Earlier quoted context omitted.
Consumers suffer because they won't buy that 50in tv? Really, any business that exploits workers should not exist. If some goods are just too expensive then people should really learn to live without them. I don't mind "suffering" as a consumer if what I pay reflects the real costs of production. It's called honesty. The problem is that any company as big as Amazon is a billion pound train moving at high speed, it ca…
I don't buy from Amazon because they're the cheapest, but because of the convenience and the excellent support. I wouldn't mind at all if they raised all prices 10-20% to pay their workers better.
Doing this WOULD make it more difficult for Amazon to crush and destroy every possible local store and national chain store that could ever exist, thus making it more possible for other choices to exist out there in the world (or even in our own communities where we live!) so from a stock market point of view, from a 'Jeff Bezos First Trillionaire' point of view, I can see why they feel compelled to go as hard as they can. Their purpose is not really to serve people, but to destroy everything else that serves a similar function as them, in order to be completely dominant and allow for, effectively, NO MARKET but just only them.
That's called a unicorn.
I'd rather pay 25% more and have… a market, I guess. I'd rather have different options. I see the motivations here, but I don't mind saying there's no benefit to ME in them. I'd be better off with Amazon only one of many supply chains I could draw on.
They have to be shockingly extreme in order to stifle the whole market, otherwise stuff will survive as a 'less good option' and remain accessible in spite of not being as 'good'.