4 ms·
Here is an idea. How about we have dislike for those that hoard wealth, while the majority of the people live in poverty, and died of it. How about we dislike
by mkdirp 5y ago
Here is an idea. How about we have dislike for those that hoard wealth, while the majority of the people live in poverty, and died of it.
How about we dislike those that avoid taxes like the plague, and yet, use all our services to their fullest extent.
How about we dislike those that exploit workers, turned a blind eye, and give a middle finger to most of their workers, and the people?
It's got nothing to do with jealousy, and everything to do with how horrible of a company Amazon is, and how its founder, and until recently its CEO, have let it become a horrible in the name of money.
I don't under people defending the ultra rich. The likelihood of the average joe getting to Bezos' wealth is next to zero. It's ridiculous to defend him despite all the bad he does. Before you say he adds to society by donating money or whatnot (e.g. Bill Gates), you know what works better? A good welfare system for those that need. One that would otherwise be funded partially by the rich's tax money that they love to avoid.
- rosndo 5y ago> How about we have dislike for those that hoard wealth, while the majority of the people live in poverty, and died of it. What about those that create wealth? It’s not a zero sum game.
- scollet 5y agoBezos does not create wealth though.
- mkdirp 5y agoAh right. The wealth that Bezos creates. The one whose workers are living pay cheque to pay cheque and barely scraping by. The one whose workers are peeing in bottles because they can't afford to be fired for taking a break. It's not zero sum game because the wealth they create favours the investors. Not the population. The aim of a company is to create wealth for the investors. Not for anyone else. I'm not sure why it is you're defending the rich in this thread, but your arguments have been overplayed for years.