Hacker News Reader

Comment by hinkley | Hacker News Reader

But They are clearly not employee focused, which is half of that social equation and most of the “half your waking hours” comment.

More and more they are “customer-focussed” in the sense that cheetahs are antelope-focused. The way Facebook and Google have turned out.

View on HN

They provide valuable jobs, otherwise employees wouldn't agree to it

So did slavers, or parents wouldn't have agreed to sell them their children.

Yes, children can be put in a more productive environment thanks to this

They provide shitty jobs for a lot of desperate people. If we don't work towards a world with good working conditions, we won't work in good conditions.

Improving conditions has a cost. Would you rather see them unemployed?

Paying them more and having Bezos and the other people at the top of Amazon not be rich enough to buy entire countries is an option, too.

A level playing field would be better. As is bosses of companies a being paid huge multiples of what their employees can expect to earth

false choice. I would rather see the profits to shareholders reduced sufficiently to pay for fair working conditions.

Actually I lied. I would rather see a network of cooperatively owned companies replace Amazon where all workers in that system have good jobs, no one is a billionaire, and money spent stays more local.

What’s stopping you build it then? Bezos built his vision, now it’s your turn!

I’m working on it.

Great! Good luck

> They provide shitty jobs for a lot of desperate people.

I know many millionaire employees of Amazon.

I’m not talking about every employee. I’m talking about certain jobs amazon offers that are anti-human.

That is assuming those employees aren't desperate for work. Had we adequate social welfare, or a glut of unfulfilled good jobs, I might agree, but when your choice is "die or work at the level we want", they aren't really given a real choice.

This is incredibly naive (or disingenuous?). When the alternative is just not having a job people will take a lot of shit, that doesn't mean it's okay.

And if the company didn't exist they wouldn't have the option of having that job. How is it not beneficial to have the company to those people?

Good thing that theres plenty of other options on the scale between uncaring capitalist monster and no company at all.

The more filters you add to companies the fewer successful ones you'll have. Filtering out companies from our current selection would leave you with fewer of them, not more.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com