This faggot is literally evil and destroying countless of jobs and small tech businesses

This faggot is literally evil and destroying countless of jobs and small tech businesses.

His net worth is so high he is able to sell servers at such low rates that he is losing money (weaseling out of taxes since reports loss in profits) in order to completely destroy small competing businesses and make Amazon the prime central host/seller.

It's a fucking scam, it's immoral, and this faggot needs to be stopped.

>hurr durr but its capitalism
When this twat starts using his funds to destroy competition (despite him still being successful as fuck) and buying news companies to report bias information and not pay a dime in taxes... hes a fraud and if you like him youre literally retarded

Other urls found in this thread:

news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10071600
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_pricing
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>offering a service for cheaper, thereby making it more accessible to poorer people/small companies
>a bad thing

can you post his website with the cheap hosting here plz? thnx

>undercutting competitors to the point where he is losing money so he can run everyone else out of business
>when AWS is the only show in town, they will jack rates up and fuck everyone
>a bad thing indeed

>they will jack rates up and fuck everyone

if they do that I'll start hosting

worst part about amazon is that if you sell anything on their site, and it sells well, they will simply clone your idea and sell it for cheaper with totally inferior build quality but fill the reviews with fake positives.

example I wanted a pull up bar that free stands. found one with good reviews. next week when I went to order it was now called something else, still had good reviews. ordered and it was chinky china made junk with weakest welding i've ever seen.

amazon is also the worst place on earth to work for news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10071600 even pajeets won't work there

>antitrust laws dont exist but only in the specific case of amazon selling servers.
nice thread tho OP

I wouldn't trust anything with any involvement witj Jeff. Hopefully trump calls out the tax evading faggot.

I like him because Amazon is convenient and prime is a good value IMO. Sue me.

Convenient? There are plenty of other "convenient" alternatives.

Whatever. I can't sue you. Enjoy giving your money to someone trying to monopolize the internet and literally take over cyberspace.

First it was selling goods, then webhosting, now hes laucnhing a video app to compete with youtube. He is taking over the internet

It's almost as if he's acting like a monopoly.
Luckily for him, someone ended up lobbying politicians to remove anti-trust laws so what he's doing is now perfectly legal!

Nice bait, I'll bite.
>not pay a dime in taxes
Of course they pay taxes, it's called payroll taxes. and every business with employees pays them peorid.
Corporate income taxes are stupid, and absurdly high in the US. I don't blame any company for "getting around" them.

>>when AWS is the only show in town, they will jack rates up and fuck everyone
Ever heard of Digital Ocean, or Linode?
both of these companies are growing like wildfire. Your scenario will never come to pass and if it did then you would be left with a market that has a shit ton of incentives to enter.

I've heard this same argument with the likes of walmart and it's just as bunk there. It assumes that once the small businesses go out that time stops and the big bad evil corp has won some cosmic game. In reality Time keeps going and competitors ALWAYS emerge (except perhaps in industries where the thing provided is a limited resource like a natural resource or is granted a natural monopoly like an ISP)
But in industries with room for innovation someone always finds a way to do it better, or at least finds a way to incentivize customers to use them instead.

>you'll never get to live in a futuristic dystopia controlled by Amazon because a bunch of fat neckbeards on the internet started complaining about Jeff Bezos

>monopolize the internet and literally take over cyberspace.
Are you 12?

Sounds like an average multi national corp to me, just gimme my cheap shit and leave me alone

He has a net worth of $59.8 billion. I'm not a socialist but I think that level of wealth in the pockets of one person is simply obscene. I seriously doubt if we capped the max wealth that an individual can possess at, say, $10 billion, people would stop innovating and the world would grind to a halt. Let people accrue $10 billion and any additional income would be taxed or allocated into employee salaries. Of course this would only work if implemented globally, which means it will never happen.

Even completely disregarding the morality of the situation, I really have a hard time believing a system that allows that sort of capital accumulation is the most economically efficient. Seems to me our economy was stronger and more stable when the ratio of executive pay to worker pay was closer to 25 than 300, the government wasn't subsidizing low paid workers with welfare, and the financial sector of the economy was much smaller.

>But in industries with room for innovation someone always finds a way to do it better, or at least finds a way to incentivize customers to use them instead.
Oh you mean just like lightbulbs?
You're horrendously ignorant on the power and influence of monopoly.

>a monopoly.
Overstock?
Ali-baba?
Staples(.com)?
Wal-mart(.com)?
Target(.com)?
Meijer(.com)?
Best Buy(.com)?

Oh you mean servers?
Digital ocean?
Linode?
Rackspace?
cloudvps?
hetzner?

It's simple, dude. Pay your workers less money, let the government subsidise their living standards, and then dodge the tax that's supposed to pay for them.

Even his rocket looks like a dick.

>destroying countless of jobs
Good, most jobs are obsolete.

>destroying small tech businesses
By offering a better service for less, nothing wrong with that.

>weaseling out of taxes since reports loss in profits
Problematic but perfectly legal and not exactly something that is easy to fix like tax avoidance because it would negatively affect all businesses.

>buying news companies to report bias information
Who cares whether they are biased towards him or some other rich guy?

>lightbulbs
Nigga what?
GE
Philips
Westinghouse
Sylvania
Halco

Reasons to buy?
CFL
LED
Full spectrum
Natural light
bug lights
spot lights
halogen

you're so fucking stupid. He doesn't have $59.8 billion in his pocket you retard. If he even signed that he wants to sell Amazon his net worth would sink.

>you're so fucking stupid. He doesn't have $59.8 billion in his pocket you retard. If he even signed that he wants to sell Amazon his net worth would sink.
No fucking shit, do you read everything literally?

I mean, wow dude, put down the bottle.

He is not a bad person, and simply is playing by the rules and incentives apparent.
In all likelyhood he doesn't even understand the negative retroactions he is causing, ligitimazing his actions through the institutions present.
If anything he is probably a very smart person, where an analogy would be: "the right man, in the wro place".
Economics is practically game theory, and the game, one he is good at playing, is inherantly flawed.
Before responding, take a serious critical look at the basic mechanisms and incentives that encapsulate a market system, the basic building block of all economic variations in the world today, which inevidably lead to capitalism.

>I spout obscene misconceptions and expect to not get called out

whatever, every single dollar he ever made came from people voluntarily giving money to him. I even got a free book once, the shipping was late, Amazon gave me a full refund AND delivered the book.

>losing money
>destroying small companies
That's a good investment. He is removing competition and absorbing those customers in the process. He isn't losing at all.

(YOU)
>I'm not a socialist
Nope your an authoritarian who wants to know how much money everyone has and take it if it's more than what you deem to be "enough".
Totally no the same thing.

>that allows that sort of capital accumulation
Dummy, That's how shit gets done.
Do you think Intel could push it's die size down every year if it couldn't accumulate capital to pump into R&D?
>stronger and more stable when the ratio of executive pay to worker pay was closer to 25 than 300
This is irrelevant and means nothing.

>financial sector of the economy was much smaller.
The size of the Financial sector is irrelevant, however there's a lot of funny business going on in that sector that could certainly be curtailed, that said the crash of 08 was cause by government rules that incentivized banks to make bad loans because they were never going to take on the risk.

Your looking at the economy through some rosy lens of the post war economy, That will never be again. You want to talk about things that will make a difference? Cut corporate taxes, Eliminate the welfare state, Institute a basic income for every citizen, Tax consumption not income, unfuck the fucking health care/insurance market (cross-state insurance market, bring back HSA's, allow true catastrophic insurance, etc)

I have not agreed with post this hard on Sup Forums since ages.

>ITT i just figured out that good and bad is subjective and depends what side your on

>You're horrendously ignorant on the power and influence of monopoly.
Still waiting for a counter-argument or examples.

Lies. They are hiring the working class like crazy. People flock to 16 an hour

>I'm in hr and there's such a huge labor shortage because of these ducks and GSX

>simply is playing by the rules

speaking about issues like tax evasion, monopolization, etc
"playing by the rules" (where "rules" really means "laws") and "acting ethically," are two different things

In the Rockefeller/Carnegie generation, it was typically understood that being ultra-wealthy came with a number of responsibilities above and beyond the common man's law, such as philanthropy and loose concepts of "honor" and "fairness." It was indeed considered a "burden."

Modern ubiquity of scummy-yet-legal practices (visa workers, offshore tax havens, systemic dismantling of small competitors) is a relatively new thing which the business moguls of previous centuries would absolutely condemn.

Like lightbulbs I said.
Like I said, you're horrendously ignorant, not even able to recognise 'lightbulbs' as a historic example.

>Modern ubiquity of scummy-yet-legal practices (visa workers, offshore tax havens, systemic dismantling of small competitors) is a relatively new thing

See

Read a book nigga

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel
Read a book nigga

I never said Amazon wasn't a good service. I also never said the business was immoral, although, that wouldn't be a very hard argument to make. Bezos started Amazon after studying a Supreme Court ruling that mail order catalogs (and by extension, Internet businesses) wouldn't have to collect taxes in States they don't have a facility. That was the big idea: tax avoidance. And that is why Bezos has lobbied against online sales taxation ever since, he doesn't want to compete with brick-and-mortar retailers on price when taxation is included. That seems to me hypocritical, I don't understand why a retailer with a physical presence should be subjected to sales taxes when an online retailer is not. This is going back a few years, and things have changed slightly, but that is one key part to how they rose to dominance.

Furthermore, Bezos only owns 17% of Amazon, and he's sold Amazon stock repeatedly with no lasting impact on the value of the stock. Nobody cares. I will give him credit in that most of his money is (currently) in Amazon stock so he's tied to the success of the company in that way.

>This is irrelevant and means nothing.
Yeah, except the economy has been chugging since 2008, and excusing a blurb in the 90's, arguably for the last 40 years for the vast majority of the population.

>Your looking at the economy through some rosy lens of the post war economy, That will never be again.
Probably correct but I don't have a crystal ball.
>You want to talk about things that will make a difference? Cut corporate taxes, Eliminate the welfare state, Institute a basic income for every citizen, Tax consumption not income, unfuck the fucking health care/insurance market (cross-state insurance market, bring back HSA's, allow true catastrophic insurance, etc)
Agree with most of these, but I think your health care solutions wouldn't make a dent because they do nothing about the obscene cost of medicine in the US...

>it was typically understood
No it fucking wasn't. They just did those things because they had the money and wanted to be remembered and had the resources to make a dent. See Bill Gates for a modern example.

No one is and/or should be compelled to give away things they were given voluntarily by others for a service or product full stop.

A cartel is not a monopoly, and is way easier to obtain and protect, particularly with government assistance.

>that one guy who goes too far

>obscene cost of medicine in the US
This is caused by a distorted market caused partially by the government being in the health insurance business and strong arming and low balling health care institutions on service pricing.
By allowing a real market to flourish in health insurance, particularly if you could de-couple health insurance from employment, you could get the prices down low enough (particularly for catastrophic coverage) people could buy it with part of that basic income I was talking about. I think another part of the problem is the al a carte mentality people in the US have with health care. They go in to the doctor they don't want to pay anything, This is wrong. They should expect to pay for normal health related things from time to time (HSA's would help with this and be better for people than flex-spend accounts that are widely used today that de-incitivize their use). The only time insurance should come in is when its going to cost an arm and a leg (no punn intended).

Also don't conflate cost with price, We have a health care pricing problem not a cost problem.
The price problem is caused by market distortions it's not as complicated as people make it out to be.

There is the issue of how to deal with pharmaceutical research and such, I think the answer to that lies in patent system reform (no more of this oh we twiddled the formula a bit can we renew our patent plz?kthxbye.)

I don't understand how so many monetarists have been falling for the basic income meme.
The only reason current welfare state is somewhat sustainable is because there's a long and annoying bureaucratic process that discourages people from relying on it, there is (or was) social stigma, which should encourage people to move on and get a job. With basic income (or negative income tax, which is more sensible but still incurs in this) all the income transfer is done AUTOMATICALLY. Sure, if everyone who right now relies on welfare started receiving a 'basic income' instead, it would be cheaper for the state because they could get rid of the bureaucracy, but there would probably be a lot more people laying off, just look at how this place is infested with NEETs if you think that's against human nature and will for creation or some bullshit like that. Law of the least effort.

Sup Forumsfag detected in thread
abort
abort

>Even completely disregarding the morality of the situation, I really have a hard time believing a system that allows that sort of capital accumulation is the most economically efficient

I'm glad you're using common sense to evaluate a topic that has consistently resisted common sense judgements for thousands of years.

I kinda see it as a necessary evil, as automation and AI ramp up in the next 5-10 years, we are going to lose lots and lots of jobs. I'm not convinced they won't be replaced but they won't be replaced with things of the same any fuck-witt can do this level (I think long haul truck drivers will be our first case study in this as self-driving cars continue to get better month after month)

And retail/service jobs that that the unwashed masses can perform are just not worth what the old manufacturing jobs are, and that trend will undoubtedly continue.

One of the biggest reasons I support it is because I believe the welfare state is a disgusting Leviathan that is destroying families and it will only grow, and it's completely untenable to remove with out an alternative and I view basic income (I also prefer the negative income tax model, I use the buzz word because it tends to dis-arm bleeding hearts and malcontents) as a way to eliminate the disgusting welfare gap, I think you will see more people working not less. you will always have the worthless NEETs but I don't think that's something that can be corrected by Fiscal policy, it's more a cultural thing.

Also I think the psychological effects can't be understated, If people who are on the lower end of the income pole didn't have to worry about where their next meal would come from it would free them up to maybe do things they would never consider today, like start a business. The studies that were done on it in the 60's( I think?) had some really interesting results.

I understand your point that it just removes friction from a system that was designed that way for a reason, but every foreseeable effect of the idea seems to align with my goals, so I support it.

How the fuck do you not know what predatory business practices are?

The end of wage cuckery should actually boost the economy, as you said, more people would consider starting their own business but besides that, spending would increase too since there is no need to worry about basics like rent and food with basic income, so people would be even more willing to buy stupid shit.

Wages for certain jobs could go down too, since most people wouldn't be able to deal with all the free time and rather work for pennies than jerk off all day long. (Beyond the extreme NEETs who don't contribute shit in the first place)

Who?
> he is able to sell servers at such low rates that he is losing money
He is able to rent you a server. It's not the same, in-house hardware is cheaper anyway.

All true. Hopefully the whole mess self-destructs before long.

You are an idiot. The system works because people that accrue that amount of money of goaded into and are more likely to invest that money into promising business sectors, thus increasing the amount of money small businesses have to grow and in turn become large businesses themselves, with Jew-level rich kids sitting at their helm who also go on to invest in other small companies. If you cap the net worth that someone has (which is not how net worth works and you should be ashamed of your fat ass for thinking of that idea in the first place), that person is less likely to invest their cash into small businesses and more likely to hoard that shit and invest less overall, which would ultimately be bad for everyone involved, regardless of their income level.

Both you and should kill yourselves

this, if you think he sells hosting below the cost and looses money, report him to antitrust law enforcement agency

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_pricing

>report him to antitrust law enforcement agency

>he thinks consumers can take on billion-dollar businesses

This. Reality isn't a fairy tale.

you are so fucking retarded

You just have to report him, not sue him yourself. Law enforcement has to follow up every report and investigate.

It would help them if you provided some proof that he indeed looses money on selling servers.

Forcing people to do things is never a good idea. It's the same mentality of a roommate who feels entitled to eat your food and use your personal property because you're "privileged".

>Forcing people to do things is never a good idea

Forcing people to do thing is a GREAT fucking idea, if what they're currently doing (or not doing, through inaction) is harming others.

It's the whole point of these things we call "society" and "rule of law"

I agree, thats literally how everything in the universe works (except our economic system).

for example, a cell in the body has an energy cap too, the rest of the energy flows into other cells and a reserve for "bad days" (fat).

Nigger it isn't like you're suing him. The government, IRS and law enforcement agencies will take care of his ass. All you have to do is report him and they will look into it.

Dear HR, former Amazon employee here.

Fuck you and your worthless ass department. Just because my rate was at 95% for one week when I consistently pulled 105+% a week for 6 months is not a good reason to fire me.

>hurr durr someone else will do your job
At what cost? How many lazy niggers will you go through before you find someone that can match or beat my production rate?

PS: Favoritism runs rampant at Amazon, supervisors give their buddies and anyone they deem attractive better pick paths so they can accomplish more with less labor while the rest of us run for literally miles a day.

>Nigger it isn't like you're suing him. The government, IRS and law enforcement agencies will take care of his ass. All you have to do is report him and they will look into it.

Yes, and he'll pay them some fraction of fifty billion dollars to nope the fuck off, or spend a tiny fraction of that to make your life a living hell, just because

"Take on" doesn't exclusively refer to lawsuits, but nice strawman. You don't even want to draw the ire of this class of person, they can fuck your life over forever with one finger.

Society works more through voluntary cooperation. Laws don't work if people don't obey them.

have to agree with this, just because we have antitrust laws, doesnt mean they are going to be reinforced.

bureaucrats are fucking cunts. you can bribe them, you can threaten them, you can get them replaced if you have enough money and power.

I get job offers from the staffing service for Amazon every month. There's no way such a job would be good if they're so desperate for workers.

>Society works more through voluntary cooperation
Not necessarily.

>Laws don't work if people don't obey them.
People obey the gun. See marxism.

Nice trickle down economics Jebediah Reagan Washington, and you avoided using the job creators phrase too. In case you haven't noticed, the middle class is shrinking, American families haven't seen a raise in four decades, the national debt is exploding because government is subsidizing insufficient employee wages and benefits, the last time income inequality was this severe was in the 1920's, we've had tepid GDP growth for years, older workers are postponing or abandoning retirement and younger workers are fucked beyond repair. There is not a single demographic doing better since Reagan re-popularized getting fucked by the wealthy except for the wealthy, and a subset of them even, yet their ardent defenders continue to line up asscheeks spread wide. You should dislodge the Koch dildo from your anus, and then kill yourself, if you've spent enough of your time propagating their childish economic theories that is. Meanwhile, the majority of the population will continue it's slide into Mexican-tier standards of living, while you maintain that a return to Bush era tax policies and deregulation reminiscent of the Industrial Revolution would somehow rectify the situation.

No, you're retarded m8. Wew lad, that eases the pressure splendidly.

They've been spamming me with job offers since I was fired. They even upped the pay rate to like $15.50 an hour. My job was simple as fuck, push around a metal cart, look at scanner, go to location on scanner 3 miles away, scan location barcode, grab whatever it asks for from the location, scan product barcode, drop into stinky yellow tote. Rinse and repeat.

kys retard