I'm going to make a comparison here that will be extreme. It may help some to understand why we are so adamant there are no "good brokers".
During the days of slave trading many began to think the practice was wrong. It wasn't right for one person to own another. The slaves lived in all different types of conditions. Some of the masters were "good" to their slaves, treated them much better than other masters treated their slaves. This didn't matter because it was morally/fundamentally wrong regardless of how the masters (whether related to you or not) treated their slaves. The battle against this practice was long and hard but eventually it was abolished.
I believe the same reasoning can be given in this debate of brokers. Without brokers puppymills would not cease to exist, their numbers would be diminished though. Through education hopefully the general public would not buy from them and that would further reduce their numbers.
No doubt some brokers may treat their dogs better than others. It doesn't matter if the broker is related or not, the practice is still morally/ fundamentally wrong and should be abolished.
__________________  ~Ruby, Reno, Razz, & Jack~ |