Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon Must Be Stopped

newrepublic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 106 posts

Re: Amazon Must Be Stopped

#61

Post by radmuzom »

schalab wrote: post #52

Can someone provide practical examples of how Amazon would possibly abuse their monopoly without breaching existing law, influencing the government, or opening up the market for a smaller, more agile competitor? It is strange picking on Amazon, as the barrier for entry into the online shopping industry is relatively low, and their monopoly is far less stable and enduring than what Microsoft and Google achieved.

> barrier for entry into the online shopping industry is relatively low

I was under the impression that online retail is extremely capital-intensive. Especially in the initial years, where companies use capital to undercut competitors.

Re: Amazon Must Be Stopped

#62

Post by InclinedPlane »

dkarapetyan wrote: post #6

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…

If by "certain kind of economic system" you mean a heavily regulated pseudo free market system, then sure. But don't try to pretend, as I think you are, that regulation isn't the important bit there and that somehow the free market is the cause of these monopolies. The systems of regulation we have today are both not very effective and also generally hugely advantage consolidation, working against the often inherent advantages of fresh startups as competitors.

Re: Amazon Must Be Stopped

#63

Post by Vulkum »

dkarapetyan wrote: post #6

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…

On a related note about the economic system have a look at this: http://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely...

This is what happens when wealth accumulates at the top of the pyramid. The video is talking about people, but those people are those behind the companies you mentioned (including Google, Facebook, hedge funds and oil companies). The problem with capitalism in my opinion, is that it's not truly capitalism: i.e. it's not the free competition system they claim it to be, but a system which is "more free" for some.

Re: Amazon Must Be Stopped

#64

Post by [deleted] »

dkarapetyan wrote: post #6

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…

[deleted]

Re: Amazon Must Be Stopped

#65

Post by dkarapetyan »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #62
dkarapetyan wrote: post #6

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…

If by "certain kind of economic system" you mean a heavily regulated pseudo free market system, then sure. But don't try to pretend, as I think you are, that regulation isn't the important bit there and that somehow the free market is the cause of these monopolies. The systems of regulation we have today are both not very effective and also generally hugely advantage consolidation, working against the often inherent…

I'm not pretending. I also disagree that a truly and freely competitive system is the answer. I don't think in the entire history of the world there has ever been any kind of free marketplace and the discussion on these matters are very often mired by ideological biases. Economics falls in a weird gray zone buffered by pure economic theory on one side and practical social constraints on the other.

Re: Amazon Must Be Stopped

#66

Post by humanrebar »

marbletiles wrote: post #38
facepalm wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want a job, why not just dig a hole in the street and try to get paid for it? 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.

There's a tragedy of the commons at work here. Amazon is playing in a new global marketplace, and the unquestioned assumption is that the lower prices that result for consumers are an overall good for society. But there are plenty of indications that's not true, and that minimally higher prices spread across millions of customers that in turn support millions more local jobs may be better for society overall. Arguing…

> minimally higher prices spread across millions of customers

Except higher sticker prices on commodity goods are regressive. If people are worried about the cost of living, raising the cost of essentials is absolutely worse, all things being equal. I would like to see the math behind the way to raise the cost of toilet paper while simultaneously making it universally easier to buy toilet paper.

There's a case to be made that raising prices (or taxes) on non-essentials is a good idea, but pricing rules inevitably become susceptible to lobbying and discourage innovation (why invent a yacht that costs half as much to manufacture?). Introducing "sin" taxes (cigarettes, oil, carbon emissions, corn syrup) might be a good idea if there are affordable alternatives, but you're also introducing morals into your economic system, which has its own problems.

If the concern is that it's hard to earn enough money to live, why not address that problem directly through minimum incomes, earned income tax credits, and the like? I don't see why we have to interfere with pricing to achieve those ends.

Re: Amazon Must Be Stopped

#67

Post by jiggy2011 »

dkarapetyan wrote: post #6

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…

This is one of the main criticisms of the capitalist system. If it inevitably results in socialism in disguise then you could have actual socialism.

Re: Amazon Must Be Stopped

#68

Post by fpgeek »

Oh, please. This piece is silly. Amazon's ebook "monopoly" is incredibly fragile. Either Apple or Google could squash it without breaking a sweat. Microsoft, Facebook and others could too, they'd just probably sweat a bit.

None of them want to. That's not an accident. It's because Amazon isn't giving them an opening by abusing either customers or suppliers. Publishers can claim otherwise, but they're not putting their money where their mouths are. They're not walking away from Amazon, nor can they even demonstrate that they're getting clearly better terms from anyone else.

Re: Amazon Must Be Stopped

#69

Post by netcan »

emotionalcode wrote: post #51
netcan wrote: post #22

We have to remember that when we talking about giant companies we are talking about giant institutions, of a form and culture that has not existed in human history. The closest parallels common throughout human history are armies. I think that our 20th century paradigms have failed to understand and shape these institutions, each with their own trappings. Labour unionism, which was deeply rooted in man labour culture…

Evolution of human culture can either be recognized as a consciously directed emergent property or it can be consciously ignored and instead directed by the unification of unspoken (but existent) belief systems of the majority. Cultural evolution isn't magic. There are properties that can be recognized for what they are and what role they play in the development of culture. I think it is disingenuous to point out the…

I disagree. I don't think "human culture can be (honestly) recognized as a consciously directed emergent property," any more than an individuals personality can be directed.

We know some things. We control some things. We can't engineer a human personality. Same goes for human culture. We can't decide to model Iraqi culture on Italian culture. We can copy some institutions, the copying is indirect. The cards will fall where they may, and the honest truth is that we don't know how it works.

Before the fact we have a bunch of angry amadons screaming that xyz will happen if we do xyz. After the fact we have the amadons arguing about what really happened. No knowledge is gained.

Post reply on HN