luigitornado Posted June 8, 2017 Author Share Posted June 8, 2017 16 minutes ago, ライムネコマスター said: Okay but seriously, LT, my dude, my man, you're allowed to think whatev r you want about the value or worth of Prine, but again, the straw the broke the camel's back for you is "poor people can get this now". Seems a bit shitty to me, tbh. That's why I'm saying you don't like poor people. If this is what crosses the line for you, well, surely you can understand why one might question your motives. also it seems kind of counter intuitive to be accessible to poor people if you're "greedy" but 🤔 This is the exact problem with a conversation about this. It's wrapped up into social politics, making it almost impossible to be upset about without coming off as a jerk. I see it as being anti-consumer. For those of you who are so anti-capitlism, I am surprised you don't see it...then again they're essentially making themselves look like Robin Hood. Difference is, Robin Hood wasn't selling anything. Quote Link to comment
Spring Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 all of that has literally nothing to do with the issue at hand though (and is also purely speculation but i don't really care about the walmart shit), which is them offering a good service for less money to people that already have less money than you. like i said, unsub or whatever, but why bring up your personal misgivings about the company when its not even relevant. them offering this for less to people on government assistance DOES NOT in any way diminish the value of prime for people that can pay full price. you're still getting EVERYTHING that they offered before. its still the exact same service. food doesn't lose some of its value just because someone else is using food stamps to buy it. they're not correlated unless you think that the people paying less for it don't deserve it, which is what you're implying given your first post. Gold 1 Quote Link to comment
luigitornado Posted June 8, 2017 Author Share Posted June 8, 2017 1 minute ago, Gold said: I like how this thread is like: "Benefits for poor people" "But what about my not poor privilege!" Who cares if a company's motives aren't 100% altruistic? Guess what? They're a company. Most companies only care about profit. But oh hey look, profit and something that benefits the less privileged. The fact that anyone is complaining about this is the reason humanity is a fucking pile of garbage. Privlelage this, privilege that. It's a broken record. I never said anything about poor people privelage and Amazon. Please don't put words in my mouth. Im complaining about Amazon. Quote Link to comment
Spring Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 3 minutes ago, luigitornado said: This is the exact problem with a conversation about this. It's wrapped up into social politics, making it almost impossible to be upset about without coming off as a jerk. I see it as being anti-consumer. For those of you who are so anti-capitlism, I am surprised you don't see it...then again they're essentially making themselves look like Robin Hood. Difference is, Robin Hood wasn't selling anything. NO ONE HERE is defending amazon as a company. i am defending prime as a service because its a good service. amazon is a company like any other company steeped in corporate greed, like, i get it. but this service being offered for less to people already in need is a GOOD THING for them regardless of amazon's motives, and it sure doesn't affect my own wallet or sensibilities because why would it???? Gold 1 Quote Link to comment
Gold Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 2 minutes ago, luigitornado said: Privlelage this, privilege that. It's a broken record. I never said anything about poor people privelage and Amazon. Please don't put words in my mouth. Im complaining about Amazon. " Hearing that some people will be able to pay a smaller fee for such a service broke the camel's back. " Spring and LimeCatMaster 2 Quote Link to comment
luigitornado Posted June 8, 2017 Author Share Posted June 8, 2017 1 minute ago, chickadee said: NO ONE HERE is defending amazon as a company. i am defending prime as a service because its a good service. amazon is a company like any other company steeped in corporate greed, like, i get it. but this service being offered for less to people already in need is a GOOD THING for them regardless of amazon's motives, and it sure doesn't affect my own wallet or sensibilities because why would it???? I already stated I was finding little value in Prime and wish they just offered a lower tiered service. one that I'd pay for in a heart beat. It's impossible to talk about this without talking about privilege and social class. Bravo, Amazon. You cheeky bastards. Quote Link to comment
luigitornado Posted June 8, 2017 Author Share Posted June 8, 2017 4 minutes ago, Gold said: " Hearing that some people will be able to pay a smaller fee for such a service broke the camel's back. " Nothing about poor people privelage. Quote Link to comment
Gold Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 Just now, luigitornado said: Nothing about poor people privelage. Yeah okay buddy LimeCatMaster 1 Quote Link to comment
Spring Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 4 minutes ago, luigitornado said: I already stated I was finding little value in Prime and wish they just offered a lower tiered service. one that I'd pay for in a heart beat. It's impossible to talk about this without talking about privilege and social class. Bravo, Amazon. You cheeky bastards. no, like, its not. i could very easily make a thread about how i feel about amazon and their practices and why i don't personally find prime worth 99 dollars a year for myself but - again - you are the one who first made the correlation between this new service and your own misgivings. you did that. i didn't just pull that out of my ass, you were the one making the connection, which is why there was a problem. but none of that has anything to do with this new service. you could say all that without looking like a total asshat. or, rather, a person that actually thinks before speaking could. Gold 1 Quote Link to comment
luigitornado Posted June 8, 2017 Author Share Posted June 8, 2017 Just now, Gold said: Yeah okay buddy There isn't. They could have announced that people who make 100k a year will be offered Amazon Prime for half the price and id still make this post. purple_beard 1 Quote Link to comment
luigitornado Posted June 8, 2017 Author Share Posted June 8, 2017 2 minutes ago, chickadee said: no, like, its not. i could very easily make a thread about how i feel about amazon and their practices and why i don't personally find prime worth 99 dollars a year for myself but - again - you are the one who first made the correlation between this new service and your own misgivings. you did that. i didn't just pull that out of my ass, you were the one making the connection, which is why there was a problem. but none of that has anything to do with this new service. you could say all that without looking like a total asshat. or, rather, a person that actually thinks before speaking could. Please hold off on the personal attacks. We were having a conversation about Prime not long ago. I stated my grievences there too. My griveneces with the service; not my own personal misgivings. The reaction to my name and topic created a veil of villainy because people's opinions of me, which Limecaster stated in a few reactionary posts early on I was probably the wrong person to make this topic in that regard. But I have nothing else to add. I stated my opinion and my grivences about Prime through out the topic (probably should have been clear of that at the start), and it seems the conversation quickly shifted to how much of an ass I am, which is now making me defensive. Sorry for offending you. Enjoy talking about how much you like Amazon Prime. Quote Link to comment
ace Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 We should get rid of soup kitchens while we're at it. Why should poor people get food for a lower price or even free when I have to pay for it? I don't see what the problem is here honestly. Amazon wants to have more customers subscribed to Prime and this is a way to do it. They've run Student Prime for years and that didn't bother you, but Prime for those less fortunate did? Quote Link to comment
Mao Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 There can be things that are brutally business motivated in order to crush competition and beneficial to people with less money simultaneously. Nobody likes Wal-Mart, so I don't know why you're defending them from the evils of Amazon using a business model that benefits both them as a business and the poor. That's called good business last I checked, you might be interested in it if you're currently managing a grocery store. Prime is still worth the asking price. You being dissatisfied with it now comes off as someone being upset with two identical health insurance policies because you pay more in premiums than someone who makes less than you. Nothing about Prime as a service has changed here, Prime Fresh was never part of base Prime. Prime Music is still a part of base Prime. Prime Video is still a part of base Prime. It's a stupid good deal, but sure. It's not worth it completely because sometimes your packages don't come in exactly 2 days every time. Gold and LimeCatMaster 2 Quote Link to comment
Rallex Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 (edited) This has got to be the shittiest reason to finally decide Prime isn't worth it. You keep bringing up your grievances from the other thread but really that doesn't matter if poor people receiving the service for cheaper is the straw that broke the camel's back. I grew up poor and the free lunch program is honestly a blessing. I know Prime is not the same as a necessity but jeeeeeez man. You wanna guilt the poor some more? Poor people ruined Prime I guess. Really Prime as a service you have to look at how you use it. There's streaming services and while there's not a whole lot you get in comparison to Netflix or Hulu, there is some quality stuff on there. They have some terrific HBO shows available. I've also been enjoying Hannibal. Of course there's also music streaming available. Let's call the streaming services really half baked and say they're worth like $3 a month. I personally thinks that's a bit low but sure I'll place it there. That's $36 in a year, over 1/3rd the cost of Prime. But the main thing is the 2 day shipping and prime discounts. Take a look at your Amazon orders for a year and ask yourself, "did I save $64?" Remember that money can be measured in cash savings, time saved, convenience, etc. Being able to receive tons of shit in 2 days with free shipping and a 30 day no questions asked return policy is pretty nice. I would personally say it's worth the price based on how I personally use it. Nobody gives a shit if you don't think Prime is worth it to you personally but when you state that poor people receiving it for cheaper as a major reason to reject it, you show yourself to be a real asshole. Edited June 8, 2017 by Rallex ace, Spring and Gold 3 Quote Link to comment
April Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 Hey man just try being on welfare it's a great life haha LimeCatMaster and Gold 2 Quote Link to comment
bel Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 they should quit being cucks and start up a gift economy obvs Quote Link to comment
purple_beard Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 I work retail and I know what markup is.. I have a issue with paying for a service upfront like Prime to get a pseudo discount... I mean how many times do you really need 2 day shipping versus hitting a free shipping tier via your purchase threshold? Then, with this, you are offering a discounted rate for the same service. I totally get the pricing war with Wal Mart and how best to put you in the best position to grow your sales over your rival though. IDK, nothing against low income families and or persons doing some online shopping but as some of the wording of the article stated... would I want my package sitting on my doorstep if I was in one of those areas? Would they require someone to sign for it. Would it go back to the UPS/USPS/FedEx dispatch office if no one was home to accept the delivery? How would that low income person get to that office to pick it up? Quote Link to comment
Swedish Brick Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 ITT: privileged nerds hate on poor people Quote Link to comment
Mao Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 (edited) 21 minutes ago, purple_beard said: I work retail and I know what markup is.. I have a issue with paying for a service upfront like Prime to get a pseudo discount... I mean how many times do you really need 2 day shipping versus hitting a free shipping tier via your purchase threshold? Then, with this, you are offering a discounted rate for the same service. I totally get the pricing war with Wal Mart and how best to put you in the best position to grow your sales over your rival though. IDK, nothing against low income families and or persons doing some online shopping but as some of the wording of the article stated... would I want my package sitting on my doorstep if I was in one of those areas? Would they require someone to sign for it. Would it go back to the UPS/USPS/FedEx dispatch office if no one was home to accept the delivery? How would that low income person get to that office to pick it up? Markup is how a company produces profits. In order to give you discounts and not hurt their profit margins, they offer a yearly plan where you pay an annual fee in exchange for discounted rates on items and free shipping services. I buy a ton of cheap things through Amazon and never spend enough to get their free shipping if I didn't have Prime. I have dash buttons set to refill supplies on almost all my household cleaning items or toilet paper or dog food or whatever else I don't want to go to a grocery store to get. None of those things hits the like 50 bucks necessary to get free shipping without a Prime account. And really, how incredibly pretentious of you to assume that poor people would be incapable of knowing how to have a package delivered to them. Like, really, they shouldn't be allowed to have Prime at a cheaper rate because they live in areas that you're making some pretty outrageously prejudiced assumptions about? Low income folks know how to get packages, incredibly. But thank you for trying to keep them from having access to a good service because you think they don't know how to have packages safely delivered to them. Edited June 8, 2017 by Mao ace, Spring, Gold and 2 others 5 Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.