If Amaz0n wants to be cheap and employ callcentretards and packing robots,
they might consider to send their current management back to business college for a refresher module
before online convenience clickers conveniently click elsewhere 
If they provide world class service and handling, then how do they guarantee low cost?
Using automation and save labor cost is the way to minimize cost while improve handling time.
Online retailers like Amazon benefit enormously by not having a brick and mortar store front which requires much more expensive floor space and also requires lots of sales people that web based sales do not and brick and mortar retailers still need warehouses and distribution centers.
Automation is not automatically a bad thing even though the modern use of it kills jobs with not much benefit to working class folks -- it wasn't always so. 150 years ago 85% of the workforce was involved in agriculture and today it's less than 5%. The development of various 'productivity enhancing technologies' like the farm tractor dramatically reduced the number of people that needed to work in agriculture and freed up the rest to do other jobs that couldn't be done if most everyone had to work on a farm etc. Of course, when productivity enhancing technology comes along there had better be NEW WORK for those that used to work on the farm and for most of the last 150 years there was. Today, however, when someone loses there job in a factory there is no other factory to go to -- that other factory is now in another country.
Ultimately, the modern business paradigm is based on the notion that only the owners should profit and everyone else should be paid as little as possible and worked until they die. It has worked for the owner class brilliantly for decades and no evidence/proof about the negative consequence to the lower 90% and particularly the lower 60% will change there mind about the current paradigm.
Sadly, the predictable consequence of this is the growing animosity towards people from other places particularly if those places are where your old/good job was sent.
Bezos is the Michael Nike of the newer generation and brings a sociopaths view of others into the business decisions that effect millions and indeed billions of people. He's outsourced to India much of the CS work and therefore reduces his cost even as it reduces the quality of CS and promotes the animosity I mentioned. An interesting aspect of this animosity is the rationalization that those who have been given someone else job develops towards the folks who's job they took. When IT workers in the USA, for example, are required to train there Indian replacements it's not just the US worker that develops a negative opinion of there replacement, but in addition, the one who get the job has to deal with the fact that there gain came at the expense of someone else. Sadly, the common defense mechanism is to conclude that the person who's job was taken deserved it -- they were not good enough, they were dumb, they were greedy, etc etc etc. The end game here is not good.
There isn't much of an alternative to the Amazon's of this world as every business that works that model employs much the same tactics. The traditional B&M businesses have cut corners to cut cost but they are never going to be price competitive with web based retailers and as a consequence there's no moral option. In an earlier model Wal*Mart became king by cutting fat all the way to the bone. There success meant the demise of the other stores and as the working class has declined in economic impact they perversely reinforce this by shopping more and more at places like Wal*Mart.
Brian
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
