I will be ultra frank:
I do not care how much money people make, encourage them to make as much as they can, but insist they also pay their own way.
For about 40 years, in the US, wages for basic labors have been near flat, while cost and risk exposure have gone through the roof.
Back when this all started, the promise was it would get cheaper to live, so no worries.
So which is it?
Actually make it cheaper to live?
Fund labor properly?
Let people suffer and die early?
I do not find any subsidy acceptable, unless there is real need.
Amazon has no such need. Amazon has a want, and so does it's many peers. Understanable. But, labor has real needs being unmet and those come well before I have any real concern for wants expressed by people unwilling to fund real, basic needs of labor helping them to make more than enough money otherwise.
I know, rough. Get that. But, we are talking about real people here, lives, kids, families. All of that matters one hell of a lot more than persuing an idealized, fantasy free labor market ideal ever will.
In fact, the only way to change that is results. Better answers to the "which is it?" question I just posed.
Answers today are trending worse, not better. And that is a primary driver behind a large and growing number of people, myself included, seeking to do things very differently.
People should get as wealthy as they can. Business gets as big as it can too. All good, so long as doing those things does not leave the carnage it currently does.
I will not respond again, but will gladly read replies.