6 ms·

> One person noted that “It costs more logistically for Amazon to pick up and redeliver than to replace most items. It’s simply a cost of doing business and is

> One person noted that “It costs more logistically for Amazon to pick up and redeliver than to replace most items. It’s simply a cost of doing business and is factored into the model.” How do we refactor our economy such that this is no longer possible? What actually needs to happen?

jstanley 5y ago
Why does it need to change? If it costs more to pick up and redeliver than it does to leave free gifts for random people, what's the downside of leaving free gifts?
- the_other 5y ago
  > Why does it need to change? Because when every decision by a company ultimately comes down to cost/profit, we lose the planet. > If it costs more to pick up and redeliver than it does to leave free gifts for random people, what's the downside of leaving free gifts? 1) the ethics are wrong here. Those gifts were intended for different people 2) Amazon "own" delivery here, and they failed; the cost is on them 3) a solution like "it's cheaper to post new ones" is anti-ecological (and thus probably also unethical) 4) Amazon is showing a very subtle disregard for its staff here. Technically, the staff member had responsibility for this delivery and they failed to manage that. Amazon enabled this misbehaviour (they probably enforced it through ridiculous targets). This removes the agency of the delivery staff. A "good" company would use individual staff members' agency to improve conditions for both the company and its staff (like how "good" engineering firms foster learning and career development). Whilst there may not be a career ladder with many rungs in delivery, those on the ladder should be afforded respect and their responsibility championed. Amazon failed here too.
- Applejinx 5y ago
  If that is even close to reality, there is no excuse not to just go straight to UBI and our Star Trek future… and stop messing around with pathetically arbitrary detritus being spewed off the fringes of a giant corporation, uselessly, and calling that 'gifts'. 'Free gifts for random people' isn't gifts, it's pollution.

jstanley 5y ago

Why does it need to change? If it costs more to pick up and redeliver than it does to leave free gifts for random people, what's the downside of leaving free gifts?

the_other 5y ago
> Why does it need to change? Because when every decision by a company ultimately comes down to cost/profit, we lose the planet. > If it costs more to pick up and redeliver than it does to leave free gifts for random people, what's the downside of leaving free gifts? 1) the ethics are wrong here. Those gifts were intended for different people 2) Amazon "own" delivery here, and they failed; the cost is on them 3) a solution like "it's cheaper to post new ones" is anti-ecological (and thus probably also unethical) 4) Amazon is showing a very subtle disregard for its staff here. Technically, the staff member had responsibility for this delivery and they failed to manage that. Amazon enabled this misbehaviour (they probably enforced it through ridiculous targets). This removes the agency of the delivery staff. A "good" company would use individual staff members' agency to improve conditions for both the company and its staff (like how "good" engineering firms foster learning and career development). Whilst there may not be a career ladder with many rungs in delivery, those on the ladder should be afforded respect and their responsibility championed. Amazon failed here too.
Applejinx 5y ago
If that is even close to reality, there is no excuse not to just go straight to UBI and our Star Trek future… and stop messing around with pathetically arbitrary detritus being spewed off the fringes of a giant corporation, uselessly, and calling that 'gifts'. 'Free gifts for random people' isn't gifts, it's pollution.