[unethical_ban]

It's not subsidizing, it's paying.

I don't subsidize a roofer when I hire them, I pay them.

So your question is "why should poor people have to pay UPS drivers a decent wage?" Which I predict you would argue that you think this is too much money/healthcare/retirement for a delivery driver.

[jhgfjhgfjhfgjhg]

The market determines the "fair" wage of a delivery driver and it is not $175,000.

[hnaccount141]

The fun thing about markets is that there's one for labor too, and apparently the labor market has decided otherwise.

[Kye]

It's the result of decades of union busting and pro-capital class propaganda. Everyone forgot labor is sold, and its price has only ever increased outside rare boom times by collective bargaining.

[nemo8551]

It looks like ups have decided that they want to pay their drivers something in the region of $175,000 in order to do their business though.

If they didn’t want to pay that then they could pay less but then those drivers might not think that’s fair and then go work for someone else, it might not be for $175k but it’s their choice at that point.

[unethical_ban]

It's worth noting the parent to this comment rarely if ever provides an original comment (always replying with a short quip) and doesn't seem to engage in debate.

[pixelatedindex]

Why do you say it is not 175K? How much should it be? Is it because you don’t want to pay that much?