> That's awful for people who can't, or don't want to, shop online The obvious counterargument is that a 2% increase in cost on almost everybody amounts to a p

> That's awful for people who can't, or don't want to, shop online The obvious counterargument is that a 2% increase in cost on almost everybody amounts to a pretty awful amount of disutility when you aggregate across the whole population, and it's regressive as it hits low-income people the hardest. But because of the boiling frog effect, nobody notices that sort of hurt enough to complain about it. I'm not taking a pro-Amazon position here; just pointing out that a gross-receipts tax is a pretty blunt instrument.