4 ms·
Assuming that local production reduces costs, the question seems to become whether they can leverage demand to break the unions or not. This comes from the two
by guerrilla 6y ago
Assuming that local production reduces costs, the question seems to become whether they can leverage demand to break the unions or not. This comes from the two further assumptions that they don't have any other leverage to do so (outside of corruption) and even though the benefit of satsifying the market presumably outststrips the cost, they will do everything they can to reduce costs anyway.
Am I missing anything?
I'll continue supporting the local competition (for books and media) in any case.
- jeltz 6y agoHow would they be able to leverage demand? I can't see our politicians wanting to get involved in this fight, especially not on Amazon's side. Why would they want to support Amazon against both unions and againast Swedish companies? I think they will just remove themselves from the conflict and let it play out. I can't see a scenario where Amazon does not have to agree to collective bargaining.
- guerrilla 6y agoSwedish naiveté always amazes me.
- Jolter 6y agoFeel free to explain a plausible scenario where Amazon wins an all-out fight with the unions, then.
- Yetanfou 6y agoVery simple, they'll just stage most operations outside of Sweden but inside the EU and run deliveries to Sweden that way. More or less like things are now, really.
- Jolter 6y agoI don’t see how they will win the marketplace then. Delivery will be slower than their local competitors, presumably.
- Yetanfou 6y agoYou'd think so, wouldn't you? In practice I've had parcels from Germany arrive a week before those which were ordered from Swedish companies on the same day. It even happened once with a shipment from China which arrived in a record 7 days while the Swedish shipment lingered in a postal depot for 3 more days. This was back in the time the Swedish postal monopoly still drove yellow trucks and cars and had not merged yet with the Danish equivalent, i.e. before things went downhill.
- alkonaut 6y agoThat's what they already do. So establishing operations in Sweden means that isn't enough.
- username90 6y agoUnlike USA Swedish politicians mostly comes from working class backgrounds. Their friends and family are working class. If they do something that is bad for the working class it will ruin their social lives, so they wont. And since the working/lower middle class is the biggest class they have no problems getting elected. This is how democracy is supposed to work.
- Yetanfou 6y ago> Unlike USA Swedish politicians mostly comes from working class backgrounds Have you looked at the current Swedish government? You'll be hard pressed to find people with "working class backgrounds" there, they're mostly political broilers who started their career in the SSU (social democrat youth movement) or Grön Ungdom (environmental party youth movement). Stefan Löfven is one of the few who at least made a start torwards becoming a worker in that he was training to become a welder before he became a full-time labour union representative followed by a career in the SAP (social democratic worker's party).
- username90 6y agoHow many of them have college degrees? How many of them have parents that had college degrees? How many of them got a lot of money from their parents? I'd say that most of our politicians don't have any of those. They might be career politicians, but if they didn't become politicians they would have had a working class career. You can't say the same for many American politicians.
- guerrilla 6y agoa) Once they get elected, they're no longer working class. You're making the same mistake Lenin's followers did but on a smaller scale. b) They can manipulate an entrte country of strangers to get elected but not the people over whom they have an information advantage and other more direct sources of power (including rewards)? Think it through a bit more.
- username90 6y ago
- alkonaut 6y agoOne of the key things about the Swedish labour market model is that both sides of the political spectrum find it (agreements) better than the alternative (rigid laws for e.g. minimum wages). The same goes for both ends of the agreements (the employers' organizations and the unions). This is why it works. It's also why it isn't very sensitive to corruption and political changes.