13 ms·

If I had to pick a single politically uniting issue, breaking up Amazon and big tech would be it. Why has this not happened yet? Is the out of power party afra

If I had to pick a single politically uniting issue, breaking up Amazon and big tech would be it. Why has this not happened yet? Is the out of power party afraid the in power party will get credit? (This has been discussed when both parties were in power) If the government can't get something with this kind of support done, I fear the road we are headed down .

nautilus12 5y ago
They are close to hitting a critical point in terms of political and economic power where they literally will no longer be able to be stopped. We will have no recourse but to replace our government with Amazon. It will be like Buy n Large in Wall-e.
- sneak 5y ago
  Amazon builds and operates internet-disconnected datacenters, on-prem in Langley, for the CIA. You're not getting rid of the CIA's drone video cluster sysadmins. They also operate several internet-connected regions (GovCloud) that have the special racist hiring policies required to fulfill US govt hosting regulations. That ship has probably already sailed.
- akudha 5y ago
  I fear we are already beyond the point of stopping them. Remember those cringey, awkward videos by dozens of mayors begging Amazon to choose their city for their second headquarters? I'm all for gov-biz partnership, but gov literally begging big biz is not a good sign. There is a power imbalance here.
- frankbreetz 5y ago
  I disagree, there is a lot the government could do. Amazon is nothing with out the US Government. Protection of all of it's property, maintaining infrastructure, both the internet and transportation system. Simply charging business for the wear and tear the place on the roads would be a start.
  - shmageggy 5y ago
    So, like corporate taxes?
  - nautilus12 5y ago
    I think your underestimating Amazon and overestimating the government
nomorewords 5y ago
I think that a lot of the big politics players realize that if the big companies get broken up, some of the businesses might not be as profitable. In other words, it seems like some businesses have been able to find a diamond//golden goose so much so that they are able to support different businesses. These other businesses will not have had the same success if they didn't have a cashcow behind their back.
ameister14 5y ago
I don't think that people are united about breaking up Amazon and frankly I don't really see the damage to consumer necessary to break it up; products come faster, cheaper. Could you articulate why Amazon should be broken up? Most of the arguments I've seen boil down to "It's so big" and not really "It's effectively dominated x market and there is no competition there" or even "they are harming competition by pre-installing free software that I can't uninstall"
- enragedcacti 5y ago
  I would split it into three things: 1. They have the size and market control to crush and/or acquire all competitors e.g. diapers.com https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-29/amazon-emails-show-effort-to-weaken-diapers-com-before-buying-it https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-29/amazon-em... 2. They purport to operate a neutral marketplace where they aren't responsible for the end product while also controlling what products you see and what company you will buy from and choose the ones that give them the best margin. The huge problem of counterfeit and faulty products on Amazon directly harms the consumer and because of (1) there isn't a general market remedy. 3. They leverage their position as market maker to figure out what products to manufacture and undercut innovative companies with their massive scale. In the short term this is a net benefit to consumers who get a cheaper product but it creates a mess of bad incentives down the line.
  - ameister14 5y ago
    >They have the size and market control to crush and/or acquire all competitors I don't think that is true for all competitors, but it definitely is for many competitors. It's a good point if they are using that power, which I think they are, especially in particular industries. Same applies to Facebook, Apple, and many other companies as well. >2. They purport to operate a neutral marketplace where they aren't responsible for the end product while also controlling what products you see and what company you will buy from and choose the ones that give them the best margin. The huge problem of counterfeit and faulty products on Amazon directly harms the consumer and because of (1) there isn't a general market remedy. That's two different things, isn't it? Counterfeit products are a problem and a non-neutral market is a different problem. I think the non-neutral market bit is already covered by existing regulations, isn't it? Shouldn't we simply apply the rules we have? >3. They leverage their position as market maker to figure out what products to manufacture and undercut innovative companies with their massive scale. In the short term this is a net benefit to consumers who get a cheaper product but it creates a mess of bad incentives down the line. This one I've seen before but not as an argument to break them up - it's an interesting argument to me because I think a lot of companies engage in these practices. Grocery stores classically would release basic cheerios for example and undercut the price of the brand
MattGaiser 5y ago
Every time Amazon enters an industry, they wipe away a competitor wallowing it total mediocrity. Is the appetite really there for anyone other then perhaps Facebook?
sarsway 5y ago
and then the world be magically better? I don't get this sentiment, what exactly do you think will be the benefits of doing this? It's a drastic action, you don't just break up multi billion companies in an afternoon, so you better come up with some very good concrete points on why this is necessary. Not just vague statements about improving competition. Also you know what a huge role Silicon Valley companies play for the U.S. internationally? And you want to cripple them? I don't understand how here on HN, where the majority is in the tech industry, the people are begging for government intervention and regulations. Be careful what you ask for, I'd rather have them stay out of the industry, thanks.
newsclues 5y ago
It hasn’t happened because big tech lobbies against it and deploy capital not only in the political arena but the general consumers culture landscape.
tguedes 5y ago
Are you sure about that? Amazon is one of the most loved brands in the country https://www.zdnet.com/article/theres-a-new-list-of-americas-25-most-loved-brands-apple-isnt-on-it/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/theres-a-new-list-of-americas-... and has been for quite awhile
humanlion87 5y ago
I think as a consumer, if we are talking about breaking businesses, first in line should be the the cable and telecom oligopolies. Big tech can come next. These companies control more critical infrastructure compared to big tech companies.
TheRealDunkirk 5y ago
> Why has this not happened yet? Regulatory capture, and campaign finance laws. Until we fix the latter, we can't fix the former.
nova22033 5y ago
If I had to pick a single politically uniting issue, breaking up Amazon and big tech would be it Is it though? Where's the polling data suggesting a majority of people back splitting up Amazon or Google?
- frankbreetz 5y ago
  A simple google search can return these results: https://www.vox.com/2021/1/26/22241053/antitrust-google-facebook-break-up-big-tech-monopoly https://www.vox.com/2021/1/26/22241053/antitrust-google-face... https://www.investors.com/news/technology/ibd-tipp-poll-majority-says-break-up-big-tech-fb-amn-googl-aapl/ https://www.investors.com/news/technology/ibd-tipp-poll-majo... https://apnews.com/press-release/pr-newswire/virus-outbreak-business-legislature-industry-regulation-public-opinion-ffa0a276775247a6e645320585fac20c https://apnews.com/press-release/pr-newswire/virus-outbreak-...

nautilus12 5y ago

They are close to hitting a critical point in terms of political and economic power where they literally will no longer be able to be stopped. We will have no recourse but to replace our government with Amazon. It will be like Buy n Large in Wall-e.

sneak 5y ago
Amazon builds and operates internet-disconnected datacenters, on-prem in Langley, for the CIA. You're not getting rid of the CIA's drone video cluster sysadmins. They also operate several internet-connected regions (GovCloud) that have the special racist hiring policies required to fulfill US govt hosting regulations. That ship has probably already sailed.
akudha 5y ago
I fear we are already beyond the point of stopping them. Remember those cringey, awkward videos by dozens of mayors begging Amazon to choose their city for their second headquarters? I'm all for gov-biz partnership, but gov literally begging big biz is not a good sign. There is a power imbalance here.
frankbreetz 5y ago
I disagree, there is a lot the government could do. Amazon is nothing with out the US Government. Protection of all of it's property, maintaining infrastructure, both the internet and transportation system. Simply charging business for the wear and tear the place on the roads would be a start.
- shmageggy 5y ago
  So, like corporate taxes?
- nautilus12 5y ago
  I think your underestimating Amazon and overestimating the government

nomorewords 5y ago

I think that a lot of the big politics players realize that if the big companies get broken up, some of the businesses might not be as profitable. In other words, it seems like some businesses have been able to find a diamond//golden goose so much so that they are able to support different businesses. These other businesses will not have had the same success if they didn't have a cashcow behind their back.

ameister14 5y ago

I don't think that people are united about breaking up Amazon and frankly I don't really see the damage to consumer necessary to break it up; products come faster, cheaper. Could you articulate why Amazon should be broken up? Most of the arguments I've seen boil down to "It's so big" and not really "It's effectively dominated x market and there is no competition there" or even "they are harming competition by pre-installing free software that I can't uninstall"

enragedcacti 5y ago
I would split it into three things: 1. They have the size and market control to crush and/or acquire all competitors e.g. diapers.com https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-29/amazon-emails-show-effort-to-weaken-diapers-com-before-buying-it https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-29/amazon-em... 2. They purport to operate a neutral marketplace where they aren't responsible for the end product while also controlling what products you see and what company you will buy from and choose the ones that give them the best margin. The huge problem of counterfeit and faulty products on Amazon directly harms the consumer and because of (1) there isn't a general market remedy. 3. They leverage their position as market maker to figure out what products to manufacture and undercut innovative companies with their massive scale. In the short term this is a net benefit to consumers who get a cheaper product but it creates a mess of bad incentives down the line.
- ameister14 5y ago
  >They have the size and market control to crush and/or acquire all competitors I don't think that is true for all competitors, but it definitely is for many competitors. It's a good point if they are using that power, which I think they are, especially in particular industries. Same applies to Facebook, Apple, and many other companies as well. >2. They purport to operate a neutral marketplace where they aren't responsible for the end product while also controlling what products you see and what company you will buy from and choose the ones that give them the best margin. The huge problem of counterfeit and faulty products on Amazon directly harms the consumer and because of (1) there isn't a general market remedy. That's two different things, isn't it? Counterfeit products are a problem and a non-neutral market is a different problem. I think the non-neutral market bit is already covered by existing regulations, isn't it? Shouldn't we simply apply the rules we have? >3. They leverage their position as market maker to figure out what products to manufacture and undercut innovative companies with their massive scale. In the short term this is a net benefit to consumers who get a cheaper product but it creates a mess of bad incentives down the line. This one I've seen before but not as an argument to break them up - it's an interesting argument to me because I think a lot of companies engage in these practices. Grocery stores classically would release basic cheerios for example and undercut the price of the brand

MattGaiser 5y ago

Every time Amazon enters an industry, they wipe away a competitor wallowing it total mediocrity. Is the appetite really there for anyone other then perhaps Facebook?

sarsway 5y ago

and then the world be magically better? I don't get this sentiment, what exactly do you think will be the benefits of doing this? It's a drastic action, you don't just break up multi billion companies in an afternoon, so you better come up with some very good concrete points on why this is necessary. Not just vague statements about improving competition. Also you know what a huge role Silicon Valley companies play for the U.S. internationally? And you want to cripple them? I don't understand how here on HN, where the majority is in the tech industry, the people are begging for government intervention and regulations. Be careful what you ask for, I'd rather have them stay out of the industry, thanks.

newsclues 5y ago

It hasn’t happened because big tech lobbies against it and deploy capital not only in the political arena but the general consumers culture landscape.

tguedes 5y ago

Are you sure about that? Amazon is one of the most loved brands in the country https://www.zdnet.com/article/theres-a-new-list-of-americas-25-most-loved-brands-apple-isnt-on-it/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/theres-a-new-list-of-americas-... and has been for quite awhile

humanlion87 5y ago

I think as a consumer, if we are talking about breaking businesses, first in line should be the the cable and telecom oligopolies. Big tech can come next. These companies control more critical infrastructure compared to big tech companies.

TheRealDunkirk 5y ago

> Why has this not happened yet? Regulatory capture, and campaign finance laws. Until we fix the latter, we can't fix the former.

nova22033 5y ago

If I had to pick a single politically uniting issue, breaking up Amazon and big tech would be it Is it though? Where's the polling data suggesting a majority of people back splitting up Amazon or Google?

frankbreetz 5y ago
A simple google search can return these results: https://www.vox.com/2021/1/26/22241053/antitrust-google-facebook-break-up-big-tech-monopoly https://www.vox.com/2021/1/26/22241053/antitrust-google-face... https://www.investors.com/news/technology/ibd-tipp-poll-majority-says-break-up-big-tech-fb-amn-googl-aapl/ https://www.investors.com/news/technology/ibd-tipp-poll-majo... https://apnews.com/press-release/pr-newswire/virus-outbreak-business-legislature-industry-regulation-public-opinion-ffa0a276775247a6e645320585fac20c https://apnews.com/press-release/pr-newswire/virus-outbreak-...