, that why would it care about all these homeless people
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
I'm in the middle. I too wish that the wealthy would do a lot more positive work with their wealth. But I also am very happy for any positive gesture.

In the physical world both positive and negative feedback are helpful depending on the circumstance Positive and Negative Feedback Loops in Biology

The same arguments have been made in psychology Which Kind of Feedback Is Best?

So I applaud that Amazon has done. And I also agree that they should do a lot more.
 

SigurdReginson

Grēne Mann
Premium Member
I'm happy for the folks who get to get out of the cold. Maybe this gesture will inspire other rich folks to dip into their pockets a little to help out, too.

As for Amazon and what they hope to accomplish, they probably want to make themselves look good to the local population. There are a lot of folks who'd be happy to see them leave Seattle, so they've been paying a lot of money towards politicians who are pro-Amazon. If this charity results in a positive perception from the locals, maybe they'll build more shelters. One can hope.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
I'm in the middle. I too wish that the wealthy would do a lot more positive work with their wealth. But I also am very happy for any positive gesture.

Nick Hanauer talks about "parasite" companies. A great example is Walmart. Walmart employees do not earn a living wage, so the rest of us have to support Walmart employees through programs like food stamps. So the Walton family are a parasite on our economy.

Amazon - while not as bad as Walmart - does stray into parasite territory. To me, job one for "the rich" is to make sure that their employees are compensated enough so that they are living comfortably. Less than that makes these rich people parasites, and it's also bad for business.

Confronting the Parasite Economy
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
Hm, I wonder what's the motivation behind this, I don't really get it. I've heard the company has such a strict philosophy toward its workforce, that why would it care about all these homeless people
To me it's the current equivalent of how the "robber barons" of an earlier age used charity. The motivation was at least for many to be remembered in a positive way by history as well as out competing their peers in the charity game.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
Since I mentioned 'robber barons' earlier in this thread, for those that might not be familiar with the term. Does this sound as familiar to you as it does to me?

... the metaphor "conjures up visions of titanic monopolists who crushed competitors, rigged markets, and corrupted government. In their greed and power, legend has it, they held sway over a helpless democracy."

... term represented the idea that "business leaders in the United States from about 1865 to 1900 were, on the whole, a set of avaricious rascals who habitually cheated and robbed investors and consumers, corrupted government, fought ruthlessly among themselves, and in general carried on predatory activities comparable to those of the robber barons of medieval Europe."
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic ☿
Premium Member
Hm, I wonder what's the motivation behind this, I don't really get it. I've heard the company has such a strict philosophy toward its workforce, that why would it care about all these homeless people
I'm a local. Lemme tell you the back story.

The Seattle City Council has been under pressure to address the homelessness problem, and one idea they came up with was a "head tax" on all the employers for each employee they employed. Naturally, Amazon strongly resisted this, and even threw a whole bunch of money at the Council elections trying to get more Seattle City Council members elected that were "Amazon friendly." It didn't work. Seattle city voters did not elect the "Amazon friendly" candidates, in spite of all the money Amazon threw at trying to sway the election. It really left a bad taste in the mouth of those who are eager to find a solution to the homelessness problem in Seattle.

Personally, I suspect this donation of office space by Amazon to be a peace offering to the voters of Seattle and the Seattle City Council members, in an effort to avoid retaliation for the anti-head-tax-for-the-homeless-election-buying-fiasco.
 

amorphous_constellation

Well-Known Member
Naturally, Amazon strongly resisted this, and even threw a whole bunch of money at the Council elections trying to get more Seattle City Council members elected that were "Amazon friendly." It didn't work.

so is this new idea even going to save them money.. actually, they're still going to have to pay this head tax anyway right?
 

amorphous_constellation

Well-Known Member
... term represented the idea that "business leaders in the United States from about 1865 to 1900 were, on the whole, a set of avaricious rascals who habitually cheated and robbed investors and consumers, corrupted government, fought ruthlessly among themselves, and in general carried on predatory activities comparable to those of the robber barons of medieval Europe."

I dunno if medieval europe had robber barons, probably more like lords who just did whatever they wanted in their fiefdoms, no robbing or cheating necessary right?
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic ☿
Premium Member
so is this new idea even going to save them money.. actually, they're still going to have to pay this head tax anyway right?
The head tax was passed by the city council, then repealed after business opposition less than a month later. It was after this that Amazon started throwing money at the City Council elections, and lost. So no, they don't have the head tax. That doesn't mean the City Council won't possibly try to revive it again.
 
Top