11–20 of 106 posts
It seems as though the author has a problem with capitalism and free markets in general. Yes, let's abolish capitalism, allow some central bureau to fix prices and use its power of violence over actors who don't comply. Oh wait... it was attempted 90 years ago and it didn't work out.
> Oh wait... it was tried 90 years ago and it didn't work out.
Whether the current system is working is up for debate.
Hmm, then we also need to stop Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Dropbox, TimeWarner Cable, military industrial complex, some big oil companies, a few hedge funds, a few banks, etc. Probably might as well call it quits with this whole capitalism thing. In all seriousness though why don't any of these articles ever address the underlying issue of why this stuff happens. If you have a certain kind of economic system then so…
Brilliant piece, also in comparison to Walmart: "Meanwhile, both companies have studiously avoided unionization and treat their workers miserably. In one famous incident, Amazon hired paramedics to revive heat-sick employees at a Pennsylvania warehouse rather than buy an air-conditioning unit."
It seems as though the author has a problem with capitalism and free markets in general. Yes, let's abolish capitalism, allow some central bureau to fix prices and use its power of violence over actors who don't comply. Oh wait... it was attempted 90 years ago and it didn't work out.
There are plenty of examples of state regulation in the greater interest, pharmaceuticals being an obvious example, road safety another. It is not in the greater interest of society to allow businesses to trample over each other or to do as they wish.
Amazon is acting to the detriment of a large number of industries and ultimately to people in general by stifling competition and by being monopolistic and abusive.
It seems as though the author has a problem with capitalism and free markets in general. Yes, let's abolish capitalism, allow some central bureau to fix prices and use its power of violence over actors who don't comply. Oh wait... it was attempted 90 years ago and it didn't work out.
>Amazon has left a trail of destruction—competitors undercut, suppliers squeezed... We normally call that progress. That "trail of destruction" is leaving money in the hands of millions of people who used to be captive to the local brick and mortar retailers.
Are those the same people whose jobs were lost due to Walmart and Amazon? Or who prefer to have a vibrant local downtown?
That would not be different from keeping a job that is not needed anymore alive just for the sake of the job.
If you feel bad about Amazon, donate 10% of what you buy at Amazon to a "hole digger foundation" which pays people who lost their jobs because of Amazon to dig holes.
Convenience, low prices, extensive catalogue, pleasent customer support, innovative products... Yes, we need to kill the beast. Maybe pander and bait some clicks in the meantime. I particularly liked the part where threatening Hachette's business is threatening democracy. What about shitty journalism? Seems like a much bigger threat to me.
Don't you think the article raises a number of valid points? While Hachette is little better than Amazon, having an effective monopoly on such a large market is definitely not healthy. The fact that they are exploiting their workers doesn't help.
The book industry needs to change, I haven't come up against the dark side of Amazon's influence. I did watch for years when Apple and the publishers clearly broke the law and cheered when they got caught as I had seen prices for books I bought just sky rocket.
As for how their employees are treated or their "perceived" treatment, local employment laws cover those. Avoiding unionization is not a crime and should not be held against anyone. Much of retail outside of grocery is not unionized. When the same unions hire no benefit, no union, temps to protest tell me again how they are the good guys?
Ain't Amazon unstoppable by now?