5 ms·

Mom and pop shops, brick and mortar in general, have largely gone the way of horse drawn carriages. Technology has made them obsolete. There are definitely prob

Mom and pop shops, brick and mortar in general, have largely gone the way of horse drawn carriages. Technology has made them obsolete. There are definitely problems with mega corporations taking over, but Walmart and Amazon are filing in niches in a technological ecosystem where real world small shops aren't viable, and that's a good thing for consumers. Whatever the solution ends up being, it won't involve the return of brick and mortar - online shopping and Amazon style logistics are here to stay. Breaking up Amazon so that the shipping and warehouse part of the business gets spun off on its own might make sense, with established shipping companies able to compete. Luddism never works - you can't eliminate automation and do things less efficiently just to arbitrarily provide work for people.

paulryanrogers 5y ago
> Luddism never works - you can't eliminate automation and do things less efficiently just to arbitrarily provide work for people. This isn't just about automation. It's also about vertical integration into one company. If all we care about is efficiency then why break up the railroad barons or company towns? Because competition, despite some inefficiencies, makes for a more robust market. Also, we don't want our kids working in the mines.
- vsareto 5y ago
  Idk what robustness is saving us from - if you’re big enough, you get bailed out. Amazon is clearly big enough now. There’s lots of bank competition but they still needed a bailout.
  - paulryanrogers 5y ago
    Banks didn't need a bailout. They needed to be allowed to fail. And restore the regulations that would've stopped them from overleveraging so much in the first place. (Or at least prosecute those knowingly involved in subprime mortgages.) Bailouts from taxpayers aren't a sign of robustness either. They are a sign of fragile, easily bought government and large players dominating markets.
ChoGGi 5y ago
> Luddism never works https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lOfZLb33uCg https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lOfZLb33uCg
- jacobr1 5y ago
  LOL But, you know, it sort of proves in an interesting point. Market/Technical/Cultural forces will push things one direction, but groups can choose to pay the higher costs to go in alternate directions. It will be interesting to see where cultural sub-groups maintain either existing (but now niche) or otherwise alternative vestiges of the current-mainstream when the rest of the economy moves onto something else. Are bookshops like this? A legacy of the pre-online/pre-megaseller era, but maintained by the bookish minority? Now potentially augmented by a coffee/tea shop and a greater focus on community events? Where else is this happening?
Iolaum 5y ago
well, there are cases were running the market at it's outmost efficiency may not be what you want. From another stratecherry post: > if an efficient market means that all of the profits flow to Silicon Valley, why should India particularly care about efficiency https://stratechery.com/2020/india-jio-and-the-four-internets/ https://stratechery.com/2020/india-jio-and-the-four-internet...
- robbedpeter 5y ago
  I agree, a brutalist fixation on efficiency isn't good. I just see rapid delivery and online shopping as things that are going to stick around, and those two things have completely broken most of the old brick and mortar models. If it was just big box stores, we could have eventually pulled back and imposed a balance by limiting what range of goods and services could be offered by any one store, or come up with ways to prop up mom and pop. Amazon made those old models irrecoverably obsolete though. The question is going to be how to achieve a healthy market while keeping the benefits of vertical integration. Splitting the logistics division of Amazon away from the online store and content services might work.

paulryanrogers 5y ago

> Luddism never works - you can't eliminate automation and do things less efficiently just to arbitrarily provide work for people. This isn't just about automation. It's also about vertical integration into one company. If all we care about is efficiency then why break up the railroad barons or company towns? Because competition, despite some inefficiencies, makes for a more robust market. Also, we don't want our kids working in the mines.

vsareto 5y ago
Idk what robustness is saving us from - if you’re big enough, you get bailed out. Amazon is clearly big enough now. There’s lots of bank competition but they still needed a bailout.
- paulryanrogers 5y ago
  Banks didn't need a bailout. They needed to be allowed to fail. And restore the regulations that would've stopped them from overleveraging so much in the first place. (Or at least prosecute those knowingly involved in subprime mortgages.) Bailouts from taxpayers aren't a sign of robustness either. They are a sign of fragile, easily bought government and large players dominating markets.

ChoGGi 5y ago

> Luddism never works https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lOfZLb33uCg https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lOfZLb33uCg

jacobr1 5y ago
LOL But, you know, it sort of proves in an interesting point. Market/Technical/Cultural forces will push things one direction, but groups can choose to pay the higher costs to go in alternate directions. It will be interesting to see where cultural sub-groups maintain either existing (but now niche) or otherwise alternative vestiges of the current-mainstream when the rest of the economy moves onto something else. Are bookshops like this? A legacy of the pre-online/pre-megaseller era, but maintained by the bookish minority? Now potentially augmented by a coffee/tea shop and a greater focus on community events? Where else is this happening?

Iolaum 5y ago

well, there are cases were running the market at it's outmost efficiency may not be what you want. From another stratecherry post: > if an efficient market means that all of the profits flow to Silicon Valley, why should India particularly care about efficiency https://stratechery.com/2020/india-jio-and-the-four-internets/ https://stratechery.com/2020/india-jio-and-the-four-internet...

robbedpeter 5y ago
I agree, a brutalist fixation on efficiency isn't good. I just see rapid delivery and online shopping as things that are going to stick around, and those two things have completely broken most of the old brick and mortar models. If it was just big box stores, we could have eventually pulled back and imposed a balance by limiting what range of goods and services could be offered by any one store, or come up with ways to prop up mom and pop. Amazon made those old models irrecoverably obsolete though. The question is going to be how to achieve a healthy market while keeping the benefits of vertical integration. Splitting the logistics division of Amazon away from the online store and content services might work.