1456
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Nomad@infosec.pub 69 points 1 day ago

I genuinely see the point and I think the argumentation that he can afford it is also sound. But the flaw is that Bezos will just hand off the cost to consumers. This won't affect his income or wealth at all. We need measures that target anti competitive behaviors and monopoly building as well as taxing people that have way too much.

[-] SeeMarkFly@lemmy.ml 37 points 1 day ago

Too big to fail just also happens to be too big to care.

Competition is good for the consumer and keeps prices low automatically.

[-] disorderly@lemmy.world 33 points 1 day ago

In my opinion, too big to fail means too big to risk it. Nationalize Amazon.

[-] mobyduck648@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Too big to fail == too big to live, at least it would be in a sane world.

[-] SeeMarkFly@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago

Remember what we did to Ma Bell?

Well I admit, phones were free then. Repairs were free then.

[-] Serinus@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

Competition is so rarely a thing though. The barriers to entry are significant enough that if you actually go through them all... why wouldn't you just price shop and then charge about the same as your "competitors"? You don't need to talk to effectively collude.

[-] arrow74@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

That's entirely dependant on the economy. If the average consumer is doing well then what you are saying does happen.

But if they are not doing well financially, like right now, then stores begin to compete more. I'm starting to see this locally myself in grocery prices. Some things are actually coming down slightly, at least for the moment. I expect with the increasing price of diesel prices will skyrocket again, but maybe we'll get lucky and companies will have to eat the cost this time. Everyone is so broke right now they may not be able to pass the cost on

[-] SeeMarkFly@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

So...read the room.

[-] arrow74@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 day ago

That's the thing though, the price will not go to the consumer. People use Amazon for the convenience and the fact that it is often cheaper than going to the store yourself.

If suddenly it's more expensive than the store it really incentives going to the store. And that is precisely why prices will remain the same.

[-] Nomad@infosec.pub 1 points 1 day ago

You might have a point there. Might also just increase the price of prime just a touch.

[-] unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago

Of course he'll hand the cost off to consumers. As if his wedding yacht ring, like everything else he does, wasn't directly financed primarily by his consumer-facing business!

[-] skisnow@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago

Retail isn't as easy to maintain a monopoly as most industries. The moment Amazon gets more expensive than the next guy, the whole thing falls apart.

[-] Nomad@infosec.pub 0 points 1 day ago

Read up on prime and why that only works to bind customers as long as you are the biggest in the market. Also the price increase still hits all the online shops, so whatever Amazon's competitive advantage is still in place.

[-] skisnow@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 day ago

the price increase still hits all the online shops

No, it hits the online shops that underpay their staff.

[-] Nomad@infosec.pub 0 points 1 day ago

Most shops don't have the benefit of vertically integrated logistics nationwide. Amazon literally doesn't pay what the owners of dhl and FedEx earn.

this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2026
1456 points (99.5% liked)

Work Reform

17496 readers
1385 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS