6 ms·

It's a catch-22 ... would Amazon be this innovative had it been nationalised? At what point do you nationalise? Is there a next technology which will be stifle

by LightG 5y ago

It's a catch-22 ... would Amazon be this innovative had it been nationalised? At what point do you nationalise? Is there a next technology which will be stifled if it was nationalise? Does nationalisation sttifle innovation? I've been wrestling with these questions as I actually don't like Amazon for all the reasons that have been well publicised ... but their customer service is excellent. Which sets me against a string of recent bad experiences with local suppliers, getting stung, and thinking ... well, if Amazon treat me better, why shouldn't I move away from local suppliers and stick with the monopoly? Which goes against a lot I believe in. I guess the problem is it's putting a lot of trust in Amazon. Which is itself an argument for nationalisation. I don't know.

suprfsat 5y ago
Jeff Bezos will testify in front of congress that he will cease to be innovative if required to pay taxes.
- Red_Leaves_Flyy 5y ago
  Sounds like extortion to me.
  - batch12 5y ago
    How so? Whether or not amazon innovates should have no bearing on a decision by congress to levy additional taxes against them. If amazon decides to become shittier as a result, someone else can fill that void.
  - missedthecue 5y ago
    not sure which party you're talking about here
- tremon 5y ago
  Does this imply he sees his ability to evade taxes as his only worthwhile innovation?
  - 8note 5y ago
    I think it implies that amazon can't both spend everything that would be profit on innovation while also paying the same money on taxes
- sneak 5y ago
  Amazon pays mountains of payroll taxes, as they are one of the largest employers in the world. The "Amazon pays no taxes" meme is a false one.
  - spaceribs 5y ago
    I think the meme is "Amazon pays no federal taxes on it's profits", and that is a correct statement.
    - sneak 5y ago
      If that were the meme, I wouldn't be trying to dispel it.
    - dahfizz 5y ago
      Even that is not really true. They paid no federal income tax in 2017 and 2018, but have before and since. I'm no fan of Amazon, but you have to admit there is a pretty large distance between "Amazon pays no tax" and "Amazon pays billions in tax, but they didn't pay this one specific kind of tax a couple years ago". https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/04/amazon-had-to-pay-federal-income-taxes-for-the-first-time-since-2016.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/04/amazon-had-to-pay-federal-in...
      - spaceribs 5y ago
        I think income tax is the most impactful and expensive tax we have in the US, it's the one everyone thinks of when someone says "doing your taxes". The fact that Amazon just this year after not paying for 2 years had to pay a measly 1.6% in taxes does not really negate the argument. Edit: 4 years -> 2 years
        dahfizz 5y ago
        It really feels like you're twisting reality. Amazon went 2 years without paying _income_ tax, not 4. Amazon paid $3.5 billion in taxes in 2019 (some of which was differed, but still owed). That is over 25% of their income that year. Their federal income tax rate came out to 1.6%, but its borderline lying to say "they paid a measly 1.6% in taxes". Amazon is an awful company. There is no reason to bend the truth to try and show how awful they are. Being disingenuous only makes your argument weaker.
nerbert 5y ago
Amazon the marketplace isn’t terribly innovative. It’s a marketplace supported by fantastic logistics, and most of it is backed by USPS anyways. There’s only so much you can do to remove the pains from buyers, sounds like we’re there.
- smhost 5y ago
  "Innovation" refers to practices like staying in the red for a decade and bypassing antitrust laws by owning (rather than monopolizing) markets. It has little to do with technological innovation.
  - andrepd 5y ago
    Precisely. Much of the "innovations" and "efficiencies" touted (by Amazon and by many other players) are actually not any material/physical/technical improvements, but financial games, buying competitors, operating at a loss, regulatory evasion, monopolisation, etc.
    - smhost 5y ago
      I mean, business/financial innovation is a legitimate kind of innovation. I'm not harping on Amazon for that. I just think that discussions about "loss of innovation" smuggle in some irrational fears about loss of technology when there are no real reasons to.
  - choward 5y ago
    Right. I wonder how much competition Amazon has eliminated over the years with their shady business practices. That competition may have driven innovation even further.
- mschuster91 5y ago
  > It’s a marketplace supported by fantastic logistics, and most of it is backed by USPS anyways. Not any more, USPS was only used for shipping anyway. Amazon has shifted to vertical integration wherever they can - they run everything they can, from air freight (with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Air https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Air) over their infamous warehouses to last-mile delivery with either in-house staff or "contractor" schemes set up to avoid labor regulations.
49531 5y ago
> Does nationalisation stifle innovation? I would argue that it does not. We have a lot of innovations from the last 100 years that have come from state-run projects / endeavors. The more I think about it the more it looks as though private ownership stifles innovation if there isn't a direct profit motive for it.
- pydry 5y ago
  Being a monopoly of any kind stifles innovation. It's often better for the state to react to private monopolies/oligopolies by entering the space and competing with a bare bones service. This has worked in banking, telecoms, land development, housing, etc. It often works better than taking over the monopoly directly. It's one of the reasons (IMHO) Singapore has such an effective private market. Often private companies lobby for laws restricting the level that they can compete - this is a signal that it's an effective tactic. If USPS were given a mandate and the cash it could absolutely build a marketplace that could compete and it would probably kick start Amazon into being a better and cheaper retailer. Unfortunately it's being whittled down to a husk of its former self.

by LightG 5y ago

suprfsat 5y ago

Jeff Bezos will testify in front of congress that he will cease to be innovative if required to pay taxes.

Red_Leaves_Flyy 5y ago
Sounds like extortion to me.
- batch12 5y ago
  How so? Whether or not amazon innovates should have no bearing on a decision by congress to levy additional taxes against them. If amazon decides to become shittier as a result, someone else can fill that void.
- missedthecue 5y ago
  not sure which party you're talking about here
tremon 5y ago
Does this imply he sees his ability to evade taxes as his only worthwhile innovation?
- 8note 5y ago
  I think it implies that amazon can't both spend everything that would be profit on innovation while also paying the same money on taxes
sneak 5y ago
Amazon pays mountains of payroll taxes, as they are one of the largest employers in the world. The "Amazon pays no taxes" meme is a false one.
- spaceribs 5y ago
  I think the meme is "Amazon pays no federal taxes on it's profits", and that is a correct statement.
  - sneak 5y ago
    If that were the meme, I wouldn't be trying to dispel it.
  - dahfizz 5y ago
    Even that is not really true. They paid no federal income tax in 2017 and 2018, but have before and since. I'm no fan of Amazon, but you have to admit there is a pretty large distance between "Amazon pays no tax" and "Amazon pays billions in tax, but they didn't pay this one specific kind of tax a couple years ago". https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/04/amazon-had-to-pay-federal-income-taxes-for-the-first-time-since-2016.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/04/amazon-had-to-pay-federal-in...
    - spaceribs 5y ago
      I think income tax is the most impactful and expensive tax we have in the US, it's the one everyone thinks of when someone says "doing your taxes". The fact that Amazon just this year after not paying for 2 years had to pay a measly 1.6% in taxes does not really negate the argument. Edit: 4 years -> 2 years
      - dahfizz 5y ago
        It really feels like you're twisting reality. Amazon went 2 years without paying _income_ tax, not 4. Amazon paid $3.5 billion in taxes in 2019 (some of which was differed, but still owed). That is over 25% of their income that year. Their federal income tax rate came out to 1.6%, but its borderline lying to say "they paid a measly 1.6% in taxes". Amazon is an awful company. There is no reason to bend the truth to try and show how awful they are. Being disingenuous only makes your argument weaker.

nerbert 5y ago

Amazon the marketplace isn’t terribly innovative. It’s a marketplace supported by fantastic logistics, and most of it is backed by USPS anyways. There’s only so much you can do to remove the pains from buyers, sounds like we’re there.

smhost 5y ago
"Innovation" refers to practices like staying in the red for a decade and bypassing antitrust laws by owning (rather than monopolizing) markets. It has little to do with technological innovation.
- andrepd 5y ago
  Precisely. Much of the "innovations" and "efficiencies" touted (by Amazon and by many other players) are actually not any material/physical/technical improvements, but financial games, buying competitors, operating at a loss, regulatory evasion, monopolisation, etc.
  - smhost 5y ago
    I mean, business/financial innovation is a legitimate kind of innovation. I'm not harping on Amazon for that. I just think that discussions about "loss of innovation" smuggle in some irrational fears about loss of technology when there are no real reasons to.
- choward 5y ago
  Right. I wonder how much competition Amazon has eliminated over the years with their shady business practices. That competition may have driven innovation even further.
mschuster91 5y ago
> It’s a marketplace supported by fantastic logistics, and most of it is backed by USPS anyways. Not any more, USPS was only used for shipping anyway. Amazon has shifted to vertical integration wherever they can - they run everything they can, from air freight (with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Air https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Air) over their infamous warehouses to last-mile delivery with either in-house staff or "contractor" schemes set up to avoid labor regulations.

49531 5y ago

> Does nationalisation stifle innovation? I would argue that it does not. We have a lot of innovations from the last 100 years that have come from state-run projects / endeavors. The more I think about it the more it looks as though private ownership stifles innovation if there isn't a direct profit motive for it.

pydry 5y ago
Being a monopoly of any kind stifles innovation. It's often better for the state to react to private monopolies/oligopolies by entering the space and competing with a bare bones service. This has worked in banking, telecoms, land development, housing, etc. It often works better than taking over the monopoly directly. It's one of the reasons (IMHO) Singapore has such an effective private market. Often private companies lobby for laws restricting the level that they can compete - this is a signal that it's an effective tactic. If USPS were given a mandate and the cash it could absolutely build a marketplace that could compete and it would probably kick start Amazon into being a better and cheaper retailer. Unfortunately it's being whittled down to a husk of its former self.