Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon • Hacker News Board

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#531

Post by danans » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 7:39 PM UTC

dahdum wrote: post #490

Seems like Democratic candidates are clamoring over each other to be further left, and I don't quite understand it. I supported Bernie in 2016, and even he is now too far left for my tastes. Democrats lost the centrist vote in 2016, not the left, and if they don't take a hard right turn after the nomination we'll have 4 more years of Trump.

> Democrats lost the centrist vote in 2016, not the left

They lost huge numbers of working class manufacturing industry workers in the Midwest, who perceived HC as a tool of Wall Street, and rightly or wrongly, instrumental in the secular economic decline of their jobs and communities. This was literally reflected in a schism of working class vs professional class counties in the midwest, with the former going for DJT and the latter going to HC [1]

Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin didn't swing to DJT because centrist's didn't have a candidate that spoke to their concerns - that candidate was definitely HC. Even many centrist Republicans who couldn't bring themselves to vote for DJT voted for her.

Those states swung because DJT at least spoke to the working class' economic concerns in a way that at the time seemed authentic, while also invoking their repressed cultural anxieties about demographic and social changes.

Democrats should stay the heck away from the racism and xenophobia that motivated part of his coalition, but they would be fools to ignore the economically-left sentiment that put him in office.

And since DJT's actual economic policy has turned out to be the same Republican trickle down, tax cuts for the wealthy approach, the Democrats have an opportunity to expose that and run against it.

[1] https://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/2016/11/macomb_county_cou... https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/elections/20...

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#532

Post by anth_anm » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 7:39 PM UTC

will_brown wrote: post #326

psadauskas wrote: post #211

How about going after Comcast and Verizon first, the actual tech monopolies ? I already don’t use Facebook, I buy things online from places other than Amazon, and have email accounts that aren’t hosted by Google. However, all of that goes over Comcast’s network because that’s my only viable choice for Internet service. Also, while FAANG occasionally do things I don’t approve of, they don’t actively lobby congress for…

>But no, because Comcast has -bribed- donated to way more congresspeople than Google... Lobbying is tracked and google spent over 33% more than Comcast - in your own words - bribing members of Congress. The bulk of Google’s lobbying expenditure was for immigration, tax reform and antitrust. I’d say Google’s far better “at playing the game” after all no one is randomly sticking up for Comcast.

Google learned from Microsoft's mistake.

You pay your bribes or the justice department comes knocking. Google made antitrust investigations just vanish into thin air.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#533

Post by debatem1 » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 7:41 PM UTC

feyman_r wrote: post #378

JackFr wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In amazons case they unfairly use their market position to begin offering amazon private label products on their platform. They know what users are looking for, spend the most on, and they can give their own products dominate positions in the UI. 1) How is that different than a department store? If you go into housewares at Macy's you'll see their own branded stuff along with other brands. So at issue is not the pr…

> How is that different than a department store? I think it is different. When a department store buys a third-party product, it pays for it and the Store bears the risk of the item not selling. If Macy's decides to make their own brand, they did so by transferring risk from manufacturer to themselves in the beginning; if a product didn't sell enough, they had stake in it. There are some successes (store-brands) and…

I'm sorry, I don't see the difference.

If Macy's sells a third party product (say, a piece of cookware) and sees it doing well, then makes and sells a copy of it they don't seem to have taken more risk than Amazon.

It also feels pretty similar to what fashion designers have accused department stores of doing for decades: letting them take the risk, then "following fast" (or stealing designs, depending on your perspective) when something turns out to be popular.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#534

Post by tokyodude » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 7:42 PM UTC

Despegar wrote: post #429

skrebbel wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would this work in practice though? Eg Amazon. Bezos is a major shareholder. Imagine splitting AWS from the retail arm, which I guess would be a sensible split point. If Bezos controls both, then what would really change? I'm not critical to the idea nor supportive - I'm just curious to learn more.

Did you read her proposal? There would be a structural separation from distribution and first party goods. Just like railroads couldn't own interests in the commodities they were transporting, Amazon couldn't operate a market place and also own private label brands. https://medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big...

How would this be applied? I feel like nearly every grocery store chain in the USA has it's own brand competing with same 3rd party brands they carry. Whole Foods had "360", Walgreens has "Nice". It's been too long since I've been to a Safeway, a Lucky's, a Ralph's, etc but it became pretty clear that each one had it's own brand. And let's not forget Trader Joe's which is almost 90% all it's own brand.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#535

Post by cowl » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 7:42 PM UTC

int_19h wrote: post #487

cowl wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so we are ok with removing the only thing we as people have going for us, consumer welfare consideration and focus only on how to make it easier for businesses to screw us. Should I feel better that the business that is screwing me is a "small business" instead of a giant? is that the new standard?

It's not either-or. The problem is that the current interpretation only looks at consumer impact, and ignores a lot of anti-competitive behavior that makes the market less free overall. In practice, this still hurts consumers, it's just that much harder to prove because of indirect effects - and so monopolies get away with it more often than they used to.

>>In practice, this still hurts consumers.

I Don't agree with this view. It surely has the potential to hurt the consumers in the future but IF and WHEN it does consumer impact at that time can be used to fight it (break up etc). No need to actually hurt the consumer NOW for the fear that they might be hurt in the future.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#536

Post by bertil » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 7:45 PM UTC

sigmar wrote: post #423

psadauskas wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not "dumping" on her policy, I'm dumping on her choice of targets. I'm not happy about the App Store monopoly, but I'm actually upset at Comcast's behavior in every area they do business.

"Elizabeth Warren Slams Comcast, Wants More Antitrust Enforcement" https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Elizabeth-Warren-Slams-C... 2016, but still..

Has she done anything since?

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#537

Post by Despegar » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 7:46 PM UTC

delfinom wrote: post #432

Despegar wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read her proposal? There would be a structural separation from distribution and first party goods. Just like railroads couldn't own interests in the commodities they were transporting, Amazon couldn't operate a market place and also own private label brands. https://medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big...

So what about Walmart who does double Amazon in revenue AND has their own private label brands? They have so much retail power they are known to get manufacturers by the balls and make manufacturers accept the cost they want instead.

Since multiple people are asking this: it would apply to Walmart and Costco under her proposal because they both have $25B in revenues.

This is just the first step in a new conversation about confronting monopoly in America. There hasn't been a bill written yet.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#538

Post by debatem1 » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 7:47 PM UTC

The more I think about this the more I focus on the Amazon case.

Amazon's core competency is logistics. They would not exist at anything like their current scale if they couldn't do 2-day delivery. That's what really gives them a leg up vs doing a Google search, finding a small e-commerce ship that sells what you want, and getting the product.

Breaking that into an independent service-- if it's possible at all-- would have far more impact, and possibly more positive impact, than anything involving house brands or an ec2 split.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#539

Post by mywittyname » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 7:48 PM UTC

jhall1468 wrote: post #231

JackFr wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In amazons case they unfairly use their market position to begin offering amazon private label products on their platform. They know what users are looking for, spend the most on, and they can give their own products dominate positions in the UI. 1) How is that different than a department store? If you go into housewares at Macy's you'll see their own branded stuff along with other brands. So at issue is not the pr…

> How is that different than a department store? If you go into housewares at Macy's you'll see their own branded stuff along with other brands. So at issue is not the practice itself, but rather that the digital marketplace makes it easier and more efficient. It's 100% the exact same thing. Go to Walmart and see thousands of "Great Value" products and you'll get the exact same thing. Warren is off her rocker on this…

The issue comes with the monopoly status. If a company controls a certain % of marketshare, that behavior crosses into anti-competitive.

If 90% of retail stores were Walmart because they owned a significant percentage of real-estate in key markets (thus, preventing other retailers from moving in), then their Great Value offerings would also be anti-competitive.

Amazon's behavior is a textbook anti-competition. They literally build copies of products offered by other merchants on their site, then rank them higher in search results, often times, driving the merchants out of business.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#540

Post by GeekyBear » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 7:48 PM UTC

psadauskas wrote: post #211

How about going after Comcast and Verizon first, the actual tech monopolies ? I already don’t use Facebook, I buy things online from places other than Amazon, and have email accounts that aren’t hosted by Google. However, all of that goes over Comcast’s network because that’s my only viable choice for Internet service. Also, while FAANG occasionally do things I don’t approve of, they don’t actively lobby congress for…

It's worth remembering that the career antitrust officials at the FTC felt that Google should face antitrust action back in 2012.

It was the political appointees (from both parties) who shut the investigation down.

>The Federal Trade Commission on Thursday faced renewed questions about its handling of its antitrust investigation into Google, after documents revealed that an internal report had recommended stronger action.

The 2012 report, from the agency’s bureau of competition, said that the agency should sue the Internet search company for anticompetitive practices…

In early 2013, the agency unanimously voted not to bring charges after an investigation.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/20/technology/take-google-to...

Google's lobbying investment levels appear to have been quite adequate.

However, I would agree that the telecomm companies are also ripe for antitrust action.