If people are going to resort to illegal methods of effecting needed change, warehouses are among the best targets available. Much lower risk of causing injuries or deaths than commercial or manufacturing sectors. Relatively few workers on site means the economic harm falls predominantly on the targeted owner class, with little spillover on the working class.
My imagination is rather poor; what would you suggest would be a better target?
This might be illegal, but it is NOT a method of effecting needed change. I’m not promoting Arson at all over organizing unions and promoting progressive reform, but if you’re going to burn something down at least target their financials and personal properties.
NO THEY DIDN’T THEY BURNT DOWN A WAREHOUSE FULL OF SUPPLIES WHICH BELONGED TO THE COMPANY. MICHAEL HSU IS GETTING PAID THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT AFTER THIS.
Not the third party staffing agency, not a bank, not his office, not his cars, none of that. A giant pile of diapers that people needed, that’s what.
Kimberly-Clark is a publicly traded company, owned primarily by various billionaires. Economic harm to the company is economic harm to the owners of that company.
This worker did do something to the billionaires. He attacked the source of their wealth.
Those diapers didn’t belong to the people. Those diapers belonged to the billionaires. You’re still not understanding that those were billionaire diapers.
Those diapers belong to nobody, now. We all have less access to diapers. I named so many examples and yet here you are refusing any course of action that minimizes harm done to common people. You don’t seem to care about billionaires you just want the people of the USA to hurt themselves.
There was no harm done to common people. Diapers are not a finite resource. The factories that produce them are still running. They just got new orders to fill. Diaper-factory workers just got new work.
Demolition crews just got new work. Construction crews just got new work. The workers in the factory just got unemployment benefits: paid time off of work, until they find new work. Firefighters just got overtime pay. Other warehouses in the region just got new work. Everyone except the billionaires and their insurers are benefitting from this.
Your argument only makes sense if the contents of that warehouse belonged to the people. If we were in a communist society, you’d have a point. But we aren’t.
If people are going to resort to illegal methods of effecting needed change, warehouses are among the best targets available. Much lower risk of causing injuries or deaths than commercial or manufacturing sectors. Relatively few workers on site means the economic harm falls predominantly on the targeted owner class, with little spillover on the working class.
My imagination is rather poor; what would you suggest would be a better target?
This might be illegal, but it is NOT a method of effecting needed change. I’m not promoting Arson at all over organizing unions and promoting progressive reform, but if you’re going to burn something down at least target their financials and personal properties.
He did target their financials. He targeted the source of their wealth.
NO THEY DIDN’T THEY BURNT DOWN A WAREHOUSE FULL OF SUPPLIES WHICH BELONGED TO THE COMPANY. MICHAEL HSU IS GETTING PAID THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT AFTER THIS.
Not the third party staffing agency, not a bank, not his office, not his cars, none of that. A giant pile of diapers that people needed, that’s what.
Kimberly-Clark is a publicly traded company, owned primarily by various billionaires. Economic harm to the company is economic harm to the owners of that company.
This worker did do something to the billionaires. He attacked the source of their wealth.
Those diapers didn’t belong to the people. Those diapers belonged to the billionaires. You’re still not understanding that those were billionaire diapers.
Those diapers belong to nobody, now. We all have less access to diapers. I named so many examples and yet here you are refusing any course of action that minimizes harm done to common people. You don’t seem to care about billionaires you just want the people of the USA to hurt themselves.
There was no harm done to common people. Diapers are not a finite resource. The factories that produce them are still running. They just got new orders to fill. Diaper-factory workers just got new work.
Demolition crews just got new work. Construction crews just got new work. The workers in the factory just got unemployment benefits: paid time off of work, until they find new work. Firefighters just got overtime pay. Other warehouses in the region just got new work. Everyone except the billionaires and their insurers are benefitting from this.
Your argument only makes sense if the contents of that warehouse belonged to the people. If we were in a communist society, you’d have a point. But we aren’t.
If you claim you don’t see how rising diaper costs hurts normal people I think you’re just coping hard.
They aren’t rising. There is no shortage. The benefits to normal people far outweigh even your imagined harm.
He burned down a warehouse, not a factory.