Jump to content
IGNORED

Trump Ripping Amazon


LadyKay

Recommended Posts

Guest shiloh357
16 hours ago, SavedByGrace1981 said:

One eternal truth about capitalism - the market is fluid and ever changing.  What may have been true yesterday may be a costly mistake, today.

I just watched the "Car Week" special on the History Channel - a three-episode special chronicling everything from Henry Ford's Model T to today's Tesla. The auto industry is replete with examples of what sells today may not sell tomorrow.  The Model T is what built Ford Motor Company, but the elder Ford tried to hold onto it so long (while his competitors were innovating) that it almost destroyed the company he founded.

Also, a lot of the same arguments against on-line businesses we heard 10 and 20 years ago when Wal-Mart was in its hyper-growth stage - i.e. it's putting the local mom and pop stores out of business.

As we've seen with the Wal-Mart phenomena, what happens is the ones who can adapt to changing market conditions survive; the ones who cannot, die.  It's a perfect illustration of "survival of the fittest".  (As long as government doesn't play favorites by declaring a company 'too big to fail', that is).

Blessings,

-Ed

I think this highlights why  people need a skill, something to make them marketable.   We used to be able to depend on the retail market for jobs, but that is changing.

I read an article recently that also cited our iPhones and Smart Phones as being another reason retail shops are closing.   The iPhone 6 was something like $600 to purchase.  That's just the phone.   For a lot of people their money charges for text, talk and data is like car payment and the author stated that the cell phone industry is bringing something like $200,000,000 a year.  That's money that is not being spent in clothing stores and other retailers.    In addition, a lot of companies are ditching the requirement that employees have to abide by a company dress code and are allowing employees who do not spend any face time with customers, to come to work in shorts, t-shirts and hoodies.  That also hurts various retailers. 

It's not just mom and pop stores that are feeling the crunch.  Sears and Macy's are closing stores, too.  We have lost Montgomery Ward and Famous Barr.   And brick/mortar booksellers are having to adjust and adapt to things like Kindle readers, as well as online bookstores. It's like you said, they have to adapt or fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest shiloh357
18 hours ago, Running Gator said:

It is called the free market and capitalism.   Only a progressive would try and influence the market to favor one style or one company over the other. 

No, this is not free market, nor is it capitalism.   Free market is when you have the basic supply and demand without the government getting involved in setting prices for the seller or buyer.

Capitalism is when the government doesn't own production or distribution of goods and services, unlike Socialism or Communism.

When you have a business that is shutting out everyone else, killing jobs and no one else can compete with you, that is monopolization and that is something that we have historically opposed in this nation.   It was a major complaint about Microsoft back in the 90s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member *
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  91
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  10,596
  • Content Per Day:  3.73
  • Reputation:   2,743
  • Days Won:  25
  • Joined:  06/16/2016
  • Status:  Offline

9 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

No, this is not free market, nor is it capitalism.   Free market is when you have the basic supply and demand without the government getting involved in setting prices for the seller or buyer.

And Amazon is the perfect example of the free market at work.  They can supply the demand better than the brick and mortar stores.  Why should they be punished for being so good?

Quote

Capitalism is when the government doesn't own production or distribution of goods and services, unlike Socialism or Communism.

And again, Amazon is the perfect example of capitalism at work, yet people that claim to be conservatives seem to hate them for some reason, starting with our President.

Quote

When you have a business that is shutting out everyone else, killing jobs and no one else can compete with you, that is monopolization and that is something that we have historically opposed in this nation.   It was a major complaint about Microsoft back in the 90s.

It was a bogus complaint about Microsoft and it is a bogus complaint about Amazon.  It is not Amazon's fault that they offer a better service than other companies.  Shoot, Microsoft didn't even offer a better product, they just had the best marketing team.  

The government should not play favorites when it comes to businesses and they should definitely not have personal vendettas against specific businesses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest shiloh357
19 hours ago, Running Gator said:

It is called the free market and capitalism.   Only a progressive would try and influence the market to favor one style or one company over the other. 

He is not favoring one style of commerce or one company over another. Nothing in the article even suggests that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Steward

  • Group:  Steward
  • Followers:  110
  • Topic Count:  10,460
  • Topics Per Day:  1.26
  • Content Count:  27,739
  • Content Per Day:  3.34
  • Reputation:   15,386
  • Days Won:  126
  • Joined:  06/30/2001
  • Status:  Online
  • Birthday:  09/21/1971

The one thing that irks me about Amazon is the free ride they get with the USPS.

According the Sandbulte, Congress has barred USPS from setting its parcel prices below its costs, to keep it from unfairly undercutting competitors like FedEx and UPS. But the formula for calculating those costs, set in 2006, hasn’t kept pace as packages have come to make up a higher and higher percentage of USPS volume. The law set the share of infrastructure costs associated with packages at 5.5%, but boxes now make up around 25% of Postal Service revenue.

Sandbulte cites an April analysis by Citigroup that put a price tag on the resulting distortion. If package delivery bore its fair share of Postal Service system costs, each box would cost $1.46 more to deliver. That "subsidy" is systemwide, and the USPS has courted other large e-commerce companies.

But Amazon’s size means that it benefits disproportionately, and ships around 40% of its deliveries with USPS. In Sandbulte's view, this means the Postal Service is "picking winners and losers in the retail world."

http://fortune.com/2017/07/16/amazon-postal-service-subsidy/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest shiloh357
1 hour ago, Running Gator said:

And Amazon is the perfect example of the free market at work.  They can supply the demand better than the brick and mortar stores.  Why should they be punished for being so good?

They are not being punished for that.

Quote

And again, Amazon is the perfect example of capitalism at work, yet people that claim to be conservatives seem to hate them for some reason, starting with our President.

Which is total garbage.   No one said anything like that.

Quote

It was a bogus complaint about Microsoft and it is a bogus complaint about Amazon.  

No, it was not a bogus complaint about Microsoft. You don't know what you're talking about. https://www.cnet.com/news/judge-calls-microsoft-a-monopoly/

Quote

It is not Amazon's fault that they offer a better service than other companies.  Shoot, Microsoft didn't even offer a better product, they just had the best marketing team.  

They don't offer a better service. It isn't about them offering a better service. And it has nothing to do with marketing.

 

Quote

The government should not play favorites when it comes to businesses and they should definitely not have personal vendettas against specific businesses. 

No one is playing favorites.  Trump isn't calling for Amazon to be shut down or punished. 

Edited by shiloh357
Removed unnecessary barb
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member *
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  91
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  10,596
  • Content Per Day:  3.73
  • Reputation:   2,743
  • Days Won:  25
  • Joined:  06/16/2016
  • Status:  Offline

32 minutes ago, George said:

The one thing that irks me about Amazon is the free ride they get with the USPS.

According the Sandbulte, Congress has barred USPS from setting its parcel prices below its costs, to keep it from unfairly undercutting competitors like FedEx and UPS. But the formula for calculating those costs, set in 2006, hasn’t kept pace as packages have come to make up a higher and higher percentage of USPS volume. The law set the share of infrastructure costs associated with packages at 5.5%, but boxes now make up around 25% of Postal Service revenue.

Sandbulte cites an April analysis by Citigroup that put a price tag on the resulting distortion. If package delivery bore its fair share of Postal Service system costs, each box would cost $1.46 more to deliver. That "subsidy" is systemwide, and the USPS has courted other large e-commerce companies.

But Amazon’s size means that it benefits disproportionately, and ships around 40% of its deliveries with USPS. In Sandbulte's view, this means the Postal Service is "picking winners and losers in the retail world."

http://fortune.com/2017/07/16/amazon-postal-service-subsidy/

That is some crazy logic that the USPS is "picking winners".  They treat every business the same, the fact that some are bigger and can take more advantage of it does not in anyway mean that the post office is picking anything.   Does Amazon get something other business do not get?  I do not think so.

  • This is Worthy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member *
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  91
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  10,596
  • Content Per Day:  3.73
  • Reputation:   2,743
  • Days Won:  25
  • Joined:  06/16/2016
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

He is not favoring one style of commerce or one company over another. Nothing in the article even suggests that.

Trump's complaint about Amazon (other than his personal vendetta against Bezos) is that they harm "local brick and mortar stores".  That is favoring one style of commerce over another. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Steward

  • Group:  Steward
  • Followers:  110
  • Topic Count:  10,460
  • Topics Per Day:  1.26
  • Content Count:  27,739
  • Content Per Day:  3.34
  • Reputation:   15,386
  • Days Won:  126
  • Joined:  06/30/2001
  • Status:  Online
  • Birthday:  09/21/1971

But according to a report published by Josh Sandbulte in the Wall Street Journal, USPS has been picking up the tab for Amazon. The WSJ contributor, whose expertise is in the shipping industry, detailed how Congress prevents USPS, through the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, from changing the parcel price. This law is designed to avoid “unfair competition” with FedEx and UPS. Section 3626 of Title 39 United States Code has become one of the provisions often quoted whenever limits imposed on USPS are being researched.

The report implies that Amazon gets the better end of the deal through the $1.46 subsidy. It is as if the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act served as a loophole for Amazon to exploit.

“The U.S. Postal Service delivers the company’s boxes well below its own costs,” Sandbulte mentioned. “Like an accelerant to the fire, this subsidy is speeding up the collapse of traditional retailers in the U.S. and providing an unfair advantage for Amazon.” He further labeled that $1.46 subsidy as “a gift card from Uncle Sam.”

USPS has been shifting to package delivery as first-class mail delivery has decreased by 40% from its peak.

With USPS picking up part of the tab for Amazon, it means that the retailing behemoth can drop its prices. FedEx and UPS receive no such deal from shipping, having to bear their share of the system costs to deliver packages.

https://www.freightwaves.com/news/2017/8/1/amazons-sweetheart-deal-with-the-usps

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member *
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  91
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  10,596
  • Content Per Day:  3.73
  • Reputation:   2,743
  • Days Won:  25
  • Joined:  06/16/2016
  • Status:  Offline

13 minutes ago, George said:

But according to a report published by Josh Sandbulte in the Wall Street Journal, USPS has been picking up the tab for Amazon. The WSJ contributor, whose expertise is in the shipping industry, detailed how Congress prevents USPS, through the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, from changing the parcel price. This law is designed to avoid “unfair competition” with FedEx and UPS. Section 3626 of Title 39 United States Code has become one of the provisions often quoted whenever limits imposed on USPS are being researched.

The report implies that Amazon gets the better end of the deal through the $1.46 subsidy. It is as if the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act served as a loophole for Amazon to exploit.

“The U.S. Postal Service delivers the company’s boxes well below its own costs,” Sandbulte mentioned. “Like an accelerant to the fire, this subsidy is speeding up the collapse of traditional retailers in the U.S. and providing an unfair advantage for Amazon.” He further labeled that $1.46 subsidy as “a gift card from Uncle Sam.”

USPS has been shifting to package delivery as first-class mail delivery has decreased by 40% from its peak.

With USPS picking up part of the tab for Amazon, it means that the retailing behemoth can drop its prices. FedEx and UPS receive no such deal from shipping, having to bear their share of the system costs to deliver packages.

https://www.freightwaves.com/news/2017/8/1/amazons-sweetheart-deal-with-the-usps

Unless Amazon is getting rates that nobody else is getting, I do not see how Amazon is being favored or picked as a winner.  Do WalMart and Best Buy and the local AirSoft store get the same rates?  If so then there is no issue.  If the "loophole" is a problem then it should be closed, but nobody should be upset or surprised that a company is taking advantage of the loophole, that is what they should do.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...