4 ms·

And I believe its exploitive of everyone in the supply chain, from manufacturers to delivery drivers, and has led to the vast centralization of an overwhelmingl

And I believe its exploitive of everyone in the supply chain, from manufacturers to delivery drivers, and has led to the vast centralization of an overwhelmingly large portion of our economy into the hands of corporation with no accountability. Furthermore I am very convinced it makes the lives of everyone, except the tiny minority that are actively exploiting everyone else, much worse. Good jobs are lost, supply chains are made fragile, and monopolistic tendencies are encouraged. I would rather the inconvenience of shopping around than encourage a world with a private entity as the sole source of all consumer goods.

cortesoft 5y ago
Yeah, but we are never going to stop that behavior by individuals choosing not to shop at Amazon. As an individual, my only two choices are to shop at Amazon and get the benefits and Amazon still exists, or don’t shop there and don’t get the benefits and Amazon still exists. Amazon is not going to care if they lose my business. The only person who suffers is me. If we think Amazon business practices are immoral, we need to make them illegal.
- methodin 5y ago
  And therein lies the main problem with that line of thinking in today's political landscape - when politicians are effectively funded by the large companies that have seemingly unlimited money and power, that will never happen, so where exactly will this new law come from?
- dkhenry 5y ago
  I believe thats exactly how we stop that, by choosing not to shop at Amazon. The government is ( theoretically ) an expression of the will of the people, if the will of the people is to exploit others for their own benefit, the government will reflect that. Until we individually decide that our neighbors are important enough to us that we are willing to suffer a little inconvenience nothing will change, but if we are willing to individually suffer a little inconvenience we absolutely can effect any company even one as big as Amazon.
  - cortesoft 5y ago
    > The government is ( theoretically ) an expression of the will of the people, if the will of the people is to exploit others for their own benefit, the government will reflect that There is a fundamental difference between stopping an abusive business practice with a vote verse with your wallet. With a vote, your choice is to allow the bad business practice and get the benefit of shopping there, or don't allow the business practice and don't get benefit of shopping there. The choice goes together with the consequences, good or bad. On the other hand, choosing with your wallet doesn't couple the choice with the consequence. Even if I don't shop there, it is very likely the business will continue. Me losing the benefit of shopping there doesn't cause the business practice to stop necessarily. Lots of people would be willing to give up shopping there if it meant the business stopped, but not if it doesn't.

cortesoft 5y ago

Yeah, but we are never going to stop that behavior by individuals choosing not to shop at Amazon. As an individual, my only two choices are to shop at Amazon and get the benefits and Amazon still exists, or don’t shop there and don’t get the benefits and Amazon still exists. Amazon is not going to care if they lose my business. The only person who suffers is me. If we think Amazon business practices are immoral, we need to make them illegal.

methodin 5y ago
And therein lies the main problem with that line of thinking in today's political landscape - when politicians are effectively funded by the large companies that have seemingly unlimited money and power, that will never happen, so where exactly will this new law come from?
dkhenry 5y ago
I believe thats exactly how we stop that, by choosing not to shop at Amazon. The government is ( theoretically ) an expression of the will of the people, if the will of the people is to exploit others for their own benefit, the government will reflect that. Until we individually decide that our neighbors are important enough to us that we are willing to suffer a little inconvenience nothing will change, but if we are willing to individually suffer a little inconvenience we absolutely can effect any company even one as big as Amazon.
- cortesoft 5y ago
  > The government is ( theoretically ) an expression of the will of the people, if the will of the people is to exploit others for their own benefit, the government will reflect that There is a fundamental difference between stopping an abusive business practice with a vote verse with your wallet. With a vote, your choice is to allow the bad business practice and get the benefit of shopping there, or don't allow the business practice and don't get benefit of shopping there. The choice goes together with the consequences, good or bad. On the other hand, choosing with your wallet doesn't couple the choice with the consequence. Even if I don't shop there, it is very likely the business will continue. Me losing the benefit of shopping there doesn't cause the business practice to stop necessarily. Lots of people would be willing to give up shopping there if it meant the business stopped, but not if it doesn't.