2 ms·

They are going through that suffering for money. Giving raises that aren't too insultingly low gives them slightly more for that suffering and provides some add

They are going through that suffering for money. Giving raises that aren't too insultingly low gives them slightly more for that suffering and provides some additional well being by giving people hope that their lives will get better and that maybe it won't be so bad later. > If anything it sounds like it makes it even less economically viable to leave the dystopian environment they are in. Economically viable for the large corporation but not for those on the bottom. Why does the maximization of shareholder value deserve to be the only consideration? Amazon skirts tax laws to save billions while taking advantage of selling within the United States. Why shouldn't we as a society say that those on the bottom deserve a slightly less bad life?

pedrosorio 6y ago
If Amazon unilaterally increases their compensation while keeping working conditions terrible: 1) They still won't be financially independent, capable of leaving the job 2) Other jobs that might not be as terrible will pay even less comparatively making it that much harder to leave Those at the bottom deserve a better life by: 1) being able to afford all necessities (housing, healthcare, etc.) 2) not being subject to psychological torture at jobs they can't leave Modest increases in compensation don't seem to address (1) effectively and do not address (2) at all which is my concern.