I've got way too much cash, thinks Jeff Bezos. Hmmm, pay more tax? Pay staff more? Nah, let's just go into space

Re: I disagree...

Yes, it would be better if we had a presence in space to an extent of a viable population on one or more planets/moons.

No, I'm not impressed with the rest of it. You seem to misunderstand the concept that while we only have one planet and while said "blades of grass" etc keep it limping along - they are indeed special along with everything else that does so. An example being the American wolf. It indirectly improves the health of its habitat - which benefits its prey (which rednecks love to pepper with armour piercing bullets), but rednecks still shoot, poison, trap them. Personally I'd solve the problem by culling the rednecks who break the law by killing them. That way every one wins.

The wolves - no more illegal culling, generally by or instigated by crusty bigoted geriatrics.

The health service - less crusty bigoted geriatrics to treat.

The environment generally - less clapped out trucks owned by crusty bigoted geriatrics (a stove bolt six were good enough fer yer great grandpappy so it's good enough for you...)

Human society - less people getting infected with the CBGs bigotry and buck toothed retardedness.

There really is a circle of life, and while grass might not be important in your opinion - it is to the animal kingdom. Tell you what, why don't I razee your home, take your car, smartphone and money and leave you to survive on your own wits. You'd be dead in a week. That's what happens to the animals when some nerk with your sort of attitude wipes out a distinctly unspecial area of woodland or grassland..

Re: I disagree...

When you say the sooner "we" who do you think that "we" will be? What do you think will happen once we can terraform planets to make them habitable? Do you think you will going? It'll be the rich and their slaves (in all but name).

I think before we even start looking to other planets we need to sort our own out first or we'll just repeat the same mistakes all over again. The stupidity you speak of is ourselves and we only have ourselves to blame for letting it get to this point.

Re: I disagree...

But the question is, should Amazon do all it can to avoid paying taxes, which could be used to solve social problems in the very cities that it has presence, just so Bezos can complete with Musk to see whose rocket is biggest?

I don't think it's an either/or situation. With that much money to burn he could do both.

Re: I disagree...

Do you want to live in a planet where Jeff Bezos is the supreme emperor?

Re: I disagree...

I'd say this ball of mud is pretty special, after all it's where we live and it keeps us alive.

" I wish more people would put resources into space,"

Face it: chemical rockets are expensive, slow and little reusable. You can put a rover on Mars, maybe a couple of people to plant a flag, and nothing else. The expense to set a colony - if it could survive, are prohibitive, and you just waste ginormous, non replaceable, resources to bring a small payload to an hostile environment - which again would require enormous resources to be kept habitable - and where those resources should come from? How much H2 and O2 - water - are we going to burn in space? Kerosene and methane won't last forever too.

Sure, interesting science, but a dead-end until someone finds a more economical and far more powerful propulsion system, and a way to survive very long time in space. Loot at astronauts after six months in the space station. And if the speed of light is an unbreakable barrier, mankind won't go anywhere in space.

Terraforming, space arks, and interstellar voyages are still just the realm of FICTION. Even a lunar outpost would be a big issue. A colony on Mars is not like colonizing New England or Australia, albeit I can see Amazon bringing slaves there too, if only they could.

There's a good chance we're going to destroy this planet before being able to go back and forth a new one. And people like Bezos won't be able to escape on their rockets.

Re: I disagree...

"The sooner we can get off this ball of mud and leave behind the stupidity ("oh, this particular piece of mud/sand/blade of grass is *special* because... reasons") the better."

You might leave this ball of mud. But you'll never leave the stupidity behind.

Re: I disagree...

You know, wanting technology to advance and hoping that we can one day stick a colony on the moon/mars that is relatively (and increasingly) self sustaining is fine. I want that to happen and so do most tech types.

I'd also like people working for Amazon on earth to actually earn enough food to be able to buy food, water, a roof over their head and still have some disposable income for entertainment etc so those people can have a decent quality of life. Preferably without relying on the states social safety net to make sure their staff can eat. Yeah, that bit of public services that Amazon does not pay any taxes towards.

Oh, and i'd like Amazon to pay money in taxes to pay for those public services that they and their staff rely on, too.

There is no need for any of these points to be exclusive and it should be something that everybody but Amazon's PR staff can get behind because regardless of how the "divide and conquer" crowd try and spin it, this is not a left/right issue or even an issue that really relates to politics.

Re: I disagree...

The sooner we can get off this ball of mud and leave behind the stupidity ("oh, this particular piece of mud/sand/blade of grass is *special* because... reasons") the better.

You're deluded. We get off this ball of mud and guess what? Our prejudices, stupidity and arrogance will go with us.

And if you think he's doing great things for space, think again. His little spaceship isn't about exploration, satellites, or colonization. It's about giving the rich a few minutes "up there" and a maybe a certificate, 8X10 color photo, and a lapel pin.

Re: Olds

Usually they have buildings named after them and are hailed as "great founders" too - I think history will also be as kind to Elon and Jeff, except they'll have cities on Mars named after them

they've all, without exception, been like that since 1776.

Without exception? Nary a one?

I've seen some serious cases of butthurt in my time, but there isn't enough Preparation H in the world to remedy this.

It is true that the love of money is the root of all evil. Covetousness isn't particularly virtuous, either.

Re: Olds

I assume you dropped your Amazon account then, eh?

If you live in a small-ish town with an Amazon Warehouse, and you're pissed off with the wages, where do you move to? It's likely that the only place in town with vacancies is the one with low wages and poor conditions - i.e. the one you're already working for.

1. National unemployment figures mean squat. There are pockets of high unemployment and poverty that Amazon actively exploit.

2. Zero hours contracts. If you’re on one, you’re not unemployed! Gov loves this. “Look at the record employment figures, aren’t we awesome?!” they crow. Meanwhile people are starving because they’re employed, but not actually getting paid a dime because they’re not needed this week.

The idea these ppl could just move on if they don’t like it is a fallacy. To what exactly?

The US is currently at full employment (4.1%). If conditions at Amazon were really that unbearable employees would just move on.

The US employment rate is a notoriously unreliable figure. It has been remarkably constant even while jobs have been created because the US saw a significant portion of the labour force leave the employment market after 2008 and some of them have been returning. Nevertheless, wages are starting to rise but that still doesn't mean that the new jobs are where the people are, or that the people are suitable or qualified for them. Indeed, Amazon's push into automation is presaging the next wave of layoffs for warehouse, delivery and store staff.

So, what's not to like?

What?

You mean workers are people like corporations and not just a fungible resource?

The Labour Participation Rate in the US is 62.9%, compared with 78.8% in the UK, where unemployment rate is 4.2%.

That means that in the US, in addition to the 4.1% who are unemployed, there are another 37.1% who don't have a job, but aren't classified as unemployed for one reason or another, compared with "only" 21.2% in the UK.

"If conditions at Amazon were really that unbearable employees would just move on."

Yes, the US is at full employment on the whole, but that employment is not evenly distributed. That's why Amazon tends to set up warehouses in economically depressed areas where people don't have a realistic option to "just move on".