Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 374: Israel's Next Target

(+) Yeah! (+)

I don't see how banning those would make things any better for the consumer, and none of these companies are monopolies in any space.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

I don't see how banning those would make things any better for the consumer, and none of these companies are monopolies in any space.

monopolies =/= bad for the consumer always. It just creates the potential for it. Some monopolies are government created specifically because that would be, in theory, good for the consumer.


---

Many of these like Amazon are awful for small businesses. They do a lot of very shady things. They can still be broken up and consumers be fine.

---

These are all pretty minor conveniences. If the bill actually hurts the tech companies then why not.

Like the thing about Google putting maps, news, and song lyrics in their search results. Very convenient, but obviously bad for everyone but Google and the user. Google is directly siphoning traffic from other sites. IIRC there was already a case where they were banned from doing stuff like this in Europe? We'll manage.

---

You don't ban activity to hurt companies you don't like. You ban activity because it's actually bad!

In other extremely disturbing news:

https://twitter.com/bradheath/status/1403319278292570113

---

Bad is ultra subjective.

---

Well he's explicitly saying that we should do it because it hurts the tech companies

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Well he's explicitly saying that we should do it because it hurts the tech companies

and then he explained why it's an unfair practice in the next paragraph

---

I'm fine with losing Amazon Basics after the tripod story where they copied the design of a small business and then banned that business from Amazon. I wouldn't be surprised if there isn't more plagiarism among Amazon Basics designs.

Of the five bill summaries in that article, the only one that seems pretty questionable is the data transfer/interoperability one. That one just doesn't seem feasible from an implementation standpoint since it would require standards that I'm pretty sure don't exist (and who gets to create those standards?)

The others seem reasonable for allowing others to compete and would cost mostly minor conveniences.

---

VintageGin posted...

I'm fine with losing Amazon Basics after the tripod story where they copied the design of a small business and then banned that business from Amazon. I wouldn't be surprised if there isn't more plagiarism among Amazon Basics designs.

Isn't this the sort of thing patents are supposed to protect against? It seems to me we already have laws on the books to prevent that kind of shit.

---

https://twitter.com/bigblackjacobin/status/1403195542583267332?s=21

---

Honestly, being forced to exert a little more effort to find things online wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, in terms of building up life skills and character.

---

Yesmar_ posted...

Honestly, being forced to exert a little more effort to find things online wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, in terms of building up life skills and character.

No extra effort would be required, even. lol. This is a very strange post.

---

Not really understanding how banning any of those things they are claiming would be technophobic or luddite-like if the issue is tech monopolies. Didnt read the post, though.

"These tech companies have unfair monopolistic business practices"

"WOW, What is your problem with tech companies all of the sudden??"

lol

---

https://twitter.com/ktbenner/status/1403142966806466568

It just came out that the Trump Administration, in its frenzy over "leakers" took the nearly unheard of step of subpoenaing the communications metadata of members of Congress. Schiff was one of them and they went after not just him, but his aides and family members too. Including a minor.

Only came out now because the Trump DOJ got a gag order on Apple that expired this year so the members of Congress weren't even aware this was happening to them and their family.

Also recontexualizes a pretty damning exchange in a Senate hearing back in 2019 where Barr is asked if anyone in the White House asked or suggested he open an investigation of anyone. Where he goes "Um." and when pressed that he really ought to remember such an event he replies, "Yeah, but I'm trying to grapple with the word suggest."

---

Bold Prediction - Nothing will happen to them still

Like I said, theyre not monopolies. Every tech company has significant competition in each market it competes in.

Stuff like this is absolutely stupid:

https://twitter.com/ne0liberal/status/1403430781662502912?s=21

---

You werent around for the Microsoft anti trust cases were you.

They have a monopoly. Thats how busting monopolies work

---

masterplum posted...

You werent around for the Microsoft anti trust cases were you.

They have a monopoly. Thats how busting monopolies work

Which company and in which market?

Like even Amazon apparently only has 40% of e-commerce, and thats if you pretend that online shopping doesnt compete with brick and mortar shopping.

---

The important thing to remember about breaking up monopolies into smaller companies is that you have to do it in such a way that prevents them from just collaborating afterward and making a cartel.

But like, I'm definitely in favor of it if we can figure that part out and I really don't care about how it affects Amazon Basics or whatever.

---

lotm did you vote for gary johnson?

---

DeepsPraw posted...

lotm did you vote for gary johnson?

??? No?

---

oh just asking since you seem to post a lot of libertarian shit on here

---

I don't think there's anything as consistent in these topics as lotm supporting the rich above all else

---

StealThisSheen posted...

I don't think there's anything as consistent in these topics as lotm supporting the rich above all else

and people wonder why I get upset...!

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Like even Amazon apparently only has 40% of e-commerce,

ONLY?

---

KamikazePotato posted...

ONLY?

It's a lot, but it's not a monopoly. Their competition is larger than they are

(And as I also mentioned, one should really be including brick and mortar sales; apparently e-commerce was ~14% of retail in 2020, so Amazon would be less than 6%).

---

*rolls my eyes*

---

Technically the "pure" libertarian stance would just be that the government shouldn't get involved regardless of whether it's a monopoly it not.
---

gary johnson isn't really a libertarian, though.

dude even wants to license people to drive!

---

Amazon is pretty monopolistic. I received an Amazon gift card last Christmas, from someone who must not know I'm boycotting them.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

It's a lot, but it's not a monopoly. Their competition is larger than they are

(And as I also mentioned, one should really be including brick and mortar sales; apparently e-commerce was ~14% of retail in 2020, so Amazon would be less than 6%).

Yes if you broaden the category to include just about everything, it's not so bad!

Starting with such a broad category like ecommerce is ridiculously disingenuous to begin with. Amazon's not selling things like cars or niche products like trading card singles, so it's not competing in those areas. Ecommerce also generally includes both B2B and B2C and last I checked Amazon is only doing the latter.

---

VintageGin posted...

Yes if you broaden the category to include just about everything, it's not so bad!

Starting with such a broad category like ecommerce is ridiculously disingenuous to begin with. Amazon's not selling things like cars or niche products like trading card singles, so it's not competing in those areas. Ecommerce also generally includes both B2B and B2C and last I checked Amazon is only doing the latter.

Yes, you can do a better job than my quick back of the envelope calculation. Heres one from a few years ago which accounts for more of these things and... also comes out to 6%:

https://www.ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2019/12/amazons-market-share19

As that piece mentions, yeah, you might consider Amazon to be approaching a monopoly in a few areas if you narrow things down to like books. But thats not what these bills are addressing at all.

---

kevwaffles posted...

Technically the "pure" libertarian stance would just be that the government shouldn't get involved regardless of whether it's a monopoly it not.

Which is why I find LotMs stance so funny. He isn't arguing that the monopoly power of Tech is ok (which is an argument) he is arguing that they dont have a monopoly which is (???)

---

I dont think vertical integration (which is what these bills seem to mostly try to address) is problematic

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

I dont think vertical integration (which is what these bills seem to mostly try to address) is problematic

I dont think vertical integration is necessarily problematic. You have been arguing against dictionary definitions.

---

masterplum posted...

I dont think vertical integration is necessarily problematic. You have been arguing against dictionary definitions.

I have yet to see anybody point about a market where any of these companies has a majority market share

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

I have yet to see anybody point about a market where any of these companies has a majority market share

Dude

---

masterplum posted...

I dont think vertical integration is necessarily problematic. You have been arguing against dictionary definitions.

That's on-brand for LotM, though.

Chris said that LotM will say anything in support the rich, and while that's often in line with his posts, I don't think it cuts to the core of what he stands for. LotM is, above all else, concerned with stability and the rule of law that supports stability. If he was a D&D character, his alignment would be Lawful Neutral. He is on record stating that 2015 is the best country in the world, and from what I've gleaned his dearest wish is that we return to that state of being, even though the last 5 years have changed the country in ways that can't ever be reversed.

This is why the majority of the news he posts in this topic is about Republicans saying heinous shit. Not specifically because it means that they want to fuck the poor (although that's part of it), but mostly because it's embarrassing. LotM doesn't like it when America looks bad on a worldwide scale, or when he's reminded that the two-party collaborative system of old is permanently dead. It's upsetting in a way to him that's slightly different from the way it upsets most people here. Most here look at what Republicans say and are appalled at the lack of empathy, while LotM is mostly concerned with Republicans destabilizing the nation.

That's not to say that LotM is unempathetic towards the poor. He wants a better life for them - but only if it's very gradual and doesn't rock the boat too much. He dislikes progressive policies, even beneficial and absolutely fucking crucial ones, as progressive policies are inherently disruptive. The fact that shooting down progressive policies helps the rich 99% of the time is just a byproduct. It's also why he disliked Bernie on a completely half-assed reasoning of 'inner circle nepotism' (which wasn't any worse than any politician ever) and has loved Biden for years. Bernie represents change, while Biden represents a return to the good ole' days. LotM doesn't want change. He wants 2015 America back. The kind where Republicans may have been awful, but they couldn't get away with being publicly awful.

As another byproduct, he is very supportive of the word of law - not the intent - as long as it isn't disruptive. He dislike police policies that let them get away with literal murder, because police corruption is a major disruptive force in the country that makes us look awful to other countries. Amazon owning 40% of the marketshare is fine though, as it doesn't fit the very strict definition of a monopoly where no one outside of one company can succeed. The fact that Amazon is grinding all its competition into the dust while treating its workers like slave labor? And the fact that it will be significantly easier to deal with Amazon's current monopoly before they control literally everything? Neither matters. We'll revisit it when it's a problem that fits the dictionary definition of a monopoly.

---

I feel like we already have a term ready for this kind of logic - lawful stupid.

---

Well, thats certainly an interesting psychoanalysis of me!

Not gonna get into any of that, but if you wanted regulations to force Amazon (and all companies) to treat their warehouse workers better I wouldnt have an issue with it!

---

damn KP, you could have just said he's a neoliberal

---

So Bibi is no longer Israel's Prime Minister
That's...huh. I will have to see

---

https://twitter.com/hugolowell/status/1404456039534182408

Breyer needs to retire.

---

If republicans refuse another Supreme Court seat we are going to get a California secession

---

Bye bye Bibi

Hopefully Bennett is less terrible.

---

We should anyway tbh, but I think you overestimate California

---

Also as a British citizen living in the EU I also feel nostalgic for 2015, but I recognise that there were fundamental issues then that led to the problems we face now. It was not a sustainable happiness and for many, many people there was no happiness at all.

---

Lightning Strikes posted...

Bye bye Bibi

Hopefully Bennett is less terrible.

he's obviously terrible but i feel like it's hard to be as bad as netanyahu.

truly the trump of israel.

---