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

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#651

Post by 908087 » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 11:31 PM UTC

Kaveren wrote: post #579

charmides wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like you are just repeating the same specious point that OP was refuting. Right now, it feels like companies like Google are mostly silencing hate speech, violent extremists, and pornography, but there is no guarantee that their censorship will remain that way in the future. In a not-so-hypothetical future where a single private company has taken almost whole control over online media and starts imposing hea…

Yes, that's exactly what I'm going to do. Your opinion has no right to exist on any platform. Don't like it? You can move off of it. Bring other people to a platform that goes by rules you like. I don't use Gab, I am not interested in it, but it exists and has rules you may prefer if this hypothetical situation were to occur. I like diverse viewpoints being allowed. It is unacceptable, however, to be so entitled as t…

Would you be similarly comfortable with your cell provider censoring your calls and/or texts? After all, it's unacceptable to force them not to censor whatever they feel like.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#652

Post by dahdum » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 11:32 PM UTC

clairity wrote: post #629

rjf72 wrote: post #586

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is an absolutely incredible idea if it could actually be made in a way such that the taxation and other factors could not be easily avoided. But there's one unspoken problem with taxes and particularly corporate taxes. Large companies are perceived as being proportionally beneficial to the US economy. If you made the US a place that was meaningfully undesirable for corporations, they can leave. And even…

generally, large corporations (and wealthy people) do not, and will not, leave the US because of taxes. people want to live here and companies want to do business here. badly. but they also want an unfair advantage and will say anything (like "we'll just take our toys and leave!") to try to get it.

It was actually common, they still do business here, before the tax law change they would do an inversion so they'd no longer be taxed by the US on their foreign profits (US had worldwide taxation while most every other country did not).

Here's an article about 2016: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/tax-inversion-tracker/

US citizens can't avoid worldwide taxation, but they certainly move states to avoid taxes.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#653

Post by ngcc_hk » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 11:42 PM UTC

Miss the whole point. The world largest is not American firm. Not even in IT.

Break yours and let others do it.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#654

Post by clairity » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 11:53 PM UTC

dahdum wrote: post #652

clairity wrote: post #629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

generally, large corporations (and wealthy people) do not, and will not, leave the US because of taxes. people want to live here and companies want to do business here. badly. but they also want an unfair advantage and will say anything (like "we'll just take our toys and leave!") to try to get it.

It was actually common, they still do business here, before the tax law change they would do an inversion so they'd no longer be taxed by the US on their foreign profits (US had worldwide taxation while most every other country did not). Here's an article about 2016: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/tax-inversion-tracker/ US citizens can't avoid worldwide taxation, but they certainly move states to avoid taxes.

yes, our tilted tax system let them do that without any repercussion. not only can they keep doing business as they always have, they get extra incentive on top. let's just equalize the tax treatment of individuals and corporations already.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#655

Post by chiefalchemist » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 12:00 AM UTC

igravious wrote: post #644

chiefalchemist wrote: post #597

I'd like to say this is just politics but I'm not even sure it's good politics. How many people are really concerned about the size of Amazon, Facebook, Google, etc. If people are that concerned, why do so many people I know have Prime? The fossil fuel industry continues to run rampant. As does the Military Industrial Complex. The former is a key player in the degradation of the planet; the latter is a money sucking…

> I'd like to say this is just politics but I'm not even sure it's good politics. How many people are really concerned about the size of Amazon, Facebook, Google, etc Oh, lots and lots. > If people are that concerned, why do so many people I know have Prime? The reason so many of the people you know have Prime is because of Amazon's dominant market position. > The fossil fuel industry continues to run rampant. As doe…

> I'd like to say this is just politics but I'm not even sure it's good politics. How many people are really concerned about the size of Amazon, Facebook, Google, etc

Oh, lots and lots.

> If people are that concerned, why do so many people I know have Prime?

The reason so many of the people you know have Prime is because of Amazon's dominant market position.

Yes. But if they are THAT concerned they would be dropping Prime and shopping elsewhere.

The "lots and lots" - if they exist (you added no link) - are likely to be the Coastal Elites. The same minds who were so out of touch we got DJT. Regardless, to think that Middle America is going to go from "build a wall" to "break up Facebook" is, at best, a stretch. As politics goes, this is a non-issue.

p.a. After the crash of 2008 we were told by many a political "leader" (including the POTUS at the time) how there was too much power concentrated on Wall Street. Liz W was one of those "leaders". Yet there were no breakups, etc. While I wouldn't put SV in the same class as WS, it's hard to imagine anything changing.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#656

Post by vilifiedtwin » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 12:36 AM 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…

Just make sure they'll break up to at least two companies for any given region because otherwise you'll end up with a local monopoly which is probably even worse.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#657

Post by bhl » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 12:37 AM UTC

e1ven wrote: post #524

andrewla wrote: post #454

Does anyone actually believe that the US government's interventions against Microsoft made the slightest bit of difference, as opposed to huge shifts in the internet and mobile landscape? You could argue that the emergence of Firefox and Chrome was only made possible by the ability to assign a "default" non-IE browser in Windows, but that ability pre-dated any of the anti-trust stuff anyway; all you got out of that w…

I apolgoize that I don't have any references available at the moment, but I've read in several books that Microsoft insiders said it made an enormous difference. Having the government essentially watching their every move caused them to moderate their actions, and make sure they were on the right side of the law. They were much more conservative than they otherwise would have been. It was described as a large cultura…

Here’s an alternative source: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/20/magazine/the-case-against...

“Anyone who said that the 1990s prosecution of Microsoft didn’t accomplish anything — that it was companies like Google, rather than government lawyers, that humbled Microsoft — didn’t know what they were talking about, Reback said. In fact, he argued, the opposite was true: The antitrust attacks on Microsoft made all the difference. Condemning Microsoft as a monopoly is why Google exists today, he said.”

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#658

Post by wwweston » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 12:39 AM UTC

giggles_giggles wrote: post #373

psadauskas wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, I should have checked the facts before speculating on which company spent more on lobbying. However, the things they are lobbying for/against also matter. As a recent example, Net Neutrality involved massive amounts of lobbing and had very clear "pro-consumer" and "anti-consumer" sides. From https://www.opensecrets.org/news/issues/net_neutrality/ > Not only was Google the pro-net neutrality organization…

>As a recent example, Net Neutrality involved massive amounts of lobbing and had very clear "pro-consumer" and "anti-consumer" sides This isn't as uncontroversial of an opinion as it might appear to be in a place like HN. What you're admitting here basically is that you think Comcast should be broken up because they lobby for things you don't like, but FAANG is fine because they lobby for things you do.

> What you're admitting here basically is that you think Comcast should be broken up because they lobby for things you don't like, but FAANG is fine because they lobby for things you do.

Far from being a shocking "admission," it's the least surprising thing in the world that people support policy they like and oppose policy they don't. And ignore policy they're indifferent to.

(People may also at times support policy they don't like and oppose policy they do for various practical political reasons, but that's a different discussion.)

This might be more of an issue in areas where things people do/don't like are arbitrary matters of taste. I'm certainly not saddling up to lead a state-backed charge against the company that produces Peeps despite the fact that I think they're a terrible excuse for candy.

But net neutrality is not an arbitrary matter of taste.

Nor, really, are immigration, tax reform and antitrust issues.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#659

Post by bhl » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 12:40 AM UTC

psadauskas wrote: post #392

giggles_giggles wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>As a recent example, Net Neutrality involved massive amounts of lobbing and had very clear "pro-consumer" and "anti-consumer" sides This isn't as uncontroversial of an opinion as it might appear to be in a place like HN. What you're admitting here basically is that you think Comcast should be broken up because they lobby for things you don't like, but FAANG is fine because they lobby for things you do.

No, you're putting words in my mouth, or misunderstanding my point. > you think Comcast should be broken up I think efforts to break up tech monopolies should first be focused on telecommunication companies. > because they lobby for things you don't like, Not just me, but are objectively harmful to 99% of the people they would affect > but FAANG is fine because they lobby for things you do. I'm mostly focusing on Goo…

> I'm mostly focusing on Google here, and yes, they at least occasionally lobby for things I like because sometimes their interests and the interests of the public in general happen to align.

There’s definitely an argument to be made here that their interests don’t align with the public, and that they should therefore be targeted first — public interests is a subjective phrase.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#660

Post by bhl » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 12:43 AM UTC

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #442

luckydata wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because Google/Amazon/Facebook are more consequential to our life and society. But I agree cable companies should also be looked at. TBH there's no hope competition will ever be a thing where heavy infrastructure spending is at play, those companies should be made public and the infrastructure provided for businesses by the government through fees, just like roads and other basic infra.

You can replace Google/Amazon/Facebook in seconds. You can not change your cable provider in a large number of areas, and even many of the ones that you can, you only have 2 choices between Comcast/Verizon/ATT/Centurylink. And, miraculously, as soon as a competitor arrives, you see prices drop and speeds increase. It happened in just about every area Google fiber rolled out to. Comcast also charge $10 for an extra 50…

> You can replace Google/Amazon/Facebook in seconds.

This is largely false: look at market share of all their competitors — network effects are really hard to replace.