alt Hacker News> still had more money than they could spend in 100 lifetimes
How is that relevant to anything? There are intelligent criticisms of Amazon. But this is just a non-sequitur.
> still had more money than they could spend in 100 lifetimes
How is that relevant to anything? There are intelligent criticisms of Amazon. But this is just a non-sequitur.
It’s absolutely not a non-sequitur.
The point is that his wealth is from exploiting labor out of greed.
He could take a smaller share and still be plenty rich and many more people would be much better off than they are today.
But he doesn’t. The disparity is so vast that it is arguably immoral or unethical. That’s AOCs point