« prev   random   next »

3
1

Why the rush to defend Amazon?

By rando following x   2018 Apr 2, 3:17pm 2,094 views   42 comments   watch   sfw   quote     share    




https://nypost.com/2018/03/31/why-the-rush-to-defend-amazon/

Mark it down as another outbreak of Trump Derangement Syndrome: A single Web site reports gossip that the president is more concerned over Amazon than Facebook, and liberal media explode with outrage and race to the defense of the online retailer — one of the most profitable corporations in America.

That prompted the Tweeter-in-Chief to shoot back Thursday and again Saturday, saying, “Unlike others, they pay little or no taxes to state & local governments, use our Postal System as their Delivery Boy (causing tremendous loss to the US), and are putting many thousands of retailers out of business!” and noting that its lobbying staff has ballooned.

President Trump is on one side of an issue? Cue a press stampede to embrace the other side. Fine: Amazon’s Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post, which seems to devote half of each day’s paper to Trump-bashing. Also fine for fact-checkers to jump on one Trump claim: The Postal Service actually turns a nice profit on its Amazon deliveries. ...

We’re not calling for a breakup of Amazon, mind you. But shouldn’t liberals want federal regulators to at least look at a company that’s become so dominant? Why is there so little media appetite for raking Silicon Valley’s muck?

Then again, Facebook’s trouble really exploded only after the left decided that it might be to blame for Trump’s election. (This, when the Obama 2012 campaign won press raves for its exploitation of people’s personal Facebook data.)

But the bias goes deeper, and directly to why Trump won: Most of the media, like all the other heights of modern culture, is studiously “woke” when it comes to race and gender — but deaf and blind about class.

Unlike the muckrakers, most of today’s reporters, editors and scriptwriters really have no idea how the other half lives, and don’t much care — except spottily, in the wake of Trump’s election.

Here we are in the president’s second year, and they still don’t get it.


This is clearly true. The media still has no idea to how to handle the case where the public disobeys the media's direct orders and instead uses democracy to elect the candidate who is actually concerned about their pain.

Any reporters out there? Please, stop just making it about the symptom (Trump) while ignoring the cause (outsourcing of jobs and insourcing of illegal slave labor). You can make a difference.

« First    « Previous    Comments 3 - 42 of 42    Last »

3   marcus   ignore (1)   2018 Apr 2, 3:37pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Heraclitusstudent says
Money can't buy a full head of hair!


Isn't there a photo of a counterexample to that claim right next to the Bezos photo ? Maybe you're on to something. Trump disrespects Bezos' for his way of dealing with his baldness.
4   DASKAA   ignore (3)   2018 Apr 2, 3:47pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

marcus says
If those two things were to disappear, do you think that real incomes would keep up with the resulting inflation ?


First it was "arugula prices will skyrocket!". Now it's "inflation!"....
5   Automan Empire   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 2, 3:57pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

"liberal media explode with outrage and race to the defense of the online retailer"

It's really hard to take seriously any article that indulges in such buzzfeed-level hyperbole.

I've long seen Amazon criticized for unfair/illegal labor and competitive practices. Rarely has it been Republicans expending effort to do so. How does dropping in a "liberal media" comment further the discussion?
6   marcus   ignore (1)   2018 Apr 2, 3:58pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Satoshi_Nakamoto says
Now it's "inflation!"....


That's not obvious ?
7   DASKAA   ignore (3)   2018 Apr 2, 4:01pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

marcus says
Satoshi_Nakamoto says
Now it's "inflation!"....


That's not obvious ?


"Obvious" is a dangerous concept.

Not so long ago it was "obvious" to many people that ZIPR will lead to runaway inflation. Never happened.
8   marcus   ignore (1)   2018 Apr 2, 4:05pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

This is different. Cheap labor, both at home, and through outsourcing obviously give us lower prices. (not denying the pain to working class Americans. Just questioning how easy it would be to reverse, and the consequences on prices and the ability of middle class incomes to keep up).

We do know that inflation would be incredibly good for Trump and his family. So much debt against assets, that he would love to pay back in dollars that are worth less than the ones he borrowed. Of course there's no guarantee in the short run that asset prices would keep up with inflation either, if interest rates go up. But everyone knows that in the long term, it's a huge win for people with assets leveraged at low interest rates. Thinking about it, I guess intense inflation could possibly be bad for him in the short run.
9   FortWayne   ignore (2)   2018 Apr 2, 4:10pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

If government extravagance was cut off, there would be 0 inflation.

marcus says
Patrick says
ignoring the cause (outsourcing of jobs and insourcing of illegal slave labor).


If those two things were to disappear, do you think that real incomes would keep up with the resulting inflation ? I don't. I'm not saying that outsourcing and cheap immigrant labor are intrinsically good things. It's more a case of "it is what it is." The natural course of history. I'm not at all convinced that it can be fought, with a positive outcome.

The trend towards diversity and the scary realization that in 100 years, Americans of European descent will be just another minority group, is another one of those "it is what it is" phenomenons that contributed to the election of Trump. Again, this isn't something that can be changed, although it's a fear that can be played to in subtle ways in political campaigns. MAGA ! MAWA !

Patrick says

...
10   Patrick   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 2, 4:18pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Certainly we do have a problem with non-productive rent-seeking by billionaires being conflated with actual productive work, but the more immediate problem for the poor masses of all races is the lack of work at reasonable wages, and that is driven mostly by the export of jobs and the import of illegal slaves.

marcus says
Just questioning how easy it would be to reverse, and the consequences on prices and the ability of middle class incomes to keep up


That's a valid question, but I think it's certainly doable because incomes will go up with more jobs here and less competition from illegals. American citizens will indeed pick tomatoes if the wages are high enough. And if the wages are high enough at the low end, those people will spend their money and the wealth will trickle up to the middle class.

Australia seems to be doing fine with the highest minimum wage in the world, and the toughest laws against illegal immigration in the world as well.
11   theoakman   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 2, 4:22pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

The left has an infatuation with companies from silicon valley. Those that rally against tax breaks are the same people clamoring for special tax breaks to Amazon to make their 2 nd headquarters.

In 2008, they hated how big Exxon mobile was. In 2013, they loved how big Apple was and today, they love Amazon. Amazon should not enjoy any more favorable subsidies that give them the edge on competition. This should be universal. In fact, I think subsidies should be outlawed altogether. If they can't compete without them, then that is really pathetic.

Trump is the only president ever brave enough to call them out.
12   marcus   ignore (1)   2018 Apr 2, 4:28pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Patrick says
but the more immediate problem for the poor masses of all races is the lack of work at reasonable wages,


Why wouldn't the higher wages simply be offset by the price increases and rent increases ? (corporations, devopers (construction jobs), just pass on the price increases to the consumer). Leaving working class Americans just as underpaid as they are now ? Even if you use sort of false labor markets to cover the competitive price of global labor, I don't see how you can overcome the impacts. The dollar would probably adjust. It's hard to guess how it would unfold, but I think most economists would predict bad outcomes. Capitalism won out globally, and we have to find a way to deal with what that means.

One thing we can probably all agree on, and that is that tax cuts combined with high spending might feel good in the short run, but it's kicking the can down the road in a truly unprecedented way. I sometimes think it's like a game of hot potato. Politicians don't want to be the ones in office (holding the bag) when this thing really blows up. Ironically it seems like it's always democrats that take fiscal responsibility to clean things up. Take Brown in California for example. Or Clinton. And yes Obama, who was left dealing with a lot of Iraq expenditures and Medicare part D that had essentially been unaccounted for (put on the credit card) . Obama took the political hit for dealing with these. It's the opposite of what happens with republicans. They whine and cry about deficit spending, but the moment they get in office, they spend their asses off guaranteeing a halfway decent economy for the short term.

You know it's true.
13   APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch   ignore (32)   2018 Apr 2, 4:54pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

When TRUMPLIGULA! is dying in Leavenworth, Bezos will buy Trump's kids at auction, slay the boys and take Melania as a concubine.
14   TwoScoopsOfWompWomp   ignore (2)   2018 Apr 2, 5:41pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

.someone else says
This is clearly true. The media still has no idea to how to handle the case where the public disobeys the media's direct orders and instead uses democracy to elect the candidate who is actually concerned about their pain.


FAPFAPFAP


someone else says
Any reporters out there? Please, stop just making it about the symptom (Trump) while ignoring the cause (outsourcing of jobs and insourcing of illegal slave labor). You can make a difference.


The Goal I think is to defeat Trump and reinstall the "Americant" Hopeless that went before, where no matter what, you were getting certain policies no matter who you voted for.

Would a Jeb!!! regime be much different than a Hillary Regime? Not by much. Maybe Jeb would have signed a ban on AR-15s while Hillary would have just tried to ban all "assault rifles". Both would be dickin' around in Syria trying to get that fabled 3rd Way anti-Assad but not Islamist and not Kurdish Army started. Neither would have done shit with China and South Korea. And BOTH would have extolling the virtues of immigrants, the evil laziness of the white working class, and the need for bazillions of refugees.

If they have to address the subsidized Globaloney, then they acknowledge it and it could become a thing. The old propaganda of hopelessness was the preferred alternative.

It's gonna be awful hard in 2024 to go back to "Regular" Presidents when we had a high energy one that completely shifted the political discourse. The UniParty Globalists don't realize the cat is out of the bag, and there's no way to keep pushing it as a piglet.
15   theoakman   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 2, 6:07pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Closing the borders would raise the prices of labor and goods but it would prevent the flow of wealth out of the country. That money has only found it's way back with foreigners purchasing land and companies on our mainland. Part of the reason the stock market keeps going up and land prices just keep rising. The 2nd part of the equation is stopping the fed from it's inflationary practices. Although, at this point, it's almost necessary given the amount of foreign debt. The dollar would need to lose something like half of it's value to pay it all off,.
16   DASKAA   ignore (3)   2018 Apr 2, 6:17pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

marcus says
This is different. Cheap labor, both at home, and through outsourcing obviously give us lower prices.


This statement is meaningless unless quantified. What's the percentage by which the prices are lower than in "no illegals, no outsourcing" scenario?
17   Patrick   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 2, 6:28pm   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

marcus says
Why wouldn't the higher wages simply be offset by the price increases and rent increases ?


Sure, it's tricky because it's circular: wages -> prices -> wages -> prices

But the entire economy is kind of like the fish in the ocean. When the plankton starve, eventually all the fish starve. The more the plankton have to eat, the healthier all the fish can be.

The main trick is that the poor spend most of what they get, benefiting the economy directly. As you move up the economic scale, people save more and spend less, which is great for investment, except for the fact that there is no point to investing when no one has money to buy anything.
18   marcus   ignore (1)   2018 Apr 2, 6:29pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Satoshi_Nakamoto says
This statement is meaningless unless quantified. What's the percentage by which the prices are lower than in "no illegals, no outsourcing" scenario?



I disagree. You can say that the price of tea goes up, if the supply of coffee for some reason goes to zero and be totally correct, without being able to specify such details. In fact it's the details pretty much by definition of such a situation, which remain unknown.
19   DASKAA   ignore (3)   2018 Apr 2, 6:32pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

marcus says
Satoshi_Nakamoto says
This statement is meaningless unless quantified. What's the percentage by which the prices are lower than in "no illegals, no outsourcing" scenario?



I disagree. You can say that the price of tea goes up, if the supply of coffee for some reason goes to zero and be totally correct, without being able to specify such details. In fact it's the details pretty much by definition of such a situation, which remain unknown.



If it goes up 0.00001% it's the same as it staying flat for all practical purposes.

So, what's the number, Mr. Math Teacher?
20   marcus   ignore (1)   2018 Apr 2, 6:36pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

I'll tell you, as soon as you tell me how much the price of tea goes up when the supply of coffee goes to zero.
21   APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch   ignore (32)   2018 Apr 2, 6:44pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

If Bezos has any sense, he'd fire all his reporters and replace them with forensic accountants and jailed Russian journalists, the longer the sentence the better and set up bureaus of native forensic accountants in Germany, Kazakhstan and Russia with body guards.

The only thing he needs is the terms of the Deutsche Bank note, supporting documentation and provenance and signature pages.

Translations of those materials into English every day on every page of the Washington Post is all he needs to speed the removal of Trumpfuck.

Whence the effeminate fake precedent is chained to a pipe into shower in Leavenworth, he can take the boys Barron, Don, Jr and Eric and have them and the sisters put to death and receive Melania as concubine, as the Founding Fathers commanded.
22   Booger   ignore (1)   2018 Apr 2, 7:19pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

marcus says
Cheap labor, both at home, and through outsourcing obviously give us lower prices. (not denying the pain to working class Americans. Just questioning how easy it would be to reverse, and the consequences on prices and the ability of middle class incomes to keep up).


I noticed that more often than not, any cost savings from outsourcing was NOT passed on to the consumer, so I am not worried about it.
23   justme   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 2, 7:36pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

QUOTE from NY Post:

>>The online retailer — one of the most profitable corporations in America

Whoa, there. AMZN is one of the must expensive corporations in America, not the most profitable corporation by any stretch.

Reality: AMZN is barely profitable. the PE ratio was 223 (rounded) at market close today:

https://ycharts.com/companies/AMZN/pe_ratio

There is also the fun fact that retained earnings since the inception of Amazon 1994 is 8,636M. That's right. A measly 8.4B. Note that for a corporation that never has paid out dividends, like Amazon, retained earnings equals total cumulative profits over the life of the corporation. Amazon also spent at least 5B of borrowed money to buy back it's own stock. Did that amount get included as a subtraction when calculating the aforementioned already meager earnings? Nope. Apparently accounting rules do not require that.

Reference for retained earnings here:
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/AMZN/balance-sheet?p=AMZN
24   TwoScoopsOfWompWomp   ignore (2)   2018 Apr 2, 7:36pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

I think it just started making a profit, at least on paper.
25   PeopleUnited   ignore (2)   2018 Apr 2, 8:31pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Patrick says
marcus says
Why wouldn't the higher wages simply be offset by the price increases and rent increases ?


Sure, it's tricky because it's circular: wages -> prices -> wages -> prices

But the entire economy is kind of like the fish in the ocean. When the plankton starve, eventually all the fish starve. The more the plankton have to eat, the healthier all the fish can be.



I like the ecological analogy. The problem is however that plankton is, exactly what the elite see most people as. The larger (more wealthy) eat the plankton for supper, and the plankton are fighting just for space or resources to create income. Unless every plankton has the resources to create their own income (the best example in this analogy would be land because a farmer harnesses the energy of the sun to store value just like plankton) then the system is rigged in favor of those that do have possession/access to resources.
26   justme   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 2, 9:53pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

TwoScoopsPlissken says
I think it just started making a profit, at least on paper.


That's what my link is for, It shows a graph of the PE for the last 5 years or so.
27   marcus   ignore (1)   2018 Apr 2, 11:17pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

justme says
Reality: AMZN is barely profitable. the PE ratio was 223 (rounded) at market close today:


But with a market cap approach 1 trillion, that means net earnings of a few billion in 2017, up by a factor of 5 since 2015. Trump is probably talking the price down so his fund manager pals can by it on the down spike.
28   bob2356   ignore (1)   2018 Apr 3, 6:31am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Patrick says

That's a valid question, but I think it's certainly doable because incomes will go up with more jobs here and less competition from illegals. American citizens will indeed pick tomatoes if the wages are high enough. And if the wages are high enough at the low end, those people will spend their money and the wealth will trickle up to the middle class.

Australia seems to be doing fine with the highest minimum wage in the world, and the toughest laws against illegal immigration in the world as well.


How much time have you spent in Australia? The cost of lving is very high, like 30-40% higher that the US at least. The cost of housing is astronimical, although that has a lot to do with land restrictions and design choices as well as labour costs. People in Australia don't shop till they drop. They live a much less consumer orientated life. They repair things, make them last, and do with less.

If Americans want to constantly endlessly buy cheap crap and cheap food then they can't complain there aren't well paying jobs because things are made with cheap labor in poor countries or processed with illegals working in the US. Big duh moment.

I've always thougt that there should be tariffs on imports that match the costs of our spending in clean air, clean water, worker safety, etc, etc. etc. If china wants to pollute and kill it's workers to produce products cheaply then they should pay a tariff to negate that advantage. Won't ever happen. If trump put tariffs on imported products that would bring them all up to parity with the costs to produce products in the US safely and cleanly there would be a revolution in trumpland. There wouldn't be a single republican left in congress in 2020 if walmart shoppers in red states were forced to pay American produced prices.
29   bob2356   ignore (1)   2018 Apr 3, 6:38am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote        

marcus says
Trump is probably talking the price down so his fund manager pals can by it on the down spike.


Trump is talking down Amazon because he is a petty vicious spoiled rich kid and the Post, owned by Bezos, holds him accountable for what he says and does. Where is all of trumps outrage about Ebay? What a schmuck.
31   Quigley   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 3, 8:44am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

someone else says
Any reporters out there?


No, sorry, corporate media ownership made these folks an extinct species. All we have now are talking heads (who parrot globalist/Leftist talking points) and order givers who preach the leftist gospel from on high. Reporters are no longer necessary for the dissemination of oligarch propaganda. A rumor, celebrity gossip, or someone’s random tweet is all the “base” they need to propagandize for hours or days. Any real news is relegated to page 6 or possibly local news sources.
32   WineHorror1   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 3, 9:00am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Patrick says
marcus says
Why wouldn't the higher wages simply be offset by the price increases and rent increases ?


Sure, it's tricky because it's circular: wages -> prices -> wages -> prices

But the entire economy is kind of like the fish in the ocean. When the plankton starve, eventually all the fish starve. The more the plankton have to eat, the healthier all the fish can be.

The main trick is that the poor spend most of what they get, benefiting the economy directly. As you move up the economic scale, people save more and spend less, which is great for investment, except for the fact that there is no point to investing when no one has money to buy anything.

You would think everyone could understand this logic. Buuuut logic is a horse who left town some time ago. 1) money creation is done as a benefit to the highly leveraged rich and those that benefit from value created out of thin air (wall street) 2) monopolistic practices and corporations are in charge 3) cost structure in America is too damn high 4) we are a borderless country. Hell even our president can't seem to stop an announcing caravan of illegals from coming in 5) rule, regulations, laws and requirements such as licenses, fees and insurance inhibit those who would start businesses. Large companies, in the long run, do more harm than good just give it time 6) there is no more "Go west, young man", all the land is taken 7) the education cartel led by government and unions have eaten almost all of the next generations seek corn.

I do believe we, as in a very large percentage of people (unless New cities can be started imo), or as in the next generation, is fuuuucked.
33   MrMagic   ignore (11)   2018 Apr 3, 9:23am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

bob2356 says
Trump is talking down Amazon because he is a petty vicious spoiled rich kid and the Post, owned by Bezos, holds him accountable for what he says and does. Where is all of trumps outrage about Ebay?


zzyzzx says
For every Amazon package it delivers, the Postal Service loses $1.46


Oh crap, those pesky facts again. Trump wants to save the taxpayers money.
34   DASKAA   ignore (3)   2018 Apr 3, 9:29am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

zzyzzx says
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/for-every-amazon-package-it-delivers-the-postal-service-loses-146

For every Amazon package it delivers, the Postal Service loses $1.46


It made sense to subsidize e-commerce via reduced postal rates and waiver of sales tax when it was in it's infancy. Now, when Amazon, eBay and such has turned into behemoths what's the point to continue subsidizing them?

PS. I do own shares of AMZN.
35   DASKAA   ignore (3)   2018 Apr 3, 9:36am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

marcus says
I'll tell you, as soon as you tell me how much the price of tea goes up when the supply of coffee goes to zero.


Me? Why should I tell you that? You claim to have an insight into such correlation, why not you use thes same method you applied to come to your "no illegals - x% inflation" to this "tea-coffe" covfefe? Because you don't have the way to calculate either, amirite? Of course you don't.

All the side of pro-unlimited-immigration can offer is vague speculation about "skyrocketing price of bluberries" and "omg, inflation!" but no numbers. They either don't have them or the numbers are insignificant compared to well-documented numbers of cost of illegal immigration per taxpayer household.
36   MrMagic   ignore (11)   2018 Apr 3, 9:45am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

bob2356 says
Trump is talking down Amazon because he is a petty vicious spoiled rich kid and the Post, owned by Bezos, holds him accountable for what he says and does. Where is all of trumps outrage about Ebay? What a schmuck.


Donald J. Trump
✔ @realDonaldTrump

I am right about Amazon costing the United States Post Office massive amounts of money for being their Delivery Boy. Amazon should pay these costs (plus) and not have them bourne by the American Taxpayer. Many billions of dollars. P.O. leaders don’t have a clue (or do they?)!
9:55 AM - Apr 3, 2018


Damn, just more pesky facts.
37   zzyzzx   ignore (1)   2018 May 2, 10:26am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/almost-half-amazon-prime-members-say-theyll-drop-service-company-will-fine-160148655.html

Almost half of Amazon Prime members we surveyed say they'll drop the service

Merry Gangemi, who has been an Amazon Prime user since 2014, plans to drop her membership because Amazon is raising the annual membership fee to $119 from $99.

“I feel like I’m paying more for the same or less,” the retiree in Vermont told Yahoo Finance. Gangemi buys books and watches TV series on Amazon, but it bothers her when she needs to pay extra for certain programs, not to mention Amazon delivery service isn’t great in the rural area where she lives.

Amazon Prime’s price hike comes after blockbuster first-quarter earnings results, which sent the stock (AMZN) soaring to record highs. The increase will take effect for new users in May and apply to existing members in June. For the lucky subscribers whose membership expires in May, they can still enjoy the old $99 price for one final year.

While Wall Street sees the move as a positive, the $20 increase has become a deal breaker for many current Prime members who are now rethinking renewals. According to a recent Yahoo Finance survey, among almost 7,000 current Prime members, 45% said they will discontinue their membership once the price goes up to $119 a year. Twenty percent were unsure. For those who are willing to pay more, the vast majority cite “fast and free delivery” as the top reason for staying. A recent poll from DealNews, a comparison shopping website, revealed similar results: Almost half of Prime users surveyed said they won’t pay the new price.

Respondents to the Yahoo Finance survey said they just don’t shop enough on Amazon or they don’t use perks like Prime video often enough to justify the higher upfront cost. Some even said they would turn to other retailers like Walmart (WMT) to find competitive prices and services after dropping Prime.

Crossing the $100 threshold also pushes people to re-evaluate their expenses. For some people, they may adjust and opt for a monthly Prime membership, which was also increased to $12.99 from $10.99 earlier this year. Sakraida said people may take a closer look at the monthly option especially during major shopping holidays like Black Friday and Prime Day. “If they quit, they can always subscribe again for a shorter period of time if they need it,” she said.

Commentary on article site is priceless!
39   edvard   ignore (2)   2018 May 16, 2:56pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

That Trump goes after companies is absolutely baffling to me. Republicans and the tea Party for YEARS wailed about the gubbermint staying out of big business and yet here we have a deranged president who sees it fit to throw tantrums and go after companies if they have anything to do with being against him or saying anything about him in a negative way. And yet what do we hear out of the GOP, its supporters and the tea party? Not one single word.
40   adarmiento   ignore (0)   2018 May 16, 7:40pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Patrick says
marcus says
Why wouldn't the higher wages simply be offset by the price increases and rent increases ?


Sure, it's tricky because it's circular: wages -> prices -> wages -> prices

But the entire economy is kind of like the fish in the ocean. When the plankton starve, eventually all the fish starve. The more the plankton have to eat, the healthier all the fish can be.

The main trick is that the poor spend most of what they get, benefiting the economy directly. As you move up the economic scale, people save more and spend less, which is great for investment, except for the fact that there is no point to investing when no one has money to buy anything.


Yes, its really a matter of optimization with some monte carlo simulation. Its more complicated than linear programming because its a circular problem, and there are inter-dependencies between the variables, as Patrick mentioned.

I think Patrick perhaps may be seeing that in his beloved San Francisco Bay Area. Eventually there will just be a few rich, and the rest are too poor to buy an iPhone or other products from companies that the rich own. Roll Tide Roll.
41   adarmiento   ignore (0)   2018 May 16, 7:45pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

edvard says
That Trump goes after companies is absolutely baffling to me. Republicans and the tea Party for YEARS wailed about the gubbermint staying out of big business and yet here we have a deranged president who sees it fit to throw tantrums and go after companies if they have anything to do with being against him or saying anything about him in a negative way. And yet what do we hear out of the GOP, its supporters and the tea party? Not one single word.


Okay, so Trump goes after Amazon because it owns Washington Post, which you already know Edwardo (aka: edvard). And please let us know that you believe that the Washington Post is not biased against the Republicans, just like MSNBC is.

What other companies did Trump go against like he did against Amazon ? I say leave Amazon alone, and watch the liberal in-fighting within Seattle as they add a new tax on companies like Amazon. I hope the San Francisco Bay Area like San Jose does the same thing Seattle does with the homeless tax.
42   FortWayne   ignore (2)   2018 May 16, 8:18pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Trump is the jobs president

« First    « Previous    Comments 3 - 42 of 42    Last »





The Housing Trap
You're being set up to spend your life paying off a debt you don't need to take on, for a house that costs far more than it should. The conspirators are all around you, smiling to lure you in, carefully choosing their words and watching your reactions as they push your buttons, anxiously waiting for the moment when you sign the papers that will trap you and guarantee their payoff. Don't be just another victim of the housing market. Use this book to defend your freedom and defeat their schemes. You can win the game, but first you have to learn how to play it.
115 pages, $12.50

Kindle version available


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions