Is It Ethical To Use Amazon?

[Revoltingest]

If you're going to be operating with half a definition, while ignoring the vast intricacies of an economic model, then this is going to be a massive waste of time. This is far more applicable than "Dictionary.com"; fully understand that I will not be utilizing your neutered definition going forward.

Now you want to belatedly weigh in on
the topic we've already beaten to death?
Well, OK.
The definition is fundamental.
When people add their personal desires to the
definition, it's bogus. This is especially so when
their desires run counter to the consequences of
how socialism plays out in the real world, eg,
liberty, democracy, prosperity.

There are many socialist programs in the United States aligning with Democratic socialism (what the Nordic Model actual is....

Social programs aren't the "means of production".

Oh I know, poor wee confused me.

That's what I'm trying to help with.
Your goal isn't socialism per se.
It's the social programs you believe are inherent in socialism.
(They aren't.)
Social programs are best financed under capitalism.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Now you want to belatedly weigh in on the topic we've already beaten to death?

In the same day is far from "belatedly". Some people have jobs; patience is a virtue.

The definition is fundamental.

The definition is simplistic and trite, and the only reason you're using it is that ignoring the vast intricacies of what "Socialism" as an economic model are undermines your simplistic take on it.

When people add their personal desires to the definition, it's bogus. This is especially so when their desires run counter to the consequences of how socialism plays out in the real world, eg, liberty, democracy, prosperity.

I invite you to attempt to show where I injected my "personal desires" into the matter, and as well I challenge you to give specific examples of "how socialism plays out". Modifier as I've already given you examples: Do so without conflating "Socialism" with Communism or Marxism, or giving an example of a Socialist system overthrown by the CIA with a dictatorship then installed.

Social programs aren't the "means of production".

Nor did I say it was, namely because that's not all there is to socialism.

And those are best financed under capitalism.

That must be why life-saving medicines cost hundreds of dollars, food prices and taxes are a thing, and basic means of living are points of profit for the very select few.

 

[Revoltingest]

In the same day is far from "belatedly".

Things move fast here.
If you let being a productive citizen who still
works for a living interfere with our endless
blathering here, that's your own fault.

I've stopped letting paying jobs
interfere with my mission here.

The definition is simplistic and trite...

You mean "simple & clear".

, and the only reason you're using it is that ignoring the vast intricacies of what "Socialism" as an economic model are undermines your simplistic take on it.

Geeze Louise...calm down.
My criticism of socialism is independent of definitions used.
I've nothing else to add.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

My criticism of socialism is independent of definitions used.

Your criticism thus far seems to be based entirely on misconception and over-simplification. Do you not see how this presents a problem for said criticism?

 

[Revoltingest]

Your criticism thus far seems to be based entirely on misconception...

Time to agree to disagree.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Time to agree to disagree.

Rarely do I ever do that. This won't be one of those times either; your stance is fundamentally incorrect in that it is built on flawed information and representation. If you no longer wish to discuss it and correct the errors, that's all you. But I do not "agree to disagree" when it's in regards to matters like this. Capitalism is unsustainable, unethical, and should be decimated.

 

[Revoltingest]

Rarely do I ever do that.

Agreement will be one-sided then.

 

[Left Coast]

The ethical shortcomings and flat-out failures of Amazon are not hard to supply at all.

And yet that doesn't make them universal.

It is not a large claim at all to say that Capitalism, at all levels, is unethical. Even putting aside crimes and exploitation of natural resources and entire nations, the average worker makes the bare minimum that does not supply a basic living anymore, all while a Capitalist rakes in the profits of other people's labor without doing anything at all.

KH, come on now. That is some pretty wild exaggeration with little to nothing to back it up. The average worker in capitalist countries does not make the "bare minimum." Look up median income by country some time. While excesses of unregulated capitalism have resulted in exploitation, it is quite another thing and yes quite a large claim to claim that any and all capitalistic enterprise is unethical.

What do you do for a living?

Nor every transaction is Capitalism, nor is basic commerce a "capitalist framework" in any way, shape or form.

If I privately own the means of production of something I sell you, and I sell it for a profit...that's capitalism, isn't it?

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

And yet that doesn't make them universal.

Neither did I say that they were universal. Can you be certain that the Amazon warehouse handling your package is squeaky clean? Following all the rules? And even still, the profits from that transaction still go toward the Capitalist who owns the entire company and pads his pockets off the labor.

The average worker in capitalist countries does not make the "bare minimum."

Median income is $54,132 annually. Average cost of living is $61,332 annually. Barring complete financial catastrophe, that is only $7,200 annually in excess finances on average. That is not a lot at all, especially taking into account debt payments and unexpected expenses like car and medical problems.

What do you do for a living?

That information I will not divulge, but I will say that I make well above the state and federal minimum wage. And yet still my spouse (who also works) and I end up living paycheck to paycheck.

If I privately own the means of production of something I sell you, and I sell it for a profit...that's capitalism, isn't it?

That depends. Is your "means of production" something like an Etsy store, or is it Capital?

 

[Left Coast]

Neither did I say that they were universal. Can you be certain that the Amazon warehouse handling your package is squeaky clean? Following all the rules? And even still, the profits from that transaction still go toward the Capitalist who owns the entire company and pads his pockets off the labor.

You can't be sure of any of those things 100% of the time, regardless of economic system. If we're in agreement that Amazon's issues aren't universal, then we're speaking about a matter of degree here. It is not black and white.

Median income

is $54,132 annually. Average cost of living is $61,332 annually.

You're comparing individual earnings with household cost of living there. Median household income in 2021 in the US was $70,784.

Income in the United States: 2021).

That is not the "bare minimum," by any stretch. You're also only addressing the US. What about Europe? Canada?

That information I will not divulge, but I will say that I make well above the state and federal minimum wage. And yet still my spouse (who also works) and I end up living paycheck to paycheck.

And you have a boss? An owner of the company you work for? And you believe they...do nothing?

That depends. Is your "means of production" something like an Etsy store, or is it Capital?

I'm not a frequent or familiar Etsy user. My understanding is that it's a site where people sell their wares, either reselling items they've bought or products they've produced, right?. If I own the equipment and materials necessary to produce the product I sell, and I sell it for a profit, that is capitalism, it seems to me. Do you consider Etsy purchases ethical?

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

You're comparing individual earnings with household cost of living there.

No, I'm not. From the survey, it is the average American’s monthly expenses. Not the household.

You're also only addressing the US. What about Europe? Canada?

I'm not concerned about Europe and Canada in terms of this discussion.

And you have a boss? An owner of the company you work for? And you believe they...do nothing?

I know for a fact that the CEO of the company I work for does not labor, yet profits off mine.

If I own the equipment and materials necessary to produce the product I sell, and I sell it for a profit, that is capitalism, it seems to me.

Is this a hobby that you are using for secondary income, or is this a fixed source of income for you? Do you own the distribution? The marketing means and platform?

 

[Left Coast]

No, I'm not. From the survey, it is the average American’s monthly expenses. Not the household.

I think you need to reread the link, KH. The spending refers to "consumer units," which are households.

I know for a fact that the CEO of the company I work for does not labor, yet profits off mine.

For a fact? What do they do all day?

Is this a hobby that you are using for secondary income, or is this a fixed source of income for you? Do you own the distribution? The marketing means and platform?

Which of those questions makes the transaction ethical or not? Is it less ethical if the income is secondary? Must I own the distribution? If the distribution is the US mail, is that ethical? But if it's FedEx, it isn't?

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

The spending refers to "consumer units," which are households.

Okay, yes you are correct there.

I will say that's frustrating on behalf of the article, as that is what resulted from specifically searching for individual expenses. Trying more specific wording, this comparison between married and single living expenses was the best that I could find.

However what this does not take into account with is where someone lives. It's a national average, which varies wildly. How much is the state tax? How much are food prices? Rent? Utilities? What utilities are expected to be paid? Gas prices? Property taxes? The point being that 60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck. 59% of which do have trouble paying monthly bills. Wages are not keeping up with inflation, which is something that has been noted for decades. We simply are not making enough, and it is getting worse.

But hey, while Americans were suffering during the pandemic, Corporations did just fine!

For a fact? What do they do all day?

They do not labor.

Which of those questions makes the transaction ethical or not?

That's not the point here. The point here is that in your hypothetical you are not a Capitalist. Simple transactional commerce does not make one a Capitalist, nor does laboring to produce a product and then selling it. You are the one benefiting from your labor. A Capitalist is someone who profits from the ownership of assets and capital; e.g. rent from property that they own or the labor of employees.

 

[Left Coast]

Okay, yes you are correct there.

I will say that's frustrating on behalf of the article, as that is what resulted from specifically searching for individual expenses. Trying more specific wording, this comparison between married and single living expenses was the best that I could find.

I agree, the article itself worded things both ways. Poor editing on the part of whoever wrote up the article.

However what this does not take into account with is where someone lives. It's a national average, which varies wildly. How much is the state tax? How much are food prices? Rent? Utilities? What utilities are expected to be paid? Gas prices? Property taxes? The point being that 60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck. 59% of which do have trouble paying monthly bills. Wages are not keeping up with inflation, which is something that has been noted for decades. We simply are not making enough, and it is getting worse.

You're laying those issues at the feet of "capitalism" as an entire economic system, am i understanding that correctly? Rather than a consequence of contingent policy decisions? You believe in socialist countries they are not suffering the effects of inflation?

You keep talking about the US, but I asked earlier...what about all the other capitalist countries? Western Europe?

But hey, while Americans were suffering during the pandemic, Corporations did just fine!

Some corporations were fine. Some went out of business.

They do not labor.

What's labor, then? Digging ditches? People with white collar jobs aren't laboring?

That's not the point here.

It seems to me it's the entire point of the thread.

The point here is that in your hypothetical you are not a Capitalist. Simple transactional commerce does not make one a Capitalist, nor does laboring to produce a product and then selling it. You are the one benefiting from your labor. A Capitalist is someone who profits from the ownership of assets and capital; e.g. rent from property that they own or the labor of employees.

Physical capital includes equipment to produce a product, land where the services or goods are produced, etc. I don't have to have an employee to be engaging in capitalist enterprise. Aside from which...okay, let's say I have an employee. Is my sale to you now ethical?

 

[Revoltingest]

We just received an Amazon delivery.
Death to socialism!
Go capitalism!

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

You're laying those issues at the feet of "capitalism" as an entire economic system, am i understanding that correctly? Rather than a consequence of contingent policy decisions?

Yes, because here in America we have the unique and major problem wherein these Capitalists are essentially writing the policies.

You believe in socialist countries they are not suffering the effects of inflation?

Not to the effect that we are. Insulin costs $12 in Canada. One border south, it costs $98.70 plus tax in the US.

You keep talking about the US, but I asked earlier...what about all the other capitalist countries? Western Europe?

I do not have current lived experience in other countries, so I cannot speak for that experience. Yet from what I do know, Capitalism continues to be a global threat in that other nations (e.g. China and Saudi Arabia) are able to levy profit as pressure to maintain unfettered productions that are directly harmful to the environment.

Some corporations were fine. Some went out of business.

Which ones? I know many filed for bankruptcy, and were promptly bailed out by the government.

What's labor, then?

Selling your time in exchange for wages.

I don't have to have an employee to be engaging in capitalist enterprise.

Yes, you do, because that is Capitalism. It is not simple, base commerce, and in your original hypothetical of just selling me something, this is not an example of Capitalism.

okay, let's say I have an employee. Is my sale to you now ethical?

The issue is not the sale. Are you treating your employee fairly? Are they compensated for selling you their time and labor sufficiently so that they are able to live above comfortability, and even prepare for unexpected disasters? Do you contribute equal effort to the business, or more effort that would reasonably justify a higher salary or wage? How about your stock; is it sourced ethically in a clear and transparent fashion? Do you obey labor and commerce laws, without trying to undermine them to maximize your profits?

 

[Left Coast]

Yes, because here in America we have the unique and major problem wherein these Capitalists are essentially writing the policies.

No, that's the case in other capitalist countries as well. Aside from which - you think die hard free marketers are to blame for high state taxes? Or inflation spurred by profligate government spending? Cmon now.

Not to the effect that we are. Insulin costs $12 in Canada. One border south, it costs $98.70 plus tax in the US.

Canada is a capitalist country, KH.

I do not have current lived experience in other countries, so I cannot speak for that experience. Yet from what I do know, Capitalism continues to be a global threat in that other nations (e.g. China and Saudi Arabia) are able to levy profit as pressure to maintain unfettered productions that are directly harmful to the environment.

What are we actually talking about here, fossil fuels?

Which ones? I know many filed for bankruptcy, and were promptly bailed out by the government.

businesses that went out of business due to covid - Google Search

Here in my own town, I know of various local businesses that went under. Surely you must know this?

Selling your time in exchange for wages.

This makes it sound like salaried employees don't labor, only hourly ones. If that's not what you meant and you agree that salaried work is still labor, I'm not sure how you exclude executive-level work there.

Yes, you do, because that is Capitalism.

No sir, I'm sorry, but "having employees" is not a requirement for capitalist enterprise. If I own capital, of any kind, and I use that capital to sell products or services for my profit.... that's capitalism by any other name.

The issue is not the sale. Are you treating your employee fairly? Are they compensated for selling you their time and labor sufficiently so that they are able to live above comfortability, and even prepare for unexpected disasters? Do you contribute equal effort to the business, or more effort that would reasonably justify a higher salary or wage? How about your stock; is it sourced ethically in a clear and transparent fashion? Do you obey labor and commerce laws, without trying to undermine them to maximize your profits?

And you believe that no capitalist business enterprise on the planet can ever met these criteria reasonably? You believe that when the government controls the means of production these issues of employees making living wages and materials being sourced ethically... solves those problems?

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

No, that's the case in other capitalist countries as well.

I was unable to find anything regarding corporations writing and influencing European laws - as they do in America - but could find no such examples. What I was able to find is that there are many different kinds of capitalism, and in European countries there are regulations and protections in place that America does not seem to have or are constantly and actively trying to erode, for example Union rights.

Canada is a capitalist country, KH.

I never said that they weren't. $12 is still far above what it takes to manufacture Insulin, but my primary concern here is America. I would absolutely argue still that both are unethical, but one is far worse than the other and is downright evil.

What are we actually talking about here, fossil fuels?

In part, but carbon emissions as a whole. Profit and cost was a major roadblock for the Paris climate agreement.

businesses that went out of business due to covid - Google Search

Here in my own town, I know of various local businesses that went under. Surely you must know this?

The very first result has several companies that declared bankruptcy but persisted and were bailed out by federal loans. As well, I'm not saying that every single corporation ever did perfect, but it is absolutely undeniably noted that while many corporations saw record profits during the pandemic, their employees were suffering and bearing the brunt of it all. This cannot be denied.

This makes it sound like salaried employees don't labor, only hourly ones. If that's not what you meant and you agree that salaried work is still labor, I'm not sure how you exclude executive-level work there.

Executives are paid via negotiation at employment, rather than being reliant on a standard wage. Executives also bonus based off employee performance (directly profiting off the labor of others). An executive also does not have to clock in or out to be paid, they simply are.

If I own capital, of any kind, and I use that capital to sell products or services for my profit.... that's capitalism by any other name.

So modifying the hypothetical with specifics, what's the capital that you own to sell these products?

And you believe that no capitalist business enterprise on the planet can ever met these criteria reasonably?

Again I cannot speak for other countries. As Capitalism is in America, I do not believe they will ever meet such criteria, no.

You believe that when the government controls the means of production

Who said anything about the government owning or controlling the means of production?

 

[Left Coast]

I was unable to find anything regarding corporations writing and influencing European laws - as they do in America - but could find no such examples. What I was able to find is that there are many different kinds of capitalism, and in European countries there are regulations and protections in place that America does not seem to have or are constantly and actively trying to erode, for example Union rights.

What I can agree with here is that the US does have a problem with lobbying by corporations that influences policy. Left-wing groups also do this, especially unions, but it's a problem regardless.

I never said that they weren't. $12 is still far above what it takes to manufacture Insulin, but my primary concern here is America. I would absolutely argue still that both are unethical, but one is far worse than the other and is downright evil.

You would argue that paying $12 for Canadian insulin is also unethical? How much should insulin cost?

In part, but carbon emissions as a whole. Profit and cost was a major roadblock for the Paris climate agreement.

This article is about how the largest carbon emitter on Earth 7 years ago was balking during climate agreement negotiations. Except that country happens to be Communist.

The very first result has several companies that declared bankruptcy but persisted and were bailed out by federal loans.

And several others that fully went under. So you had a mix: some companies that did well, some that did poorly but improved from PPP loans, and others that went out of business.

Executives are paid via negotiation at employment, rather than being reliant on a standard wage.

Nearly all employees in the private sector are paid via negotiation at employment. "Standard wages" are the stuff of government work, generally.

Executives also bonus based off employee performance (directly profiting off the labor of others).

Others whose work they supervise, direct, and are ultimately responsible for, yes.

An executive also does not have to clock in or out to be paid, they simply are.

That's all salaried work, by definition. I'm a salaried employee, do I not "labor?" Do hourly employees work harder than me simply by definition because they clock in and out?

So modifying the hypothetical with specifics, what's the capital that you own to sell these products?

Machines to produce them, for example.

Again I cannot speak for other countries. As Capitalism is in America, I do not believe they will ever meet such criteria, no.

I don't know how you could possibly have that knowledge of the future, but okay.

Who said anything about the government owning or controlling the means of production?

Socialists, all the time.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

This article is about how the largest carbon emitter on Earth 7 years ago was balking during climate agreement negotiations. Except that country happens to be Communist.

Erm, no.

China is state capitalist. They are further from Communism than America is.

Nearly all employees in the private sector are paid via negotiation at employment.

Do you have any evidence that this is true? I would be astonished to discover that the majority of people who are privately employed are in any way able to negotiate their wage at employment.

Socialists, all the time.

Socialism is social ownership of the means of production. This CAN be done by government, but only IF that government can reasonably be said to be representative of the will of the people. This is why democracy is necessary for socialism, and why many states that claim to be socialist are in fact just state capitalist. If the government is, say, an authoritarian dictatorship or a one-party state, you cannot reasonably call such governments socialist.