4 ms·

I think you've got it backwards. Amazon (as Walmart before them) has done more to help poor people than any other firm or program around. Squeezing suppliers

by JackFr 7y ago

I think you've got it backwards. Amazon (as Walmart before them) has done more to help poor people than any other firm or program around. Squeezing suppliers and returning the benefit to consumers in lower prices, providing a wide offering of goods previously unavailable are real benefits which improve peoples lives. SpaceX is a government contractor -- an amazing one no doubt, but without the custom of the government they wouldn't exist. Tesla grew up on government subsidies for years and when faced with real competition, Elon suggested it was time to stop the subsidies. He may be doing good for the planet, but he is an ego driven hype machine.

procombo 7y ago
Amazon = net negative for people who do business with them. "Squeezes" relationships, as you put it. Elon Musk ventures = solves real world problems while maximizing fun. It's interesting how you paint Amazon and Walmart. Let me bring up just one example: The short term price squeezing means manufactures are responding by providing lower quality items to Amazon, just like what they do at Walmart. (Try buying a box of name brand Pampers diapers on Amazon right now and compare them with the same SKU at, say, Target) And all the more power to them if that's their goal. But long-term it isn't a sustainable strategy, business or environmental. Low-quality products equals more landfill and less money in consumer's pockets overall. It also means a very small market for product re-use, such as buying second hand. I grew up with 20 year old appliances from a local thrift shop. Every appliance I buy now seems to have a 24 month shelf-life, with the liability of having to dispose of unrecyclable materials. I'm telling you, net negative.
- pas 7y ago
  Is there a real study/video on that SKU comparison?
- pathseeker 7y ago
  >Low-quality products equals more landfill and less money in consumer's pockets overall. It also means a very small market for product re-use, such as buying second hand. I grew up with 20 year old appliances from a local thrift shop. Every appliance I buy now seems to have a 24 month shelf-life, with the liability of having to dispose of unrecyclable materials. I'm telling you, net negative. Nice anecdote, maybe you're just abusive? I buy simple appliances from Walmart and they last fine. I have a $15 drip coffee maker that has probably made about 2000 pots of coffee now from them and it still works. I'm telling you, net positive.
14u2c 7y ago
This seems a like a false equivalence to me. There is far more than just Amazon that has facilitated the benefits you described. The Internet, portable computing, etc. all played a role in the general standard of living increase. If Amazon had not become dominant entity its very possible that another or many other competing players could have done things differently. It's a lot harder to argue that another player in the market could have filed the niche that Elon identified and continues to expand.

by JackFr 7y ago

procombo 7y ago

Amazon = net negative for people who do business with them. "Squeezes" relationships, as you put it. Elon Musk ventures = solves real world problems while maximizing fun. It's interesting how you paint Amazon and Walmart. Let me bring up just one example: The short term price squeezing means manufactures are responding by providing lower quality items to Amazon, just like what they do at Walmart. (Try buying a box of name brand Pampers diapers on Amazon right now and compare them with the same SKU at, say, Target) And all the more power to them if that's their goal. But long-term it isn't a sustainable strategy, business or environmental. Low-quality products equals more landfill and less money in consumer's pockets overall. It also means a very small market for product re-use, such as buying second hand. I grew up with 20 year old appliances from a local thrift shop. Every appliance I buy now seems to have a 24 month shelf-life, with the liability of having to dispose of unrecyclable materials. I'm telling you, net negative.

pas 7y ago
Is there a real study/video on that SKU comparison?
pathseeker 7y ago
>Low-quality products equals more landfill and less money in consumer's pockets overall. It also means a very small market for product re-use, such as buying second hand. I grew up with 20 year old appliances from a local thrift shop. Every appliance I buy now seems to have a 24 month shelf-life, with the liability of having to dispose of unrecyclable materials. I'm telling you, net negative. Nice anecdote, maybe you're just abusive? I buy simple appliances from Walmart and they last fine. I have a $15 drip coffee maker that has probably made about 2000 pots of coffee now from them and it still works. I'm telling you, net positive.

14u2c 7y ago

This seems a like a false equivalence to me. There is far more than just Amazon that has facilitated the benefits you described. The Internet, portable computing, etc. all played a role in the general standard of living increase. If Amazon had not become dominant entity its very possible that another or many other competing players could have done things differently. It's a lot harder to argue that another player in the market could have filed the niche that Elon identified and continues to expand.