4 ms·
Environmentally friendly too as the journey is being made anyway.
by celticninja 9y ago
Environmentally friendly too as the journey is being made anyway.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> Environmentally friendly too as the journey is being made anyway. It's a financial incentive for employees not to use transit but instead personal autos to and from work in order to be available for such deliveries, so it's actually environmentally hostile.
- xienze 9y agoWal-Marts are typically in areas where public transit isn't appealing (or even exists in the first place) if you have the ability to drive a car.
- anigbrowl 9y agoTough titty for the employees who do rely on transit. No extra $ for them.
- xienze 9y agoWell to hear it from HN readers, they're the lucky ones: they won't be exploited like their car-driving brethren.
- anigbrowl 9y agoA specious mischaracterization of the arguments on display.
- xienze 9y agoIs it? The arguments boil down to: * I bet this isn't really "optional" * I bet they're not going to get paid enough to make it worthwhile
- anigbrowl 9y agoAnd none of those made the same inference as you that they were lucky as a result, which was the specious mischaracterization I referred to.
- cat199 9y agoDoes the extra $$ exceed the cost of owning a car in the 1st place? This might not be as true as you think..
- EpicEng 9y agoreally, what proportion of workers do you think will ditch the bus in favor of driving a car to work? Absolutely tiny, if any at all. These people live in the burbs for the most part and everyone drives everywhere.