|
MrRodgers -> RE: Far Left Puppeteer Jeff Bezos Worth $81 Billion (5/14/2017 1:44:54 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
quote:
ORIGINAL: BoscoX
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4497398/Amazon-founder-Jeff-Bezos-vacations-Italy.html
And he is putting mom & pop and everyone else out of business as he builds his Democrat crony empire
https://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2017/05/12/bloodbath-for-retail-stocks-rolls-on/
And the far left useful idiots, who have been brainwashed to rail and rage against Walmart, are very predictably nowhere to be found
I'm neither far left nor an idiot, but I am useful, so first:
1) Walmart's problems stem from their manipulation of markets, not their success at it. Frankly, succeeding in discount retailing is remarkable. But they are a long way from the principles of Sam Walton who achieved it. Labor practices in particular are unfortunate.
2) Jeff Bezos, on the other hand, is a clever, innovative, quality-obsessed entrepreneur. Amazon is a remarkable achievement, and an admirable achievement. I shop locally, but I also use Amazon quite a bit.
3) Yes, large successful companies in the Internet age put pressure on local shops, but trying to make that unhappen makes no sense and would be market manipulation (and higher prices and fewer goods). Rather, small business need to adapt to take advantage of the opportunities they have. A small shop, for example, and clear inventory by selling all over the world through Amazon. I do business in North America, South America, Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Australia and Japan, for example...thanks to the Internet.
4) Same with robots replacing workers -- we have to adapt to take advantage of productivity and new possibilities. For example, when women math checkers at NASA saw their math jobs were threatened by computers, they learned computer programming instead.
5) That's the difference between progressive and conservative approaches -- we can't cling to the past and expect to thrive.
I researched Walmart and Walton and from the beginning, he established supplier relationships in China. After most favored nation trading status was allowed despite China being a communist foe allegedly, Walton just expanded th concept. I've often wondered how many college degrees did it take to figure out that one could make 1000's% profit of the oppressed Chinese labor.
KMart (Kresge) tried and failed to compete because they didn't go to China. And also didn't reinvest in their stores. Woolco (Woolworth) did the same. Their founders and real risk takers...were long gone.
The rest like Sears, JCPenny and Target either sat on their hands or failed to merge with the right partners. Thus there really is no competition to Walmart and their low wages set the floor everyone else tries to occupy. (Sears essentially invented the 2nd work shift and tried to ride that profit center and it house brands for 75 years and never madse a commitment to move its manufacturing (wholesale) to China. A big mistake. Target is slowly having to go that way but has found a middle niche.
Bozos set out as a single category killer in online retailing of books and then later diversifying to sell DVDs, Blu-rays, CDs, video downloads/streaming, MP3 downloads/streaming, audiobook downloads/streaming, software, video games, electronics, apparel, furniture, food, toys, and jewelry.
Then it went on an acquisition binge that has not abated having acquired 76 retailers mostly on the Internet. (a mere piker when it comes to entering markets by acquisition rather than by a start-up and hire people...where IBM and Cisco for example, just those two...acquired literally 1000's of companies just since 2000)
Robots are the future of all manual labor in and out of the household. They will eliminate several times the number of jobs they create.
The difference I see in what one night call progressive and conservative approaches is the understanding that the progressives realize it will take a serious tax reform regime to remove the egregious incentives from the advantages that capital has enjoyed in simply drawing far too much capital to buying and selling things...mostly paper, to the real innovation that creates products that will require a 'new' US workforce. Yes, that means education but it is very possible.
The modern conservative sees growth in numbers only and counts as producing more paper or property to buy and sell as something that adds to GDP...it does not. The whole concept is a ruse to make million$ from the golf course and pay 20% fed. tax.
|
|
|
|
