zlacker

>>jbegle+(OP)
The amount of people trying to defend Amazon in this is absolutely staggering. The amount of people trying to protect what Amazon stands for is revolting. If you are one of these kinds of people you should know that you are the enemy of treating people humanely.

>>void44+pi
These types of pleas to emotion really should be saved for other social media venues like FB, Twitter and Reddit.

Defend your position with facts instead of ad hominems (e.g. "you are the enemy").

>>maland+nS
If you want to be a sociopath or a robot free of emotions, be my guest. The rest of us live with having emotions. Sorry to tell you that, it's part of what makes people human.

>>void44+tW
It's one thing to have emotions, it's another to make emotion driven policy decisions. Policy outcomes depend on physics, not on our wishful thinking. If someone has good arguments that ignore emotions it doesn't make their arguments worse or weaker. What you should then do is consider their arguments and propose something that still largely addresses those issues but also addresses the emotional parts that you seem to care about.

>>d1zzy+531
I'm not convinced that a good argument of ethics and empathy could be made without emotions. The whole point of this entire thread is about having empathy for the situation of the workers, which Amazon as a company does not seem to have. If you think you can have an emotion-free Logic And Reason argument involving empathy, I would love to hear it!