3 ms·
If you want to argue that, due to scarcity, we can't maximize global quality of life without mistreating some people, that is least a coherent argument. There
by PhasmaFelis 9y ago
If you want to argue that, due to scarcity, we can't maximize global quality of life without mistreating some people, that is least a coherent argument.
There is no coherent argument that Amazon isn't treating its employees poorly, even relative to other companies in the same fields. Read some articles about working conditions at Amazon. This one's a decent starting point: https://gizmodo.com/reminder-amazon-treats-its-employees-like-shit-1792642652 https://gizmodo.com/reminder-amazon-treats-its-employees-lik...
- CryptoPunk 9y agoI know about the difficult working conditions, but calling it mistreatment implies Amazon doesn't have a right to offer these terms in the free market, and that the employees would be better off if they didn't have the jobs. The working conditions are voluntarily assumed by the employees, so it can't be mistreatment, and the terms offered are the best the employees could find on the market, so they are better off for these jobs existing. I don't see the rationale behind calling it mistreatment and implying Amazon is having w negative impact.