4 ms·

This is an incredibly stupid headline. Trump didn’t criticize Amazon because it was a monopoly, he criticized it because he thinks that Amazon owns the Washingt

by evan_ 9y ago

This is an incredibly stupid headline. Trump didn’t criticize Amazon because it was a monopoly, he criticized it because he thinks that Amazon owns the Washington Post and he’s mad at the Washington Post.

ethanwillis 9y ago
And anti-trumpers don't defend Amazon because they don't believe it's a monopoly, they defend it because Trump criticizes it. The point is that the motivation doesn't matter too much if the end result is the same. Amazon IS too big and we need to do something about it. We can all have differing motivations but still want the same thing.
- lostlogin 9y ago
  Ends doesn’t justify the means and motivation really does matter. If this really is done to hit The Washington Post, is that not a bit disturbing? It’s got a few parallels with the Gawker situation but a load worse imho.
  - themoat 9y ago
    I think it kind of depends on what the ends and means are. Also, why does motivation matter in this case specifically. I believe that the enemy of my enemy is my friend can apply in certain situations. I don't need someone's motivation to strictly align with mine. Sometimes a unified goal is enough.
    - ethanwillis 9y ago
      Completely agree that it depends on the ends and means. In pretty much any issue we're always going to have to work with people who have differing motivations than ours, and motivations that we don't agree with. I think you've got the right question in asking why the motivation here disqualifies the end goal.
- evan_ 9y ago
  If I say “the claim that Amazon costs the USPS money has no basis in fact”- or point out any of the other factual innacuracies in the president’s months-long tantrum about Amazon and the Washington Post- that isn’t defending Amazon. If there’s a case to be made against Amazon then it should be made without making things up.
  - ethanwillis 9y ago
    Why does Amazon use USPS so heavily? It's because they charge them much lower rates than their competitors. USPS should (and not discussing regulations could) charge Amazon more. I think it's pretty tasteless that Amazon takes advantage of regulations and the dismal financials of USPS to get cheap delivery. In the long term who wins and loses here? Amazon wins and makes some more billions and the postal workers lose as all their pensions get gutted.
    - evan_ 9y ago
      You’ve moved the goalposts from “the USPS is losing money” to “the USPS is not making as much money as possible”- and still not actually provided any real numbers or facts. Wouldn’t a better solution to the problem you claim exists be to try to change the postal rate? Instead, Trump (and, apparently, you) attacks Amazon for being so “tasteless” as to... pay the bill for services rendered. Trump famously doesn’t pay his bills so maybe he just doesn’t understand how this kind of thing works? Elsewhere in this thread you argue that the ends justify the means because Amazon needs to be regulated. This ignores the possibility that if Trump is lying about his motivation, then he's also lying about the "ends" he's after: If he's trying to hit Amazon as a way to hurt the Washington Post, then you have to factor that in to your calculations. It's no longer "Amazon is too big", it's "Amazon's too big and the Free Press is too free".
      - ethanwillis 9y ago
        I actually didn't move a single goal post. I never stated that I believe that the USPS is "losing money" in the strictest sense on each of the transactions. You're projecting Trumps tweets onto me personally. I don't care if Trump famously doesnt pay his bills because that has nothing to do with how I view Amazon. If you ask me directly I'd say it's tasteless how Trump treats his contractors and fucks them around when he can definitely afford to pay them. And maybe he is lying about the ends he's after, that's the risk with allying with people who do have different motivations than you. However that's a risk you have to take in a society that's trying to organize many different people with many different opinions. It's almost like we need to debate and come as close to a solution as possible that meets each person's expectations/motivations without crossing the lines in the sand we each draw for acceptable behavior. So let's discuss all the issues so you can maybe have a real discussion with me and not just argue with me because you think I'm some Trump shill. Trump 1.) He treats women like garbage 2.) He plays games with subcontractors and employees to fuck them out of as much money as possible or not pay them at all. 3.) He plays all the tax loopholes to pay the minimum possible tax that he can. etc etc. Amazon 1.) Utilizes the USPS's precarious financial situation and their massive buying power to get lower rates that screw over the USPS in the long term. 2.) They don't care about the fact that when they have drones doing deliveries and drop USPS that all of the USPS workers who need their pensions paid will be SOL. Free Press 1.) I don't think that the press is too free when it's basically all sock puppeting for rich people whether that be Fox News or Washington Post. At the same time I would definitely oppose any kind of legislation that curtails the ability of the free press to be.. free. I don't have to support gutting the Washington Post to talk about putting some regulations on Amazon.
- drivingmenuts 9y ago
  That's just sloppy engineering, if it is even engineering. It's more like throwing something against the wall and if it sticks, call it a success. Trump doesn't like the politics of the people in a business vaguely related to Amazon. Any change made on that basis is going to lead to bad results.
padseeker 9y ago
It might not be just because of the Washington Post, although that is certainly a contributing factor. There is also reason to believe that Trump wants to go after Amazon because Amazon is hurting brick and mortar retail, which also hurts commercial real estate, which also hurts him financially. Also Jeff Bezos is very wealthy, and Trump might view him as a rival. I am not a Trump supporter, however it may be true that Amazon is in fact underpaying taxes. What's repugnant is that I don't believe his motivation is about making sure everyone pays their fair share into the system. It's more just transparent resentment, as well as a tactic to go after rivals. It is concerning the way Amazon does business. However I'm not sure what kind of case the Justice Department would have against it as a Monopoly. What segment of the market do they control as much as AT&T did, or Microsoft?

by evan_ 9y ago

ethanwillis 9y ago

And anti-trumpers don't defend Amazon because they don't believe it's a monopoly, they defend it because Trump criticizes it. The point is that the motivation doesn't matter too much if the end result is the same. Amazon IS too big and we need to do something about it. We can all have differing motivations but still want the same thing.

lostlogin 9y ago
Ends doesn’t justify the means and motivation really does matter. If this really is done to hit The Washington Post, is that not a bit disturbing? It’s got a few parallels with the Gawker situation but a load worse imho.
- themoat 9y ago
  I think it kind of depends on what the ends and means are. Also, why does motivation matter in this case specifically. I believe that the enemy of my enemy is my friend can apply in certain situations. I don't need someone's motivation to strictly align with mine. Sometimes a unified goal is enough.
  - ethanwillis 9y ago
    Completely agree that it depends on the ends and means. In pretty much any issue we're always going to have to work with people who have differing motivations than ours, and motivations that we don't agree with. I think you've got the right question in asking why the motivation here disqualifies the end goal.
evan_ 9y ago
If I say “the claim that Amazon costs the USPS money has no basis in fact”- or point out any of the other factual innacuracies in the president’s months-long tantrum about Amazon and the Washington Post- that isn’t defending Amazon. If there’s a case to be made against Amazon then it should be made without making things up.
- ethanwillis 9y ago
  Why does Amazon use USPS so heavily? It's because they charge them much lower rates than their competitors. USPS should (and not discussing regulations could) charge Amazon more. I think it's pretty tasteless that Amazon takes advantage of regulations and the dismal financials of USPS to get cheap delivery. In the long term who wins and loses here? Amazon wins and makes some more billions and the postal workers lose as all their pensions get gutted.
  - evan_ 9y ago
    You’ve moved the goalposts from “the USPS is losing money” to “the USPS is not making as much money as possible”- and still not actually provided any real numbers or facts. Wouldn’t a better solution to the problem you claim exists be to try to change the postal rate? Instead, Trump (and, apparently, you) attacks Amazon for being so “tasteless” as to... pay the bill for services rendered. Trump famously doesn’t pay his bills so maybe he just doesn’t understand how this kind of thing works? Elsewhere in this thread you argue that the ends justify the means because Amazon needs to be regulated. This ignores the possibility that if Trump is lying about his motivation, then he's also lying about the "ends" he's after: If he's trying to hit Amazon as a way to hurt the Washington Post, then you have to factor that in to your calculations. It's no longer "Amazon is too big", it's "Amazon's too big and the Free Press is too free".
    - ethanwillis 9y ago
      I actually didn't move a single goal post. I never stated that I believe that the USPS is "losing money" in the strictest sense on each of the transactions. You're projecting Trumps tweets onto me personally. I don't care if Trump famously doesnt pay his bills because that has nothing to do with how I view Amazon. If you ask me directly I'd say it's tasteless how Trump treats his contractors and fucks them around when he can definitely afford to pay them. And maybe he is lying about the ends he's after, that's the risk with allying with people who do have different motivations than you. However that's a risk you have to take in a society that's trying to organize many different people with many different opinions. It's almost like we need to debate and come as close to a solution as possible that meets each person's expectations/motivations without crossing the lines in the sand we each draw for acceptable behavior. So let's discuss all the issues so you can maybe have a real discussion with me and not just argue with me because you think I'm some Trump shill. Trump 1.) He treats women like garbage 2.) He plays games with subcontractors and employees to fuck them out of as much money as possible or not pay them at all. 3.) He plays all the tax loopholes to pay the minimum possible tax that he can. etc etc. Amazon 1.) Utilizes the USPS's precarious financial situation and their massive buying power to get lower rates that screw over the USPS in the long term. 2.) They don't care about the fact that when they have drones doing deliveries and drop USPS that all of the USPS workers who need their pensions paid will be SOL. Free Press 1.) I don't think that the press is too free when it's basically all sock puppeting for rich people whether that be Fox News or Washington Post. At the same time I would definitely oppose any kind of legislation that curtails the ability of the free press to be.. free. I don't have to support gutting the Washington Post to talk about putting some regulations on Amazon.
drivingmenuts 9y ago
That's just sloppy engineering, if it is even engineering. It's more like throwing something against the wall and if it sticks, call it a success. Trump doesn't like the politics of the people in a business vaguely related to Amazon. Any change made on that basis is going to lead to bad results.

padseeker 9y ago

It might not be just because of the Washington Post, although that is certainly a contributing factor. There is also reason to believe that Trump wants to go after Amazon because Amazon is hurting brick and mortar retail, which also hurts commercial real estate, which also hurts him financially. Also Jeff Bezos is very wealthy, and Trump might view him as a rival. I am not a Trump supporter, however it may be true that Amazon is in fact underpaying taxes. What's repugnant is that I don't believe his motivation is about making sure everyone pays their fair share into the system. It's more just transparent resentment, as well as a tactic to go after rivals. It is concerning the way Amazon does business. However I'm not sure what kind of case the Justice Department would have against it as a Monopoly. What segment of the market do they control as much as AT&T did, or Microsoft?