40 ms·

Amazon is also wading into this logistics space, so they will be head to head. https://logistics.amazon.com https://logistics.amazon.com They have a lead; the

by imglorp 10y ago

Amazon is also wading into this logistics space, so they will be head to head. https://logistics.amazon.com https://logistics.amazon.com They have a lead; they're already into aviation: http://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/amazon-to-lease-20-boeing-767s-for-its-own-air-cargo-network/ http://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/amazon... It's going to be a spectacular, automated race to the bottom. The losers are going to be the 10 million professional drivers in the old trucking and taxi businesses.

ecnal 10y ago
>It's going to be a spectacular, automated race to the bottom. Excellent! More efficient shipping benefits a lot of people. The problem isn't the increase in efficiency — are faster CPUs a race to the bottom because worse chip makers go out of business? — it's poor policy that fails to adequately compensate those who lose from this. We should focus on electing officials and supporting policy to turn these Kaldor-Hicks improvements into Pareto ones. (I know you're not taking a stance against automation, I just think it's important to stress that the correct response is to make everyone better off by using some of the gains to compensate the losers)
- cashmonkey85 10y ago
  Yea it's amazing people complaining about efficiency and an increase in prosperity. I understand people arguing for the redistribution of wealth but arguing against an increase in prosperity is ludicrous