[social_quotient]

By mom and pop shops you mean retail. I don’t think the aspiration of humanity (or a participant) should be to have a retail business. It’s neither the good being sold nor the person utilizing it. The retail shop itself was inefficient and often expensive with little selection and almost no reviewing mechanism. It’s sad sure, but it was replaced with something far better.

That replacement also drove costs down, and unlocked tremendous amounts of time spent “doing” retail shopping and as a society it’s our job to put that time and those savings to use. It’s also our job , in a moral sense, to make sure displaced industries/people like “retail” also find a new way of being productive.

Let’s not forget the investors that have reaped tons of benefit from this. They too have allocated those funds back to the market either via spend, investment, or tax. Even if the capital is idle, the bank has it which is also giving someone a job.

[marricks]

It's feels like your "utopia" is a world controlled by a few giant corporations which guarantee the "effective movement of capital" around. If that's the case we have few things we'd agree on as our world views are just too different.

I'll just say that as we have fewer major players the more those players will lower wages and generally exploit workers. Most people won't enjoy living in that world.

[social_quotient]

If you zoom in time scales it’s kinda what happens? Sure in 1,10,20 years it isn’t good. I don’t agree we need few companies controlling everything but when you disrupt something as pervasive as retail what do you expect to have happen? I wonder what Ford thought when he put horses and livery out of business… I wonder what the local grocery store thought when they killed the butcher shop. It probably takes a while for the “next” thing to come along that displaces amazon. I guess my point is evolution happens. It’s our job as individuals to find ourselves on the right side of these changes. It’s not the governments job to make sure I’m treated fairly and it’s certainly not bezos or fords job to make sure they don’t disrupt the status quo. The market votes and we all casted ours votes.

I do believe in capitalism so maybe we disagree on a few things but I’d be curious how you see innovation without some value transfer proportional to that innovation. Amazon and I guess the “problem” is obvious but how do you get one without the other. Genuinely interested in your views.

[int_19h]

Capitalism doesn't work when the market is non-free, and the market is non-free when it's monopolized. So if you believe in capitalism and want it to function as intended, you should be actively promoting antitrust enforcement against the likes of Amazon.

[MichaelZuo]

Do you not believe in the existence of Walmart? I can see no aspect of potential monopoly that doesn’t also apply more strongly to other companies.

[leetcrew]

what would antitrust enforcement against amazon look like? amazon basics is a bit questionable, but aside from that they have credible competition in every business segment.

[MrMan]

yes

[B1FF_PSUVM]

> I don’t think the aspiration of humanity (or a participant) should be to have a retail business.

Shopkeepers have been around for a long time, genociding them may not be wise.

Strictly as an ecological approach, no value judgement. Sparrow killing backfired on paradise builders.

[social_quotient]

I think “genociding” is being a bit pedantic. The shop keeper you are romanticizing was often a local inventory of goods. You were just a sale and they made a living on the arbitrage of goods. Not even all American made goods.

They weren’t always knowledgeable staff with a smile that remembered you and your family. I wish it was the case but I’m afraid it wasn’t.

So, not all shops are gone. How do we reconcile that? Is it that the ones that could not be replaced and/or provided more value than amazon have remained?