it's always "did you really need to burn down your workplace to prove a point" and never "how was the revenge arson? did you have fun doing revenge arson? were the flames pretty?"
🔥🔥🔥
Context for other users:
On the morning of April 7, 2026, a fire was started at the Kimberly-Clark Distribution Center in Ontario, California. It escalated to a six-alarm fire and took nearly twelve hours to extinguish. The facility was completely destroyed and declared a "total loss". There were no injuries or deaths. An employee who was working in the warehouse is accused of arson.
Authorities stated that the employee had shared videos of himself starting the fire on Facebook, saying "all you had to do was pay us enough to live" and "there goes your inventory" while lighting pallets of toilet paper ablaze.
ALL YOU HAD TO DO WAS PAY US ENOUGH TO LIVE
No injuries. No deaths. This was a protest fire. This is why unions are important, to prevent frustrations like these, to ensure people are paid enough to live.
🔥🔥🔥🔥
Dumb question, but (taking the motive at face value) how would a union specifically have prevented this as opposed to warehouse just paying workers more?
"Anything destructive is good if you sound like a communist."
Do you think the heroic impoverished proletariat is doing better or worse now that their workplace has burned down and they can no longer perform labor in exchange for wages? Was this an effective action to empower the heroic impoverished proletariat, or was it destructive and helped nobody except as it provided masturbation material to communists?
Do you actually and literally know what they were actually paid in the actual real life world or are you just assuming that because the concept of money makes you upset, any violence and destruction was justified?
No injuries. No deaths.
THROUGH NO FAULT OF HIS!
He never told any of the other workers to leave and they were in fact looking for him before they had to evacuate. It is sheer luck that nobody was killed because the arsonist couldn't have cared less if everyone else there had died.
This was a protest fire.
Protest fire. Arson. Sure looks the same to me.
This is why unions are important, to prevent frustrations like these, to ensure people are paid enough to live.
I don't think "Unionize or there will be arson" is the great reasoning you think it is.
Regarding the warehouse arson, he wasn’t working for Kimberly-Clark, whose inventory he destroyed, he was working for a contracted inventory management company. So his “protest” didn’t actually make a point, his employers didn’t actually lose anything except maybe a contract for that one warehouse which can be offset by firing his co-workers. Kimberly-Clark likely had insurance, but will suffer some loss due to higher premiums, but they didn’t control his pay.
