4 ms·
Walmart too. And Target. And grocery stores. I am not sure people are really prepared to take the implication of how unfair Amazon seems to its logical conclus
by montagg 4y ago
Walmart too. And Target. And grocery stores.
I am not sure people are really prepared to take the implication of how unfair Amazon seems to its logical conclusion, because it means undermining a lot of what makes us comfortable in modern life under capitalism. Regulation targeted at increasing competition (breakups, rather than regulation Amazon as a monopoly of a kind and entrenching them) might result in a better outcome, or it just might make things more expensive and then you have to repeat the same breakup and regulation process again every 15 years.
- freejazz 4y agoIsn't that inevitably the result if you want the cheapest thing? I pay a little more and I never shop at amazon.
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago> undermining a lot of what makes us comfortable in modern life under capitalism I read Wealth of Nations, did I miss the part where it says: "you should have a single global company control most of the market"? Every economist writes about importance of competition. If you want to keep around giant monopolies, you are not capitalist.
- lotsofpulp 4y agoOn a global scale, it helps if your country is where all the biggest companies are coming from, especially to compete with big companies from other countries.
- ClumsyPilot 4y agoYou could make the same argument fir trade barriers, protectionism, subsidies, etc. It also comes across as "two wrongs make a right"