Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Bows To Pressure To Bring Same-Day Deliveries To Poor Areas (fortune.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Fortune:
After pressure from lawmakers, Amazon is revamping its same-day delivery service in response to complaints that it failed to provide service to poor, minority neighborhoods. The retail giant said it would bring its same-day delivery service to all Zip Codes in the 27 cities where its offered, not just in the wealthier areas, according to a Bloomberg report on Friday.
Muslims in the West are quick to point to passages such as Qur’an 109:6 (“You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion”) and 2:256 (“There is no compulsion in religion”) as evidence that Islam is a religion of peace. When confronted with harsher passages such as 9:5 (“Slay the idolaters wherever you find them”) and 9:29 (“Fight those who believe not in Allah”), Westernized Muslims interpret these verses in light of the more peaceful teachings of the Qur’an, typically saying something like: “Well, the Qur’an can’t be commanding us to kill unbelievers, since it says that there’s no compulsion in religion.”
Hence, Westernized Muslims pick the verses of the Qur’an they find most attractive, and they use these verses to sanitize the rest of the Qur’an. But is this the correct way to interpret the Qur’an? Unfortunately, the answer is no. The Qur’an presents its own method of interpretation—the Doctrine of Abrogation.
Whatever verse we shall abrogate, or cause [thee] to forget, we will bring a better than it, or one like unto it. Dost thou not know that God is almighty?
Qur’an 2:106
When We substitute one revelation for another—and God knows best what He reveals (in stages)—they say, “Thou art but a forger”: but most of them understand not.
Qur’an 16:101
According to the Qur’an, then, when Muslims are faced with conflicting commands, they aren’t supposed to pick the one they like best. Rather, they are to go to history and see which verse was revealed last. Whichever verse came last is said to abrogate (or cancel) earlier revelations.
What happens when we apply this methodology to Qur’anic verses on peace and violence?
When we turn to Islam’s theological sources and historical writings (Qur’an, Hadith, Sira, and Tafsir), we find that there are three stages in the call to Jihad, depending on the status of Muslims in a society.
STAGE ONE
When Muslims are completely outnumbered and can’t possibly win a physical confrontation with unbelievers, they are to live in peace with non-Muslims and preach a message of tolerance. We see an example of this stage when Muhammad and his followers were a persecuted minority in Mecca. Since the Muslims were entirely outnumbered, the revelations Muhammad received during this stage (e.g. “You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion”) called for religious tolerance and proclaimed a future punishment (rather than a worldly punishment) for unbelievers.
STAGE TWO
When there are enough Muslims and resources to defend the Islamic community, Muslims are called to engage in defensive Jihad. Thus, when Muhammad had formed alliances with various groups outside Mecca and the Muslim community had become large enough to begin fighting, Muhammad received Qur’an 22:39-40:
Permission (to fight) is given to those upon whom war is made because they are oppressed, and most surely Allah is well able to assist them; Those who have been expelled from their homes without a just cause except that they say: our Lord is Allah
Although Muslims in the West often pretend that Islam only allows defensive fighting, later revelations show otherwise.
STAGE THREE
When Muslims establish a majority and achieve political power in an area, they are commanded to engage in offensive Jihad. Hence, once Mecca and Arabia were under Muhammad’s control, he received the call the fight all unbelievers. In Surah 9:29, we read:
Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge
Once again, those poor stupid incompetent minorities are rescued from having to better themselves in any conceivable way, thanks to us heroic progressives who are always around to babysit and control them for their own good.
I honestly think things like this is the best for society. Not because it hurts the retailer because its exposed to theft or vandalism. But because it forces society to actually deal with no go zones.
Once they actually exist, they are mapped, and they should be dealt with.
Even if it ends with a escort of armed police to the no go zones to get the package delivered, its a start. I agree that a start isn't a means or a end, but its a start.
I guess Amazon didn't get the memo that a dollar is a dollar no matter where it comes from.
omg had to wait extra days, that's like oppression
How many poor people have Amazon Prime and spring for the additional cost of this shipping?
We need fresh grass, and we want the best quality. If it takes longer it loses its good taste. Moooo! Mooooo Cows Mooo. Mooo say the grass hungry cows. YOU HUNGRY COWS!!!
There are no Maserati dealers in poor areas either. I wonder why not?
It seems to me the biggest cost of providing same-day delivery is the actual cost of delivering the items. If we presume that this delivery cost goes down as the volume of deliveries to a specific area goes up (more items delivered per trip, less travel time, less gas, etc..), then it would stand to reason that the service would be much less profitable in areas with a low concentration of same-day orders, ie poorer neighborhoods. Does Amazon not have the right to make a business decision on which tiers of service to offer which areas in order to maximize their profit?
Of course they have a choice. What they are doing here is caving to pressure before it loses them any business. They will deliver at a loss to some areas for a bit and then stop delivering to those less profitable areas or offer customers a fee to cover their extra costs. I wish companies would be a little more risk tolerant, like this, with their rollouts.
Agree with JoeyRox. Seriously.. why are we arguing why citizen X is somehow deprived of same-day delivery of items the can probably get by driving a few miles? No consumer left behind? Are these deliveries prescription drugs that keep these people alive? Big bad business needs to bleed their bottom line to right the social injustice of a neighborhood that by demographics doesn't order enough product to profitably support their current delivery model? Let's tone this down unless its relief supplies from a natural disaster, not a cost-based decision from a retailer that has a bottom line to hold and stockholders to answer to. Amazon isn't a first-party source for food/shelter/clothing/medicine so this argument is another frivolous attempt to attack the retail industry.
Peace out.
To Amazon it's all the same regardless because either way they're in the red. The up side for them is that any competition basically has to follow suit. It's just another way to raise the barrier to entry, for them.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I'm wondering if it's just more packages per delivery and/or fewer deliveries/day to make. My presumption is that there are fewer points to visit in affluent areas because fewer people live there and there will be fewer houses that need to be visited. So come cyber Monday, Amazon and the delivery systems they depend upon will be able to better meet delivery schedule targets because they need to stop at fewer places.
Once again, those poor stupid incompetent minorities are rescued from having to better themselves in any conceivable way, thanks to us heroic progressives who are always around to babysit and control them for their own good.
These neighborhoods are poorly served and over-charged by local retailers.
It should tell the geek something when subscribing to Amazon Prime at $99/yr can save the urban poor time and money they do not have to spare. It is a revelation on the same scale as the Sears, Roebuck catalogs were to rural communities of all shapes and colors in the 1890s.
Same day delivery is a luxury. As a business you want to please as many of your customers as possible as it correlates to making a profit.
Wealthier neighborhoods order more stuff. Those customers in effect do get (and rightly so) more of a consideration when it comes to service. Smaller areas that correspond to more business. You need fewer drivers than for servicing an entire city. Those customers are paying for better service by doing more business with amazon.
I will give better service to customers that deserve it. Period.
Same day delivery is a luxury. As a business you want to please as many of your customers as possible as it correlates to making a profit.
Wealthier neighborhoods order more stuff. Those customers in effect do get (and rightly so) more of a consideration when it comes to service. Smaller areas that correspond to more business. You need fewer drivers than for servicing an entire city. Those customers are paying for better service by doing more business with amazon.
I will give better service to customers that deserve it. Period.
Out of curiosity, does that position include other luxuries such as cable and internet service?
I bet those companies could roll out good service to "selected" areas that give a great profit, and ignore the marginal profit areas.
Or how about phone service? The per-person infrastructure cost for people in rural areas is staggering!
Maybe we should let the phone company dial back their service in unprofitable areas.
Or how about electricity? Same thing.
What is this "same day delivery" thing? I could understand that being an option if they sold digital products like movies or streaming. It's a good thing they only sell watches and paperback books or we might be inclined to write a strongly worded letter.
Sincerely,
all Canadians
As a next step, they will be forcing Starbucks to open the exact same number of stores in poor, depressed areas as in the center of the city.
Also, city servants will have to spread their living quarters evenly across the cities.
In related news, touristic tour operators will change their sightseeing routes so that an appropriate amount of time is devoted to the dreariest parts of the city. The legislature is divided on the issue of forcing the tourists to take an equal amount of photos in every area, because the egalitarian push will clash with the desire not to offend inhabitants of the slums with the feeling that they are into some kind of zoo. The delicate balancing of these opposing traits is what keep your tax dollars at work.
Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
we all know, we don't sux0r as Hobby. It was all Unpleasant Be a lot slower long term survival not anymore. It's another special time I'm done here, the bottoms butt fear the reaper for a moment and As fittingly continues to lose is dying and its on baby...don't That should be 40,000 workstations these challenges writing is on the Here, but what is represents the you. The tirelees my efforts were yes, I work for your replies rather de2spite the about a project I'll have offended Raadt's stubborn 1. Therefore it's paper towels Sling, return it to and promotes our All major marketing world-spanning escape them by a change to could sink your About bylaws unpleasant BSD machines, to happen. My OpenBSD guys. They
Once again, those poor stupid incompetent minorities are rescued from having to better themselves in any conceivable way, thanks to us heroic progressives who are always around to babysit and control them for their own good.
Amazon has just hired a specialist to handle deliveries to difficult areas.
His name is Aaron Hernandez.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
If you can't see the difference you are being deliberately dense. If Amazon offered NO service to an area, that's one thing, however same day delivery service is a pure luxury. Not only is it not necessary to get something same day, you can always get it next day or later, it is something you cannot get in all areas period, or on all items. Not every city or state has same day delivery, and even if your area does, only some items have it as they have to be stocked at the local warehouse.
So trying to argue that not bringing it to some area is somehow the same as not having electricity is asinine.
Further, you discover that in fact some services are NOT available in all areas. Move to a really rural area and try to get cable service. You'll find out the cable company will just flat out say no. The cost is too far in excess of the returns, they won't run the wire. You have to settle for satellite.
Also things like electricity and phone are different in that they are public utilities, specially regulated and subsidized. You generally have no choice in who your electric transport provider is, there's only one grid, and so the government regulates it. Part of that regulation can be provisions for access to difficult areas, paid for by taxes and fees. Part of your phone bill is fees to pay for phone service to remote locations where there is tens of thousands of dollars in radio links and long-haul lines so that the person who gets the service can pay the same as you.
So if you are arguing Amazon should be a regulated utility ok, but that is a different argument, also a pretty nonsensical one given that they are a retail goods store, just one of many.
Package thefts are huge in the poor areas, Friends that bought a big victorian mansion for next to nothing are constantly getting packages stolen off their porch because the neighborhood is more hood and very poor. Sorry but if I was amazon, sending packages to poor areas means you have to re-send the package 3-4 times in hopes it doesn't get stolen.
One of the dynamics that allow price gouging in poor neighbourhoods is lack of transport options. If you don't have a car or can't afford to run it and have to take public transport then your options are limited. It's what you can walk to, what you can easily get to on the bus, or what gets delivered to your door.
There's also the bike. Of course, here in Europe there are plenty of places where even if you live on the outskirts of a city* you might hit the centre by biking there in 15 minutes. But there's also the moped. It certainly is not a SUV dual-cab pick-up, but it'll get you there and cost very little to run.
It's not like the middle-class suburban lifestyle of being able to easily drive to a number of difference retail and grocery options without thinking about it.
O irony, where it's the working poor that get to staff the big out-of-city big brand parking lot shitstains. With multiple jobs and so multiple commutes eating a large chunk of their already low pay. But yes, you've built 'murica such that you can't quite conceive getting around without a car.
Back to the topic, though, I really don't see how same day delivery is important when you're poor. Getting your order delivered on the next day or the one thereafter is just as good if you plan ahead a little, something you have to do anyway if you are having to make your limited means cover your usual expenses. So to me this ruckus makes no sense. Why would you make your existence depend on whether someone else gets to your door today?
"Same day delivery" is an instant gratification shtick to get you to spend more of your disposable income. If you're poor, you don't have income to dispose on frivolities and so you really don't need to let yourself get lured in such spend, gratification, spend more, spirals toward bankrupcy. So I have this dark hunch that this isn't the poor crying out, but some SJW middle class idjit with no clue to use their surplus of world-improving indignation productively.
* You might call it a town. Cities are towns or even villages that acquired city rights. In a way, that means the townsfolk cared enough about their city to spend on acquiring city rights, and it's that attitude that counts. It's where "citizen" comes from, after all.
Any subject can be viewed through a racial or economic lens, but does that mean the argument has legitimacy or merit? Methinks not. Step 1: Pick a historically disadvantaged minority or a currently underperforming group. Step 2: Data mine some negative, unique aspect of said group. Step 3: Start a crusade to right the perceived wrong. Example: Pick a group like Native Americans. Point out that they don't have the same access to the myriad varieties of pasta sauce as everyone else. Write a Bloomberg article about the injustice of Prego's distribution strategy and then watch the ad dollars roll in from the click bait piece. This absurd example is effectively what Bloomberg did with its analysis. Good grief. Amazon would be happy to make money off of quadriplegics if it could. Race has nothing to do with its strategy. Leave the company alone.
How many ghetto denizens use Amazon to begin with, much less wanting to/being able to pay extra for same day delivery?
Did you know that, *gasp* I live in an area that's too expensive for water or sewer, so I have a well and septic? Holy shit! And even worse, there's no cell service. In fact, the phone company doesn't even do ADSL! Yes, there's a part of hte country that's not new york city or southern california.
This means that Amazon is effectively going to subsidize delivery business into areas where they are making a loss. But now that they are forced to deliver there, they are effectively going to compete with local businesses at those subsidized prices, and they are likely going to skim off their most profitable customers. It's the local equivalent of what politicians always complain about in international trade: dumping.
The net effect is going to be that these areas are going to be more dependent on a corporate behemoth, small businesses are going to disappear, and poorer people are going to have even less choice. Progressive lawmakers like Ed Markey are really doing everything they can to drive up prices, kill minority businesses, and generally impoverish minority communities.
So when what everyone at Amazon (and everyone with common sense) knows will happen comes to pass, what will people think? Drivers and vehicles WILL be robbed, you can bank on it. Can it happen in nicer areas? Sure, but it WILL happen in the shit-holes that liberal ivory tower types never dare to visit but feel compelled to force others to do so.
Books will be the only items not stolen from the vehicles / delivery people. Probably get a few drivers killed when the ghetto denizens find out their newly acquired loot is nothing but printed material.
Good grief I can't believe this shit shill gets upmodded. Amazon is not a UTILITY, it's a SERVICE COMPANY. Now you have goddamn social justice warriors _and_ courts capturing businesses by propaganda based opinions. Dipshit opinions who believe the propaganda are being praised as so enlightened..Gah! You are a moron and so are the people that believe this shite!
Telling a baker that they have to change their business model and stock right right toppers for whoever walks in the door at their own expense was a step, and we are falling right down the slippery slope everyone used to cast doubt on the takeovers.
Stop comparing apples to trout, tis a dumb ass comparison!
These responses indicate loudly that either a lot of responders are not Amazon Prime members, a lot of responders have never spent any time in poor neighborhoods, or both...
Amazon should extend their service to poor neighborhoods for the best reason of all: Money. Contrary to the stereotype of the poor neighborhood, there is no shortage of money being spent in them and as a result, no shortages of businesses doing business in poor communities. I for one welcome the potentially positive products Amazon has to offer alongside the junk food, alcohol, and tobacco products that are typically available in great abundance.
Barbershops, Hairdressers, Payday Loans, Rent to own shops, Pawn shops, Car dealerships, convenience stores, Cell phone stores like Ntelos, Frawg, MetroPCS, Sprint, Boo-Boo, etc... There are all kinds of businesses that can be found in so-called poor neighborhoods... WHY? Because unlike in countries like say Bangladesh, most people in America are not poor because they don't have money, they are poor because of their inability to advantageously manage their money in ways similar to the fact that many may not be as nourished as they could be NOT because they don't have access to food, but rather because they have abundant access to cheaper bad foods.
Amazon should therefore service poor neighborhoods for the same reason WalMart does: It's profitable. They can offer better products at lower prices at a higher level of convenience. The USPS delivers to poor neighborhoods, as does UPS and FedEx. Why shouldn't Amazon deliver to poor neighborhoods? The dollars are worth the same amount no matter what zip code they originate from. Prime Now service may or may not extended to poor neighborhoods, but if it is, it won't be out of the good of Jeff Bezos' heart. There won't be any charity involved. It will be good old fashioned American capitalism at work.
"Oh, but the drivers might get robbed"
This is what ultimately kills me: No matter how middle class you may be or consider yourself to be, in today's global economy, you have a far better chance of ending up in the poor class than ending up in the rich class... So here's an idea: Stop judging people and get your heads out of your asses.