3 ms·

I would agree with you, I see people like Jeff Bezos who's unfathomably wealthy but also treats his workers so terribly that they have to pee in bottles and I w

I would agree with you, I see people like Jeff Bezos who's unfathomably wealthy but also treats his workers so terribly that they have to pee in bottles and I wonder why? What compels someone to so obssesively seek wealth that they must treat people like that. I can only see it as some sort of mental illness. When someone compulsively hoards trinkets to the detriment of all around them, we call that a disease and I don't see why we should treat it differently when it's dollars they're collecting.

Sharlin 5mo ago
To get to where Jeff Bezos is, it's almost mandatory to have sociopathic traits and to be genuinely incapable of regarding other people as anything but means to an end. It's a simple selection effect.
- tencentshill 5mo ago
  He took a course on how to use your laugh as a domination tactic.
aquariusDue 5mo ago
Who knew dragons in real life could be so lame compared to fiction /s
sleepybrett 5mo ago
To be fair, I don't think jeff has proclaimed that their drivers need to pee in bottles. That's all mid level managers trying to show gains to their up-line reports. Jeff (and the board) wonders if deliveries could be more efficient, and wants to find efficiencies to report to the board and the shareholders. However it's fucking dave, 6+ layers below jeff that is firing drivers for missing unreasonably tight delivery schedules because they had to stop to take a leak. So that dave can tell suan who can tell susan who can tell .... and finally jeff that deliveries are now 2.3% faster. I do think that enough money and therefore a higher degree of control of your own life experiences does warp your perceptions of the world, however. I fail to understand why anyone with a billion fucking dollars in the bank just doesn't retire to a beach stocked with sex workers and cocaine and instead decides to continue torturing people through layers of unthinking bureaucracy though.
- tartoran 5mo ago
  >Jeff (and the board) wonders if deliveries could be more efficient And does not even care how or want to know how, just attain the goal at any cost. Of course, when word gets out that people are forced to pee in bottles, he suddenly wants to change things, not because he cares about the conditions that led to it, but because it damages his image.
- deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
- jaggederest 5mo ago
  The purpose of a system is what it does. If you're in control of a company, and that company is an "orphan crushing machine", it's your responsibility because ultimately someone must be responsible. You could argue the board shares responsibility, and certainly every high level manager endorses it. You have to say "Deliveries should be as efficient as is consistent with basic decency, anyone delivering Amazon packages will have breaks and schedules that are reasonable and achievable", in the same way that he mandated APIs[1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18916406 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18916406
  - sleepybrett 4mo ago
    I'm not arguing that this isn't true. I'm arguing that the closer to the bottle pissing employees you are on the org chart the more guilty you are.
    - f33d5173 4mo ago
      If it was only a small cluster of employees bottle pissing then this would make sense. When it's endemic across the company, that suggests it comes from incentives set at the top, and the low level managers can't individually do much about it.
      - sleepybrett 4mo ago
        Well at least at or near the top of the last mile group.
derangedHorse 5mo ago
> When someone compulsively hoards trinkets to the detriment of all around them, we call that a disease and I don't see why we should treat it differently when it's dollars they're collecting He doesn’t hold dollars, he mostly holds equity. Also it doesn’t seem like he’s directly involved in the day to day tasks assigned to delivery drivers so it’s weird to assign blame to him for that as well. One could argue that if drivers were unhappy with the work, they could just quit. Another would argue that that’s a callous way to view the problem as a new job may not be easy to get. I’d link these 2 issues and say my view is that if Bezos were to sell his stock to give to charity, Amazon’s own stock would plummet which would indirectly force the decision to leave Amazon onto their drivers. A depreciating stock price means their corporate RSU grants look less attractive, which I speculate would make working at Amazon less attractive, leading to worse talent and declining company performance. If a decline was to happen in this way there would probably be more demands on drivers, potentially decreasing demand for the job as the whole, and leaving the drivers who stay behind in worse conditions.
- joshstrange 5mo ago
  This is an insane comment/prediction. > He doesn’t hold dollars, he mostly holds equity. A distinction without a difference. > Also it doesn’t seem like he’s directly involved in the day to day tasks assigned to delivery drivers so it’s weird to assign blame to him for that as well. It’s weird to assign blame to the CEO for a long-standing practice of his company? You’ve got to be kidding? I don’t want to go full Godwin’s law here but Jesus… > One could argue that if drivers were unhappy with the work, they could just quit. Another would argue that that’s a callous way to view the problem as a new job may not be easy to get. Yes, “Another” would. Anyone who has existed in the world could tell you that. “Just get another job” is so incredibly tone deaf. It’s up there with “just sue your employer if they are stealing from you/harassing you/etc”. > I’d link these 2 issues and say my view is that if Bezos were to sell his stock to give to charity, Amazon’s own stock would plummet Literally a made up outcome with zero basis in reality. And a rather disgusting defense of his practices “no, no, you don’t understand, he has to be horrible or Amazon will falter and fail and then those people will lose their jobs!”.
  - 5mo ago

Sharlin 5mo ago

To get to where Jeff Bezos is, it's almost mandatory to have sociopathic traits and to be genuinely incapable of regarding other people as anything but means to an end. It's a simple selection effect.

tencentshill 5mo ago
He took a course on how to use your laugh as a domination tactic.

aquariusDue 5mo ago

Who knew dragons in real life could be so lame compared to fiction /s

sleepybrett 5mo ago

To be fair, I don't think jeff has proclaimed that their drivers need to pee in bottles. That's all mid level managers trying to show gains to their up-line reports. Jeff (and the board) wonders if deliveries could be more efficient, and wants to find efficiencies to report to the board and the shareholders. However it's fucking dave, 6+ layers below jeff that is firing drivers for missing unreasonably tight delivery schedules because they had to stop to take a leak. So that dave can tell suan who can tell susan who can tell .... and finally jeff that deliveries are now 2.3% faster. I do think that enough money and therefore a higher degree of control of your own life experiences does warp your perceptions of the world, however. I fail to understand why anyone with a billion fucking dollars in the bank just doesn't retire to a beach stocked with sex workers and cocaine and instead decides to continue torturing people through layers of unthinking bureaucracy though.

tartoran 5mo ago
>Jeff (and the board) wonders if deliveries could be more efficient And does not even care how or want to know how, just attain the goal at any cost. Of course, when word gets out that people are forced to pee in bottles, he suddenly wants to change things, not because he cares about the conditions that led to it, but because it damages his image.
deleted 5mo ago
[deleted]
jaggederest 5mo ago
The purpose of a system is what it does. If you're in control of a company, and that company is an "orphan crushing machine", it's your responsibility because ultimately someone must be responsible. You could argue the board shares responsibility, and certainly every high level manager endorses it. You have to say "Deliveries should be as efficient as is consistent with basic decency, anyone delivering Amazon packages will have breaks and schedules that are reasonable and achievable", in the same way that he mandated APIs[1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18916406 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18916406
- sleepybrett 4mo ago
  I'm not arguing that this isn't true. I'm arguing that the closer to the bottle pissing employees you are on the org chart the more guilty you are.
  - f33d5173 4mo ago
    If it was only a small cluster of employees bottle pissing then this would make sense. When it's endemic across the company, that suggests it comes from incentives set at the top, and the low level managers can't individually do much about it.
    - sleepybrett 4mo ago
      Well at least at or near the top of the last mile group.

derangedHorse 5mo ago

> When someone compulsively hoards trinkets to the detriment of all around them, we call that a disease and I don't see why we should treat it differently when it's dollars they're collecting He doesn’t hold dollars, he mostly holds equity. Also it doesn’t seem like he’s directly involved in the day to day tasks assigned to delivery drivers so it’s weird to assign blame to him for that as well. One could argue that if drivers were unhappy with the work, they could just quit. Another would argue that that’s a callous way to view the problem as a new job may not be easy to get. I’d link these 2 issues and say my view is that if Bezos were to sell his stock to give to charity, Amazon’s own stock would plummet which would indirectly force the decision to leave Amazon onto their drivers. A depreciating stock price means their corporate RSU grants look less attractive, which I speculate would make working at Amazon less attractive, leading to worse talent and declining company performance. If a decline was to happen in this way there would probably be more demands on drivers, potentially decreasing demand for the job as the whole, and leaving the drivers who stay behind in worse conditions.

joshstrange 5mo ago
This is an insane comment/prediction. > He doesn’t hold dollars, he mostly holds equity. A distinction without a difference. > Also it doesn’t seem like he’s directly involved in the day to day tasks assigned to delivery drivers so it’s weird to assign blame to him for that as well. It’s weird to assign blame to the CEO for a long-standing practice of his company? You’ve got to be kidding? I don’t want to go full Godwin’s law here but Jesus… > One could argue that if drivers were unhappy with the work, they could just quit. Another would argue that that’s a callous way to view the problem as a new job may not be easy to get. Yes, “Another” would. Anyone who has existed in the world could tell you that. “Just get another job” is so incredibly tone deaf. It’s up there with “just sue your employer if they are stealing from you/harassing you/etc”. > I’d link these 2 issues and say my view is that if Bezos were to sell his stock to give to charity, Amazon’s own stock would plummet Literally a made up outcome with zero basis in reality. And a rather disgusting defense of his practices “no, no, you don’t understand, he has to be horrible or Amazon will falter and fail and then those people will lose their jobs!”.
- 5mo ago