this post was submitted on 05 May 2026
1429 points (99.1% liked)
Work Reform
16265 readers
1018 users here now
A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.
Our Philosophies:
- All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
- Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
- Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
- We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.
Our Goals
- Higher wages for underpaid workers.
- Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
- Better and fewer working hours.
- Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
- Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem isn't Amazon, which employer millions of people and provides services that people obviously love. In fact, many cottage businesses have found success on Amazon, as well as many authors being able to publish their books with the permission of the publishing industry, and much more. Why should we get rid of all that? None of that is the problem.
The problem is profit. If Amazon employees made double or triple their salaries, treated them respectfully, and had great benefits, nobody would complain about them. They'd probably be lauded as a great company.
What's causing it is Bezos' untreated OCD, which manifests as uncontrolled compulsive financial hoarding. He sucks so much profit out of the business, that it severely hurts the employees, and the company's corporate image. If he could figure out how to live below his means, he'd find out that he really doesn't need enough money for a million lifetimes, he could share that money with his employees, make his customers more comfortable buying from Amazon, and they'd make even more money than they were.
Or America could do what they do with uncontrolled hoarders whose collections start to have a negative affect on those around them - we get them mental help, and give all those cats to new families. That's what we should do with Bezos. Comfine him a mental hospital until his mania for profit subsides, and give all his neglected money to people who will appreciate it. Or nationalize Amazon, and run it as a government held non-profit, with the proceeds going to fund social programs.
Amazon Let Its Drivers’ Urine Be Sold as an Energy Drink
Love my cottage businesses.
I think there's an element of truth to this. But trying to medicalize what is, at the end of the day, just economic autocracy presumes that there's a person who could do Bezos's job (such that it ever even existed) "ethically". I don't really think this person exists. Once you consolidate an abundance of authority in a few hands, people just behave like this because it yields immense benefits and costs them nothing.
This sounds like you're talking about Trust Busting.
But I've got a better idea...
It's not that hard. All an "Ethical" CEO would have to do is reduce the profits to 25%, and invest the rest into employee pay and benefits. Then market the shit out of that.
That CEO would be an American Hero, and his company would boom, lifting the share price, and keeping the stockholders happy.
But he wouldn't have multiple yachts, including one he has to sell, because it was "too big."
No, all an 'ethical' CEO would have to do is provide workers with the full surplus value produced by their labor. Otherwise he can get put into the woodchipper 75% faster as thanks for him stealing only 25% of my existence.
Valid.
That is, at best, a kind of National Socialism (or perhaps, trade unionism) that's great at benefiting everyone directly below the CEO but not so great at socializing the wealth accrued by the company at-large. I would argue that even above and beyond the immediate miserable labor practices of Amazon as a company, what you have is an "Infinite Paperclip Machine" under the hood. Amazon is an engine of industry that snatches up cheap raw materials and transforms them into expensive finished products without bothering to ask the question "Do we need another box of paperclips?"
Redistributing profit is nice, I guess. But so long as Amazon operates on the principle of maximized profits, it becomes a meat-grinder of primary accumulation.
He'd be the next Henry Ford, a man famous for really high quality political opinions and a legacy of ecologically friendly public-private partnerships.
The problem is Amazon. Hope that helps. Throw Bezos in a woodchipper.
Or if you're willing to take the bitter medicine and view a broader reality, capitalism is the problem and inherently depends on destroying the planet on which we rely on to survive. Bezos is just a particularly severe symptom of the disease of capitalism.
That's the thing; Amazon didn't pull out its success out of nowhere; the consumer made it what it became. Want to have a version of Amazon with healthcare and job security? Then build it yourself. That won't work because of the customer wanting the cheapest stuff possible? Here's the crux of the problem. There won't be corporate reform without consumer reform.
You missed my point. The solution isn't to let them continue to be bad, until someone goes into competition and beat them with a more moral business model. The moral model can't succeed when they are competing with someone who is exploiting and manipulating the system in bad faith.
The solution is to create a business environment where the moral business succeeds, while the immoral business struggles, and eventually decides to follow the rules in order to succeed, or close.
Yes, but it will be up to the consumer to create such an environment, either with their wallets or democratically.
The government will have to take a major role in that. Reconfiguring the entire direction of the business environment cannot be left to the easily manipulated vagaries of the American consumer. It has to be much more deliberate than that, with targeted laws and vigorous enforcement.
In the future, we must make it uncomfortable to be super wealthy, like needing permission to spend their money on a second yacht. If the commission determines that's an unreasonable request, the money will be confiscated, and steered to Social programs. Obviously that's too much money for them to handle responsibly.
I think the Universal Ranked Income concept that I put together can address at least some of the issue. The essential idea is that everyone receive basic UBI and benefits, such as free healthcare, generic food or supplies, basic car, basic housing, fuel, and so forth. A job is for earning money, which in turn is used for luxuries and upgrades. In effect, money is a non-essential currency.
Aside from that, each type of job falls into a category of rankings. This rank gives a fixed amount of money, replacing the basic UBI income of $10k for a citizen. Assuming a full year of work after mandated vacations and whatnot, that would be $40k for a basic job like waiter. An astronaut gets the highest ranked job, which brings in $100k. Mix this with an absolute cap on wealth and assets ($100k for each category), and that will limit the power of a person over society, while allowing for a reasonable level of liberty and prosperity for a person. Plus, companies can't commit wage theft or use bad terms.
However, this doesn't entirely address companies by themselves. Each worker should have the ability to vote for the leadership and the leader's paygrade within their own establishment, and also be able to cast such votes for leaders that are above the establishment. Say, WalMart managers - you can vote for your store's manager, the city's manger, the state's manager, and the nation's manager, ect.
Still not enough. Companies also should have restrictions on how much total wealth and assets they can hold. What I propose: the cap is 50% of the staff payroll, based on each employee. An waiter adds $20k to the company's capacity, while an astro is 50k. If a company needs capacity without increasing headcount, they can participate in a government lotto program. The lotto gives an annual income to a winner, and each winner only can have one income at a time, which can replace basic UBI. To qualify, they have to be without a job and not have any benefits to draw upon. (Each day worked, gives 1 day of income as retirement benefits.) This allows companies using AI or not needing people, to still contribute to society while improving their fiscal potential.
0000
I know, a long list of stuff. Unfortunately, economics are wooly and there are many, many issues to sort out, if we go down the route of an egalitarian society.
Valid concepts. I like to speculate on the future Utopian Socialist America, too, if we can make it happen.
If I had the money, I would fund an EVE Online spinoff that existed to compare different socio-economic models against each other. Year 1 would have the shards separate, so that each community would develop in isolation and master their respective styles. Year 2, the shards are linked together to that each 'galaxy' can visit each other for trade and conquest.
The way I figure, our world is so used to feudalism and capitalism, that things like genuine socialism or communism would be 'noobs' when their governments spawn, and thus be killed or corrupted not long after appearing. Giving time to become equals with infrastructure and experience would be useful for evening the playing field of the experiment. Plus, we can look at each society at isolation before mixing in the complications of competing with other models.
To me, it would be preferable to study these models in a virtual environment, before trying them in the real world. Unfortunately, I have the feeling that we will have to fly by the seat of our pants and hope for the best.