Yeah man, we can look back at the dystopia 1950s when no one started a business because employees were paid so much.

That's why growth was so stagnant from the 50's to the 90's.

27Allin's gut feelings about the way the world should work >>>> objective historical reality.

No, I get it. The goal should for sure be paying people as little as you can, aka, getting your costs as low as you can. But the goals change once you get to be worth a billion or a hundred million, and there's something broken in your brain if you can't understand that.

No, that's not it. We as a society have decided that people do not get to get wealthy with no regard for human life, and we argue about where to draw the lines. 27 rejects this premise, and so he does not get to be taken seriously.

It's amazing how much of the Amazon story is that they set money on fire for a decade but the market for whatever reason decided Bezos would be the winner of the e-commerce wars

successfully hitting performance metrics itt

I mean, ****, where do you even begin?

Bezos doesn't go home to a Scrooge McDuck style vault where he bathes in the tears of uppity millennials and counts his fat stacks of cash.

Current labor costs are baked into the value of the company, and thus his own net worth. If Amazon's labor costs double overnight, what do you think happens to the price of the stock, and thus the investment of all those people who own the other 85% of Amazon? How long do you think Amazon survives without any outside investment? The money will have to come from within, which means lowering costs or raising prices. Which one do you think is easier in a competitive business environment?

Bezos is a nice scapegoat for you because he's one dude who could technically afford to write a personal check to each employee for several thousand dollars, but there aren't very many Jeff Bezos equivalents out there. You'll find that you run out of other peoples' money very quickly.

You mean to say that if laborers get more money, then wealthy people won't be as wealthy? WOW HOLY **** MAN. WAIT UNTIL YOU TELL THE LABORERS THIS.

Shocking, I know.

Another shocker? If you artificially limit the upside of entrepreneurship, fewer people will shoot for the moon and something like Amazon never happens in the first place. This ends poorly for everyone.

Yeah we'd never have figured out the whole shopping online thing if not for genius mr bezos.

Inso0 is going to blow our ****ing minds when he tells us about this radical book "Atlas Shrugged" and the hot trend of "going Galt" that is totally real and rooted in history

gtfo here with this bull****. you know what actually causes fewer people to shoot for the moon WRT entrepreneurship? being priced out of healthcare coverage and a tightening social safety net which all spells some level of certain personal and financial disaster should the business fail.

With the "rich people don't actually do the triple lindy in to a pool of gold coins" I almost have a bingo.

Online shopping existed long before Amazon did, but that's not the point.

Entire industries exist to service massive companies like Amazon. Their economies of scale allow me to press a button and have a $6 spatula delivered to my house in 3 hours for free if I wanted so. If you decided that "nobody is allowed to be worth more than $100,000,000" like some other guy ITT says, our entire way of life changes, and not for the better.

IBM, Apple, Microsoft, Google. What does a world look like when IBM is forced to stop growth and expansion back in 1962 because they were "too rich" by then and we decided that money was better spent on relatively minor increases in worker pay?

This dumb mother****er is a true believer, huh?

Even after the dragon nostrils I'm actually surprised.

I'm sure that if Bezos thought the upside was merely $50 billion, he'd have been like, "Naw dawg, I'm good. Guess I will go into plumbing."

If you dismantle IBM in the 60s because they were "too rich" like the other guy alluded to, Bezos may well have been a plumber. He pursued an education in computer science, and you can thank the fat cats at IBM and Xerox for that.

Hahahahaha. One, bull****. Two, paying workers more is not dismantling a company.

Who said anything about dismantling IBM?

What do you want him to do sell his shares and give the proceeds to amazon employees? Suppose he did that once he became a billionaire (circa 1998, I think); he'd have nothing left to give.

He can transfer some shares to his employees?

Also,

****ING GOOD

If you hate America and capitalism, there are plenty of pseudo-socialist countries you can apply for residency in.

The actual socialist ones are figurative hellholes, so you probably don't want to head to any of those.