5 ms·
This one is rather preachy. It is unintentionally arguing the existence of Amazon itself is bad and that everyone would be better off without it, including all
by nsxwolf 2y ago
This one is rather preachy. It is unintentionally arguing the existence of Amazon itself is bad and that everyone would be better off without it, including all the people it employs and serves, directly and indirectly.
- inanutshellus 2y agoI see only demonstrated difference between exactly how wealthy one single man is versus things you also can't imagine but we can understand their relative size. How many mouths Amazon feeds is not on-topic. Imagine that he got his wealth by magic. Poof. He has it. The data would still be the same. His wealth, as of 2021, is literally unimaginable the same way that counting the number of stars in the universe is. Wow. It's just... so... overwhelmingly wealthy. Amazingly, spectacularly, unfathomably wealthy.
- WolfeReader 2y agoAs it should.
- pcthrowaway 2y agoWhere does it argue against the existence of Amazon. Not that I disagree with it, but it doesn't even do that. It is however, out of date. At the time of creation, the 400 richest people in the world owned $3.2T of wealth, now you only need to take the top 23 richest people to amass $3.2T of wealth.
- inanutshellus 2y ago"Updated April 3, 2021". Seems odd that 400 would go to 23 in less than 4 yrs, though.
- spencerflem 2y agoSeems odd, but: https://www.forbes.com/sites/chasewithorn/2023/12/19/the-10-billionaires-who-gained-the-most-wealth-in-2023/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/chasewithorn/2023/12/19/the-10-... In that year alone, Elon gained a hundred billion dollars. Most people did not Wealth inequality is mind boggling.
- troyvit 2y agoIf it is preachy it uses very few words to preach. In fact it only mentions Amazon once, and that's to highlight the average pay of an Amazon warehouse worker.