I don’t necessarily disagree with many of your points, but I think drawing attention to the end of Sears’ lifecycle is an unfair thing. Someday Amazon too will have an end of life, and employees and shareholders will get fucked over then too.
The article also draws attention to how workers benefited _in good times_ at Sears, not near the end. And this is where the comparison is most meaningful, where Amazon is more questionable.
The article also draws attention to how workers benefited _in good times_ at Sears, not near the end. And this is where the comparison is most meaningful, where Amazon is more questionable.