Amazon no more

[prendrelemick]

I have resolved to stop doing any more buisness with Amazon. This article -http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/dec/01/week-amazon-insider-feature-treatment-employees-work -highlights the reasons, but I had already decided before I read it. The last time I got a book from them I felt ashamed of myself and decided to stop. This is not a crusade or anything, just a personal decision, their coporate constitution does not match my personal one.

So anyway, I need to continue to feed my addiction (for books), but not from them. Can anyone recommend another source? especially for downloads.

[gustave dore]

Bookzz and mobilism are good for downloads. Piratebay and kickasstorrents have some valuable books.

[Methinks]

Bookzz and mobilism are good for downloads. Piratebay and kickasstorrents have some valuable books.

Bookzz I'm not sure of, but aren't mobilism, piratebay and torrents pirating?

Prendrelemick: perhaps Barns N Noble online, or Google books, etc. Can't help you much. I prefer physical books and bookstores.

[gustave dore]

He asked for downloads, he didn't specify on whether he wanted legal sites. If you want legal, project Gutenberg.

[prendrelemick]

Well I did mean legal downloads, but that was in my niave ignorant days (before I read your post).

[gustave dore]

Nothing wrong with a little piracy if you only do it a little and still support artists.

[prendrelemick]

Hang on a minute! I'm supposed to be making a strong stand against corporate greed here, must check the old moral compass first.

[waltzinmathilda]

Yes, Project Gutenberg is a good one for downloads. Speaking of "flash and blood" books, I find myself resorting more and more to bookdepository.com (I'm pretty sure they provide some options for kindle, too). They don't charge you for shipping fees, which is pretty decent of them. I have only recently come across the news of Amazon's alleged exploitment of employees and, if the accusations turn out to be true I will probably follow in your steps...

[TheFifthElement]

www.hive.co.uk are good. If you favourite your local bookshop they also receive a percentage of every sale.
A lot of the publishing houses also offer e-book sales directly.

[TheFifthElement]

Yes, Project Gutenberg is a good one for downloads. Speaking of "flash and blood" books, I find myself resorting more and more to bookdepository.com (I'm pretty sure they provide some options for kindle, too). They don't charge you for shipping fees, which is pretty decent of them. I have only recently come across the news of Amazon's alleged exploitment of employees and, if the accusations turn out to be true I will probably follow in your steps...

Book Depository is owned by Amazon

[TheFifthElement]

Yes, Project Gutenberg is a good one for downloads. Speaking of "flash and blood" books, I find myself resorting more and more to bookdepository.com (I'm pretty sure they provide some options for kindle, too). They don't charge you for shipping fees, which is pretty decent of them. I have only recently come across the news of Amazon's alleged exploitment of employees and, if the accusations turn out to be true I will probably follow in your steps...

Duplicate

[Dreamwoven]

Its amazing how corporations get in everywhere. I had no idea Amazon was so big. We live in a world of gigantic companies, all too big to fail. The ordoliberals would have turned in their graves.

the other side of this is that we now live in a society where big business and big government work hand-in-glove. All a bit reminiscent of 1930s fascism...

[waltzinmathilda]

Book Depository is owned by Amazon

Gosh, you are right! I've just visited the section "about us" on their website and, indeed, they mention the acquisition of bookdep by amazon. I wasn't aware of it, at all. Thanks for telling me ;)

[YesNo]

One of the things I like about the ebooks from Amazon is that they store notes and highlights on the books I've purchased and sync them across devices. They also do this for the free books they offer and which I could download elsewhere. This adds value to those books and makes me want to use the Kindle app to read them since I can also annotate them.

[Sancho]

Back in the mid 90s I kept hearing about this new-fangled thing called the Internet. In the spirit of investigation, my wife and I went down to Sears and bought an HP 386 computer. We brought it home, plugged it in, coupled it to the phone line, and set out to discover the Internet. We found Netscape Navigator and then the wife said, well now what do we do? I said I didn't know, but I'd heard of an Internet bookstore called Amazon and it was supposed to be a big deal. So I typed in Amazon. Well we immediately got a bunch of hits for - Amazonian women, totally naked, big girls, in the wild, jungle vixens ... Click here.

So I did. Well you know what popped up on the screen. My wife rolled her eyes and said she figured it would be something like that, and then stomped out of the room. I was there for hours.

Anyway, as for Jeff Bezos' Amazon, it's a growth company and still in a growth phase. Despite The Guardian's view that the way to a better society is through bureaucratic regulation and taxation, I'll make the argument that Amazon is industrious because it's free, and rich because it's industrious.* Besides, they do generate a lot of tax revenue. In a rare moment of clear-headedness I made one of the few good stock-buying calls of my life and got into Amazon early. I made a lot of money on it and I've paid a lot of capital-gains tax on it. And it's a call anybody in the free world could've made who was willing to risk the capital up front.

*By the way, I sort of ripped off that phrase from a British Monarch.
Here's George III round about 1780 on the loss of the American Colonies:


A people spread over an immense tract of fertile land, industrious because free, and rich because industrious, presently became a market for the Manufactures and Commerce of the Mother Country. s, presently became a market for the Manufactures and Commerce of the Mother Country. An importance was soon generated, which from its origin to the late conflict was mischievous to Britain, because it created an expense of blood and treasure worth more at this instant, if it could be at our command, than all we ever received from America. The wars of 1744, of 1756, and 1775, were all entered into from the encouragements given to the speculations of settling the wilds of North America.

He goes on in his endorsement of unbridled capitalism:


This compartative view of our former territories in America is not stated with any idea of lessening the consequence of a future friendship and connection with them; on the contrary it is to be hoped we shall reap more advantages from their trade as friends than ever we could derive from them as Colonies; for there is reason to suppose we actually gained more by them while in actual rebellion, and the common open connection cut off, than when they were in obedience to the Crown...


I admit this correlation between Amazon and the American War for Independence has its limitations. Anyway, Mick, you can always use Amazon to find stuff and then buy it from a small bookstore. I like Powell's in Portland, Oregon.

[qimissung]

I was going to suggest Powell's. I limit my purchases from Amazon because I, too, dislike their business practices. I haven't read the Guardian's article, but it's long been my understanding that they outsource their warehouse employees so that they don't have to give them benefits. I've heard that their warehouses are not temperature regulated and that people who worked there have been known to pass out in the heat. I don't entirely not use them, because they are still the easiest way to get some older paperbacks that I like, but I do use them infrequently. I wouldn't have minded making some money on their stocks, though, if I'd thought of it at the time. :D

[Dreamwoven]

I was going to suggest Powell's. I limit my purchases from Amazon because I, too, dislike their business practices. I haven't read the Guardian's article, but it's long been my understanding that they outsource their warehouse employees so that they don't have to give them benefits. I've heard that their warehouses are not temperature regulated and that people who worked there have been known to pass out in the heat. I don't entirely not use them, because they are still the easiest way to get some older paperbacks that I like, but I do use them infrequently. I wouldn't have minded making some money on their stocks, though, if I'd thought of it at the time. :D

This touches on another point about the welfare state and how it has become increasingly undermined by the very extreme form of laissez-faire that we have now become accustomed to. Along with this comes the frequent market booms and busts we now have as part of our everyday reality. They seem to get more severe and extreme as time passes. The 2008 sub-prime mortgage crisis was the deepest recession since the Wall Street Crash of 1929. The last boom has barely had time to get established and already the signs are emerging that a crash may come at any time, only 7 years after the sub-prime.

[Iain Sparrow]

I was going to suggest Powell's. I limit my purchases from Amazon because I, too, dislike their business practices. I haven't read the Guardian's article, but it's long been my understanding that they outsource their warehouse employees so that they don't have to give them benefits. I've heard that their warehouses are not temperature regulated and that people who worked there have been known to pass out in the heat. I don't entirely not use them, because they are still the easiest way to get some older paperbacks that I like, but I do use them infrequently. I wouldn't have minded making some money on their stocks, though, if I'd thought of it at the time. :D

It probably wouldn't have mattered much at the time, if you had stock in Amazon... because you would have had to hold on to it through some scary times like the tech-bubble bursting and whatnot. I had stock in Amazon a long time ago, and $10,000 in Apple when it was at about $25/share... but things got twitchy and I lost my nerve and sold at $28/share. I felt like such the clever investor! When I think about it now, if I would have just held on to it and weathered the storms and sold out now... it makes me ill.:)
The pitfalls of being impatient.

[Sancho]

Bah! Boom or Bust, Feast or Famine, Good Times or Bad - that's life. It's character building.

Buy the ticket. Take the ride.*

and since I'm doing other people's quotes, here's a barnyard truism for the stock market:

Bulls make money. Bears make money. Pigs get slaughtered...and Chickens are too scared to cross the road.**

*Hunter S. Thompson
**Old Wall Street saying

[Dreamwoven]

I don't think we have any option but to take the ride. Where would we get off?

[JBI]

In all honesty, that they work their workers like they should be worked to me seems like a boon not a detraction. I am happy to say that Amazon not only maintains a staff where many people want to work there - a competitive job recruiting system - but also works beyond efficiency. if that means getting lazy people to work a full day, so be it.

We live in a culture that allows for slacking. If people are being paid well though are expected to preform well, so be it. I don't see any of these employees quitting and joining the competition.

[Sancho]

^well there you go. And JBI is one of the smartest guys here.


I don't think we have any option but to take the ride. Where would we get off?

Well, nobody gets outta here alive.

But no, you don't have to buy the ticket and take the ride. You can sit around in your hermetically sealed world, never take a chance, never lay it on the line, never hang it out there, never take a corner with too much speed bald tires and lousy brakes, never take a chance on love, never throw your hard-earned money at risky equity, but that would be...

BORING!

[mtpspur]

I only recently started to use Amazon.com and have been highly pleased with the service. Barnes and Nobles tends to fail me one out of three tries. If I thought there was a sweatshop environment going on I might hesitate but not in this case. There are workers that can handle the grind and prosper and some that can't. That is their decision or life choice for better or worse. I suspect-being an old timer people have forgotten to a degree the old work ethic of blood, sweat and tears. Just a thought.

[prendrelemick]

Aye there's rub ^, As I said it's a personal decision. I think they could be efficient without being exploitative and bullying. I decided to stop using them when I heard them defend the policy of sacking managers who become pregnant. Not good enough.

It goes a bit further than work ethic, they exploit me as a tax payer too, using the infrastructure of the UK for profit but refusing to contribute to it by avoiding UK taxes, and by paying minimum legal wage - which is topped up by the government from tax revenues (that's a subsidy isn't it). By doing this they put competitors (who do contribute to the "common weal") out of business. Where is their work ethic? What's the difference between welfare handouts, and tax breaks and subsidies for big buisineses ?

[YesNo]

I have never owned Amazon stock nor considered it since it doesn't pay a dividend. Expecting a market crash I don't even own stocks at the moment. It is part of my "cash is trash until the crash" investing philosophy.

Here's an investor's perspective by Gary Bourgeault comparing Amazon to Wal-Mart: http://seekingalpha.com/article/3325775-wal-mart-going-after-the-heart-of-the-amazon-beast

I don't know if Wal-Mart is any better than Amazon from the perspective of the warehouse worker. Wal-Mart at least has positive earnings per share and pays a dividend. I wouldn't mind having shares in Wal-Mart (after the crash), but I prefer Amazon's ebooks.

[qimissung]

It's the "exploitative and bullying" part that does it for me. And it's not just Amazon. It's becoming increasingly common to outsource laborers so that companies can minimize their resources and have more for the stockholders. I read one article about a young man who was working in plant where because of carelessness a box weighing about a ton fell on him on his first day there. I don't mind if they work hard; that isn't my concern. But I do think all people who work should be treated fairly and in a humane manner. I doubt that's going to happen unless business is regulated. It hasn't' been my experience that a free and unfettered market works very well; people, unless checked, will do exactly what they want, not what is best or humane or fair or good.

As it happens I do shop heavily at Walmart. I would like to cut back, but most grocery stores are too expensive for me, which makes me sad. I do shop at a local grocery store for any produce I get, as the produce at most Walmart's if often inedible, I find. But that's another one. I mean, jeez, how much more profit do those owner's need to make?

Not to mention that all of our clothing is made with exploitative labor practices, in the US anyway. The only exception to that is athletic wear made for colleges and universities.

In fact I googled "exploitative labor practices," and of course labor is rife with them. Coca cola immediately popped up, as did child labor proactices around the world, and the palm oil industry.

[mtpspur]

Excellent points made above and I actually agree with you guys about the work conditions. However when it comes to wanting CERTAIN books I'm discovering they have what others can't or won't get. My personal favorite supplier simply doesn't make enough of a profit on certain things to make it worth his while to get them even though I have told him I don't mind paying a small mark-up. I tend to be a little hard hearted about work backgrounds due to 21 years in the Air Force being at the beck and call of a capricious lot and then 23 years as a AAA calltaker/dispatcher where while it was nice being useful and productive and actually making a small difference in the lives of a paying customer base it did get old getting called a liar/SOB at least once a shift by a disgruntled customer or even a tow company. So for me Amazon if I could physically keep up sounds like my kind of place.

[qimissung]

Well, I use them occasionally also, mtpspur, but I am trying not to turn a completely blind eye to the sordidness of their business practices.

And then there's this, because it does affect all of us:

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/06/no_one_is_making_them_stop_why_corporations_outsou rce_catastrophe_and_workers_pay_the_price/

[YesNo]

Coca cola immediately popped up

Coca Cola and Pepsi are companies that puzzle me. People still drink this stuff? I guess you could put cigarette companies right up there as well.

[Sancho]

Here's a link to an article in Harpers last year. Similar to the Guardian bit, Mick, but focuses on roving bands of seniors in caravans working at Amazon sort centers as temps during the holidays.

https://shar.es/1vG3xC

I still drink the occasional Coke, Y/N, and having traveled to many places where the water supply is questionable, a can of Coke can be a very good thing. You can get one basically anywhere on the planet, and it will never give you Montezuma's Revenge.

By the way, growth stocks ain't for everybody. They can be a wild ride, but if you wait until Amazon pays a dividend their grown phase will more than likely be over and done with. Dividend-paying stocks lately have been like owning bonds - certainly a necessary core holding.

[prendrelemick]

Thanks Sancho, there's a new perspective for me. Those old folks are exploited by seasonal employers but are very relieved to be exploited. I don't know. I keep remembering a sentence from the Guardian piece - about having the luck to fall on the right side of a very thin line. I've never been in desperate straights, I may have a strong "work ethic"- but I know its down to luck in the end.

ps. I downloaded a book from Google Play last night - another multi-national corporation.:rolleyes:

[YesNo]

I switched from Microsoft Office products to Google Docs and Sheets earlier this year along with email, browser and cloud storage for photos. I haven't used Google Play to buy books yet, but it might be an alternative worth considering.

[prendrelemick]

I had a very quick look at Hive last night - as recommended by my old friend TheFifthElement- they look promising.

[mtpspur]

:) I drink Coke these days but about 20 years back Pepsi was the taste buds delight. There are no easy answers to all this. Do I wish my book store could get the books I want (small press company books--mostly pulp fiction/comics related material)? You bet but since they can't I'll get it and pay appropriately to the company that can supply it. I should confess I was aware of Amazon BUT had NEVER bothered to look into them until my wife began using them in her business. All I knew was they were some ort of store. My wife (and son) thought I knew what they offered. A testimony to communication I suppose. SO right now I'm in the honeymoon period of this discovery and anxious to get several ites off my want list.

[blank|verse]

prendrelemick -

I'm with you in being against Amazon, as are my literary friends, for whom the view that Amazon is a malign and pernicious influence is as obvious as the sun. Not only are the latest allegations about staff treatment concerning, they have also been accused of avoiding paying their fair share of tax in the UK, of bullying small publishers (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/22/amazon-beware-friendly-internet-giants-google-facebook)(whose profits are marginal enough anyway), and of putting out of business countless small bookshops across the country.

Yet I'll admit I do still buy from them, or through them, occasionally. But I've not bought a new book from them for a while and don't intend to change.

Instead, I buy from Waterstone's, or WH Smiths, or Foyle's, or Blackwell's, or directly from the publishers. And sometimes, smaller bookshops selling second-hand books on Amazon can be contacted directly so you can cut out the middle-man. You might also like to see if your local library offers 'downloans', although of course, these are only temporary.

What's disappointing to the point of depressing is that some people on this, a literary forum, are speaking as apologists for Amazon, and encouraging their monopolist tendencies – Greed is good! Lunch is for wimps! – as if there's no moral dimension to the discussion, and that Amazon has any benefit beyond being cheaper for them, the individualist consumer.

I would hope that people want to support all publishers of their favourite authors and poets, many of whom produce less mainstream literature and take risks, so they can survive and continue to publish a wider plurality of literature in future. If it costs a bit more, then so be it; if you don't support them, they won't be around much longer.

[Dreamwoven]

I agree entirely. Second hand books can be bought from Alibris or in Sweden for faster delivery from Bokus and Adlibris.

[Jackson Richardson]

Totally agree with prendelmick.

Secondhand books can be browzed and bought through the utterly delightful Abe books https://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/BuyersMenu

I used to buy books through The Book Depository rather than Amazon, but I understand they have been taken over.

I only bought one book from Amazon this year, apparently otherwise unobtainable. I must have clicked a button to say I wanted to join Amazon Prime, because in my next month's statement there was £79 charged to me for just that.

Fortunately I was able to cancel the membership and get the promise of a refund.

But I am further determined not to use them again except in utter extremis.

Between Foyles, Blackwells and Waterstones I should have enough choice online.

[prendrelemick]

I remember that Amazon Prime scam. They signed you up without telling you if you clicked on "Try Amazon Prime". They were told to stop it and had to repay a lot of money.

Meanwhile I've discovered there are plenty of alternatives for downloading books, I am trying them one by one, I shall post my experiences on here. If I need a second hand hard copy of something I usually find it on ebay no problem.

[TheFifthElement]

I had a very quick look at Hive last night - as recommended by my old friend TheFifthElement- they look promising.
Excellent! I've used Hive for a while. Their selection is not as comprehensive as Amazon, but they're reasonably priced and support high street bookshops. Blackwells are pretty good too, and Waterstones much improved since Mr Daunt took charge.


Totally agree with prendelmick.

Secondhand books can be browzed and bought through the utterly delightful Abe books https://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/BuyersMenu

Abe Books are also owned by Amazon.

[Sancho]

Holy crap! Those guys own everything.

I don't know about you guys, but I still have trouble reading a book on my iPad. I can read magazine articles just fine on it, but when I sit down to read a book, I still want a book.

I've downloaded a bunch of the classics from The Guggenheim Project, but I mostly use them for reference not sitting down and reading straight through.

[YesNo]

I'm with you in being against Amazon, as are my literary friends, for whom the view that Amazon is a malign and pernicious influence is as obvious as the sun. Not only are the latest allegations about staff treatment concerning, they have also been accused of avoiding paying their fair share of tax in the UK, of bullying small publishers (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/22/amazon-beware-friendly-internet-giants-google-facebook)(whose profits are marginal enough anyway), and of putting out of business countless small bookshops across the country.

I found this quote in John Naughton's article from The Guardian cited above:


Amazon is fanatically committed to the philosophy that you – the customer – are always right.

What's wrong with that? What is Naughton's alternative to the customer being always right?

[blank|verse]

YesNo - see paragraph 4 of my previous post...

[YesNo]

What's disappointing to the point of depressing is that some people on this, a literary forum, are speaking as apologists for Amazon, and encouraging their monopolist tendencies – Greed is good! Lunch is for wimps! – as if there's no moral dimension to the discussion, and that Amazon has any benefit beyond being cheaper for them, the individualist consumer.


Here's paragraph 4 from your previous post, blank|verse. How does this answer what is wrong with the following?


Amazon is fanatically committed to the philosophy that you – the customer – are always right.

Also, why the adjective "fanatically"?

[Sancho]

Mind if I jump in here folks?

I think the whole discussion begs the question: where do the obligations of a multinational corporation lie?

To the shareholders?
To the employees?
To the customers?
To the greater good of society?

All of the above? Some of the above? If so in what proportions? Because the needs and goals of the above mentioned groups are sometimes at odds with each other. So, look at Amazon's operating practices from the perspective of each group and decide for yourself what is morally okay.

Is a corporation even obligated to operate in an ethical way?

[Iain Sparrow]

Mind if I jump in here folks?

I think the whole discussion begs the question: where do the obligations of a multinational corporation lie?

To the shareholders?
To the employees?
To the customers?
To the greater good of society?

All of the above? Some of the above? If so in what proportions? Because the needs and goals of the above mentioned groups are sometimes at odds with each other. So, look at Amazon's operating practices from the perspective of each group and decide for yourself what is morally okay.

Is a corporation even obligated to operate in an ethical way?


The appropriate question is, are we obligated to behave ethically?
You can't expect more of Amazon then you yourself are willing to give. I'm assuming you typed that post while wearing clothes, and you're currently using a computer, sitting on a chair at a desk, perhaps drinking tea... nearly all of which were produced overseas by laborers working long hours for little pay with little to no benefits. In short, most of those laborers live lives that we wouldn't consider for ourselves nor wish on our worst enemy.
If indeed you wish a greater good for society, then the haves will need to make sacrifices for the have-nots... most of us live like royalty compared to the Chinese workers who made your computer, the shirt on your back, the chair you sit on and the tea you're drinking.

[Sancho]

Well, again, the needs and goals of all the aforementioned groups are sometimes at odds with each other.

So who gets to decide what's ethical where multinational corporations are concerned?

Government regulators?
A labor union?
A professor of philosophy?
Public opinion?
You?

So if a non-stakeholder in a corporation decides that the corporation is acting unethically, so what?

If, on the other hand, there's a groundswell of public option against Amazon that begins to affect their business, well then, they will change their ways. It's business. And that's the beauty of the free market.

[Clopin]

Market forces will determine whether corporations can get away with 'unethical' business practices, as you suggest in your final paragraph.

@ Iain it's not that the Haves in general need to make any particular sacrifice but rather that some Haves 'have' absolutely all of the profit garnered through low wage sweatshop labour. You can, in fact, find a lot of goods and products manufactured in countries like Germany and Japan where the factory workers make decent salaries. Fast fashion clothing labels are notorious for sweatshop labour and hellish conditions, but take a look at a company like American Apparel where they make the clothes in the U.S, pay their factory workers $14 an hour (which is more than I make), and the only sacrifice I would need to make as a have in this situation would be paying a little more.

[Dreamwoven]

I agree with Clopin.

[prendrelemick]

This is brilliant, now we are getting to the knub of things. Corporate power, market forces, exploitation, customer, worker, shareholder, tax avoidance.. etc..etc..


In the end I don't believe it is necessary for Amazon to be so fanatically rapacious, I'm not sure it is even good buisness for them in the long term. They seem to have taken the decision to behave a certain way for doctrinal reasons rather than pragmatic ones.

The Amazon Prime scam they were running shows the real attitude towards their customers more clearly than their corporate statement.

Sancho asked:-
So who gets to decide what's ethical where multinational corporations are concerned?
and he provided the answer :- You

This is why I've decided to to do what I am doing - I have no answers for anyone else, and certainly no solutions, I'm just going to stop buying from Amazon, it feels the right thing to do for me personally. I want no part of them.

[prendrelemick]

Here's paragraph 4 from your previous post, blank|verse. How does this answer what is wrong with the following?


Amazon is fanatically committed to the philosophy that you – the customer – are always right.

Also, why the adjective "fanatically"?

Me,me,me can I answer that. Because the customer (me) lives in the society Amazon is harming by not divi-ing up its fair share in Taxes.

[Sancho]

Taxation, it seems to me, is a government thing. Avoiding taxes is a business thing. If the local government lets Amazon in with tax incentives and the constituency is unhappy with it, throw the bums out in the next election cycle. If Amazon doesn't pay taxes required by the law of the land, haul their arses into court and make them pay penalties.

As for labor practices in developing countries, seems to me Amazon moves a lot of goods made in sweat shops, but they don't operate a single shirtwaist factory in China. They're basically a logistics company. So are they responsible for the conditions in the factory in which the goods they transport are made?

In this country a few years back we had a sort of public outcry against the Walmart-isation of the nation. If focused on how Walmart would come into a community and a short time later all the mom-and-pop shops would be out of business. There were also exposés published concerning worker conditions in third-world countries that supported getting cheap goods to market in the west and Walmart's culpability there. People picketed Walmart. Groups boycotted Walmart. Organizers tried to unionize Walmart workers. Local governments made it difficult for Walmart to set up shop in their communities. Round about that time, I found myself walking into a Walmart in Honolulu while some crazy dude was on the sidewalk screaming at the people going into the store - "WALMART IS THE DEVIL! THE DEVIL! STAY AWAY! STAY AWAY!" He screamed at me. I said to him, "Hey man, I just need some flip-flops." He said, "Oh, well, okay."

So anyway, here we are now with Amazon putting the squeeze on Walmart. I guess the old adage that applies here is - be carful what you wish for - eh?

So I'll do a little self-examination as Ian requested above. I'm wearing:

A pair of Levi's. Made in Mexico
A Columbia Sportswear T-shirt. Made in Vietnam
A pair of Clarks shoes. Made in China
A ball cap with a food co op logo on it (Down To Earth, Eugene, Oregon). Made in China
^ there's some irony, eh?
I don't like underwear, so I'm going commando (TMI?). Made by mom and dad
I'm sitting on a chair that I made from the wood of an oak tree that fell over in my yard. Yay! But I probably use some tools that were made in China. Boo!
And I'm typing this on an iPad. Made in China

So, sweatshop-sweatshop-sweatshop-sweatshop...holy crap! But Amazon didn't have anything to do with any of that stuff.

Hmm, so what to do? What to do? The only thing I can think of is, we're just going to have wipe out the human species. We don't have to do it right away. It might take a generation or two. So all you people out there, I want you to stop screwing.

[prendrelemick]

You're right, you're so right. It is a Government/Buisness thing (Though the / is almost redundant) Anyway I'd better bodyswerve away from Politics.

I can imagine great minds being excerised in corporate boardrooms at this very moment trying to get round the problem that you can't move your logistics operation to a third world country, its simply not fair. Perhaps third world political enclave warehouses on home soil are the answer - watch this space.

All this Socratic questioning has got me thinking way beyond the reasoning that led to a one man boycott. But in the end although I live and engage with the real world, where my action is pointless, I also live inside my illogical, hypocritical head where it feels right.

[Sancho]

Ain't it cool how a British guy and an American guy now can have a civilized conversation about taxation policy, given that whole taxation-without-representation thing 200 years ago that split up our two countries?

Also sorry 'bout the So-crates method. Annoying, huh?

[Jackson Richardson]

Abe Books are also owned by Amazon.

Blast. I've just ordered two books from them. At least it is a way of getting in touch with genuine small businesses, I hope.

[prendrelemick]

I've just checked to make sure I hadn't accidently joined Amazon Prime too. I hadn't - but anybody who opted for " next day delivery" did - often unknowingly.

Amazon Prime was an extra service that guaranteed next day delivery for £49 a year subscription. Then they bought a film and TV streaming company for 200 million and added the service to Prime so their valued customers could use it, and hiked the price up by 60% (in the UK). They did send an email to say they'd done it but there is no opt out, if you want quick delivery but not the streaming service, tough! (So the customer is not always right in this case.) Then to recruit more customers they had this idea of them clicking on a seemingly unrelated button (next day delivery) and also a free trial with no notification when its over. Another problem is that there is no sign you are a prime member on your Amazon account page, you need to go to "account settings" to find out.

[sandy14]

All this Socratic questioning has got me thinking way beyond the reasoning that led to a one man boycott

You are not the only one who is boycotting Amazon. Like you my friends and I are looking for alternatives to the services Amazon provide.

[Iain Sparrow]

So I'll do a little self-examination as Ian requested above. I'm wearing:

A pair of Levi's. Made in Mexico
A Columbia Sportswear T-shirt. Made in Vietnam
A pair of Clarks shoes. Made in China
A ball cap with a food co op logo on it (Down To Earth, Eugene, Oregon). Made in China
^ there's some irony, eh?
I don't like underwear, so I'm going commando (TMI?). Made by mom and dad
I'm sitting on a chair that I made from the wood of an oak tree that fell over in my yard. Yay! But I probably use some tools that were made in China. Boo!
And I'm typing this on an iPad. Made in China

So, sweatshop-sweatshop-sweatshop-sweatshop...holy crap! But Amazon didn't have anything to do with any of that stuff.


... and so it goes, we're all unwitting accomplices to Amazon's less than ethical business practices, even when we're not buying books or whatever from Amazon.
Audible.com, where I get most of my books (audiobooks), is also owned by Amazon.
And this time of year, I don't wear underwear either.:)

[prendrelemick]

All this Socratic questioning has got me thinking way beyond the reasoning that led to a one man boycott

You are not the only one who is boycotting Amazon. Like you my friends and I are looking for alternatives to the services Amazon provide.

Let us know how it goes.

[kev67]

I've just checked to make sure I hadn't accidently joined Amazon Prime too. I hadn't - but anybody who opted for " next day delivery" did - often unknowingly.

Amazon Prime was an extra service that guaranteed next day delivery for £49 a year subscription. Then they bought a film and TV streaming company for 200 million and added the service to Prime so their valued customers could use it, and hiked the price up by 60% (in the UK). They did send an email to say they'd done it but there is no opt out, if you want quick delivery but not the streaming service, tough! (So the customer is not always right in this case.) Then to recruit more customers they had this idea of them clicking on a seemingly unrelated button (next day delivery) and also a free trial with no notification when its over. Another problem is that there is no sign you are a prime member on your Amazon account page, you need to go to "account settings" to find out.

I have never trusted that Amazon Prime. It always smelt fishy. I have often wondered what the deal was with all the other vendors who sell via Amazon, often at cheaper prices.

My mother told me she will not buy from Amazon any more. I assumed Amazon were one of those tax-dodging multinationals, but was not aware they were guilty of anything particularly evil. The problem with not using them for me is that they sell obscure books that are difficult to get hold of otherwise.

[Sancho]

Mick, looks like what started as a symbolic gesture has turned into a movement.
So this tune popped into my head:

Here's what we gotta do:


Walk into the shrink wherever you are, just walk in, say, "Shrink, . . . you
Can get anything you want at Alice's Restaurant", and walk out.

You know, if one person, just one person, does it, they may think he's
Really sick and they won't take him.

And if two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both faggots and
They won't take either of them.

And if three people do it! Can you imagine three people walkin' in, singin'
A bar of "Alice's Restaurant" and walkin' out? They may think it's an
Organization!

Can you imagine fifty people a day? I said FIFTY people a day . . .
Walkin' in, singin' a bar of "Alice's Restaurant" and walkin' out? Friends,
They may think it's a MOVEMENT, and that's what it is: THE ALICE'S
RESTAURANT ANTI-MASSACREE MOVEMENT! . . . and all you gotta do to join is to
Sing it the next time it comes around on the guitar

With feelin'

You can get anything you want at Alice's restaurant
You can get anything you want at Alice's restaurant
Walk right in, it's around the back
Just a half a mile from the railroad track
You can get anything you want at Alice's restaurant


http://youtu.be/m57gzA2JCcM
Alice's Restaurant, Arlo Guthrie

[Emil Miller]

The key words to this discussion are 'The Guardian' which, for those who do not know, is a left-wing British newspaper that is managed as a trust and therefore exempt from tax regulations applicable to other newspapers.
I don't disagree with their report on the working conditions at Amazon, but merely with their reason for mentioning it ,because the raison d'etre of the Guardian is to highlight potential grievances in society in line with their overall left-wing outlook.
I have no problem with Amazon, who advertise my books on their website, although I never buy books from them: preferring to buy them from a bookstore offering the immutable tactile response from printed page to reader.

[YesNo]

The key words to this discussion are 'The Guardian' which, for those who do not know, is a left-wing British newspaper that is managed as a trust and therefore exempt from tax regulations applicable to other newspapers.

Ah! So they don't pay taxes either.

[Sancho]

Haha

I am apoplectic! I'm going to boycott The Guardian from here on out.

[prendrelemick]

Mick, looks like what started as a symbolic gesture has turned into a movement.
So this tune popped into my head:

Here's what we gotta do:




http://youtu.be/m57gzA2JCcM
Alice's Restaurant, Arlo Guthrie

I shall have an iconic Tshirt made with me looking far-seeing and determined on the front and "I'M APOPLETIC! written in large letters. Others could then have NO! I'M APOPLECTIC! on theirs.

Now, what's the most efficient way to sell and distribute them...

[prendrelemick]

The key words to this discussion are 'The Guardian' which, for those who do not know, is a left-wing British newspaper that is managed as a trust and therefore exempt from tax regulations applicable to other newspapers.
I don't disagree with their report on the working conditions at Amazon, but merely with their reason for mentioning it ,because the raison d'etre of the Guardian is to highlight potential grievances in society in line with their overall left-wing outlook.
I have no problem with Amazon, who advertise my books on their website, although I never buy books from them: preferring to buy them from a bookstore offering the immutable tactile response from printed page to reader.

Every news outlet has an editorial agenda. I get annoyed because I do pay my taxes and so am subsdising those who don't. Poor people? well ok - there but for the grace of God go I and all that - But the very wealthy?

Even our glorious brylcreamed leader has his family wealth tucked away off shore, and so does nearly all of the cabinet - so don't expect much action on tax loopholes just yet.

[Sancho]

I shall have an iconic Tshirt made with me looking far-seeing and determined on the front and "I'M APOPLETIC! written in large letters. Others could then have NO! I'M APOPLECTIC! on theirs.

Now, what's the most efficient way to sell and distribute them...

Sign me up. I'll buy one.

And, you know, Amazon.com has pretty efficient distribution system.

[YesNo]

The only tax issue that I am aware of that Amazon has had is whether or not it must collect sales or use tax from its customers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_tax Apparently, it has been losing that battle.

Regarding income tax, Amazon isn't profitable with a negative earnings per share so I don't expect it to have any income taxes to pay. This part worries me. If Amazon can't make a profit will it survive? If it doesn't survive what happens to all those notes and highlights that I made in its ebooks stored on its cloud? Not that I make all that many notes nor ever go back and look at them again. What happens to all those ebooks?

Of course, if I bought the physical books, I would have to store them which is a nuisance although I still have wall space in the basement for shelves.

[Ecurb]

As I understand it (which is not very well) Amazon doesn't make a profit because it throws all the money it makes into expansion. It's one of the fastest growing companies in the world (despite having never made a profit).

One thing about sweat shops: I sometimes wonder who needs his job more, the First World worker making $15 an hour, or the Third World worker making $1 and hour. We may want to punish the companies that abuse their workers, but surely by doing so we might punish the workers as well. This is a slightly different issue than "buy American", which seems overly nationalistic to me. Why should I give money to (relatively) rich Americans instead of poor Thailanders?

[Sancho]

Well, sure, I suppose, so long as they don't have an eight-year-old child chained to T-shirt making machine for 16 hours a day.

But then again, when countries industrialize, they exploit their workers. England did it. We did it. Everybody does it. That's how it's done. So we did it to ourselves, but the question is: do we do it to somebody else? Or condone it?

It is a fertile environment for the creation of literature, though.

[prendrelemick]

Well, I use them occasionally also, mtpspur, but I am trying not to turn a completely blind eye to the sordidness of their business practices.

And then there's this, because it does affect all of us:

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/06/no_one_is_making_them_stop_why_corporations_outsou rce_catastrophe_and_workers_pay_the_price/

For a bit of historical context from an American perspective, click the link that gimissung posted many pages ago.


That stuff from Socr - I mean Sancho quoting George III was paraphrasing Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations" that had come out a couple of years earlier . The central theme of that book was indeed freedom = industriousness, and greed is good because it benefits all. But he warned against business conglomerates "cabals" as he called them because they were essentially anti free-trade . Even worse (he said) is when Government and big business become too close, forming their own cabal . Then free trade is severely damaged.

I reckon companies that become " too big to bust" are not good for the fair exchange of goods and services because they use their power to control markets - As Adam Smith warned

[Dreamwoven]

There is even a Wikipedia item on Too big to fail: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Too_big_to_fail

[Clopin]

As I understand it (which is not very well) Amazon doesn't make a profit because it throws all the money it makes into expansion. It's one of the fastest growing companies in the world (despite having never made a profit).

One thing about sweat shops: I sometimes wonder who needs his job more, the First World worker making $15 an hour, or the Third World worker making $1 and hour. We may want to punish the companies that abuse their workers, but surely by doing so we might punish the workers as well. This is a slightly different issue than "buy American", which seems overly nationalistic to me. Why should I give money to (relatively) rich Americans instead of poor Thailanders?

Because you care about improving your own community and culture, and securing the best possible future for your own offspring (I know you don't think like that, I'm just suggesting a reason for why Americans may prefer to buy American goods; humans being fundamentally quite tribal.). The Thai people can sort out Thailand (is how I feel at any rate).

You're right though that often sweatshop workers aren't as exploited as you might think. Given the choice between, say, starving, prostitution, or sweatshop labour I think many people will be glad that the third option even exists.

[Clopin]

For a bit of historical context from an American perspective, click the link that gimissung posted many pages ago.


That stuff from Socr - I mean Sancho quoting George III was paraphrasing Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations" that had come out a couple of years earlier . The central theme of that book was indeed freedom = industriousness and greed is good because it benefits all. But he warned against business conglomerates "cabals" as he called them because they were essentially anti free-trade . Even worse (he said) is when Government and big business become too close, forming their own cabal . Then free trade is severely damaged.

I reckon companies that become " too big to bust" are not good for the fair exchange of goods and services because they use their power to control markets - As Adam Smith warned

Smiths invisible hand does work both ways though as Iain's example demonstrated earlier. I'm pretty confident that nobody participating in this discussion would feel comfortable with contracting an Asian child to work long hours under inhumane conditions in your basement for basic starvation wages in order to manufacture your computer and clothing; right? But essentially everyone is guilty of just that. Attitudes change and are changing though, free market capitalism has outlived child labour (in the West at least) and can probably handle outsourcing and sweatshop labour as well. What would help is if people had a bit more money as nowadays the average 'middle class' family is probably on a razor budget and actually can't afford to buy from stores other than Wall-Mart, etc.

[prendrelemick]

Two excellent posts there clopin .^That is exactly the point I was about to make. You never find freedom where you find poverty.

[YesNo]

I was thinking about the protests against fracking projects as the price of oil started to go down. The protests weren't able to stop the projects although they may have had some benefits protecting the environment, but the low price of oil may well bankrupt those companies relying on debt to pursue the projects.

Perhaps something similar will resolve the sweatshop problem. All we need is a good, hard recession.

[Ecurb]

Because you care about improving your own community and culture, and securing the best possible future for your own offspring (I know you don't think like that, I'm just suggesting a reason for why Americans may prefer to buy American goods; humans being fundamentally quite tribal.). The Thai people can sort out Thailand (is how I feel at any rate).

You're right though that often sweatshop workers aren't as exploited as you might think. Given the choice between, say, starving, prostitution, or sweatshop labour I think many people will be glad that the third option even exists.

Actually, I do "think like that". However, community and culture aren't always directly correlated with political status. My community and culture might be more closely associated with Vancouver, B.C. than with Guam or Florida. Price and quality being equal, I'd gladly buy from my friends and neighbors rather than strangers, but "American" seems a large and nebulous neighborhood (or "tribe", if you prefer). If we're going to "let the Thai people sort out Thailand", then we won't boycott goods made there (although we might decide to buy from Joe Blow down the street, in order to help a neighbor). Also, I'm not sure boycotting actually makes life better for anyone: it might hurt the Thais (who need the work) and the Americans (who benefit from from buying goods cheaply). Of course it might also improve working conditions in Thailand. I'm not sure.

Of course, this is different from boycotting Amazon because they don't pay taxes. One problem with modern capitalism is that the hidden costs of doing business (infrastructure) are shared by the taxpayers, and that provides unfair advantages to those who don't pay.

[Clopin]

It's not about boycotting anything, but you suggested earlier that in doing business you might prefer (or hypothetically it might be preferred by someone) to spend your money where it may be more sorely needed. Sure America is a big tribe, but a lot of people still think along those lines and would rather buy American products if possible.

I never said boycotting sweatshop labour would help anyone. It might not, I agree.

[mortalterror]

Most of the books I want are fairly rare and either aren't carried in a Barnes and Noble or are the devil to find in second hand shops. Meanwhile, Amazon can ship them to my door with a single click.

[Gutted]

As I understand it (which is not very well) Amazon doesn't make a profit because it throws all the money it makes into expansion. It's one of the fastest growing companies in the world (despite having never made a profit).



key point.

[Gutted]

The key words to this discussion are 'The Guardian' which, for those who do not know, is a left-wing British newspaper that is managed as a trust and therefore exempt from tax regulations applicable to other newspapers.
I don't disagree with their report on the working conditions at Amazon, but merely with their reason for mentioning it ,because the raison d'etre of the Guardian is to highlight potential grievances in society in line with their overall left-wing outlook.


Salon made an appearance here as well. Meanwhile, Huffpo and Buzzfeed wait in the reserves.

[Jackson Richardson]

the raison d'etre of the Guardian is to highlight potential grievances in society in line with their overall left-wing outlook.


That's one way of looking at it. Alternatively, the Guardian brings to light some of the unfairness of society which the overwhelmingly right wing British press ignores.

[prendrelemick]

Just seen the latest adverts for Amazon Prime, where next day delivery saves the day in a pleasent heart-warming way.

What it doesn't say is that you will be paying extra for downloading films whether you want to or not, because their focus is not so much on the customer as on destroying Netflix.

[Dreamwoven]

Just seen the latest adverts for Amazon Prime, where next day delivery saves the day in a pleasent heart-warming way.

What it doesn't say is that you will be paying extra for downloading films whether you want to or not, because their focus is not so much on the customer as on destroying Netflix.

I don't follow your argument here. Forgive my ignorance but is there some sort of rivalry between Amazon and Netflix?

[prendrelemick]

key point. The situation in the UK is a little different, (if I have it right). Amazon UK as was, is a huge operation with a turnover of over £4 billion. It pays only around £3 million in corporation tax to the UK Government, claiming all this activity is carried out by a subsidiary branch of their small swiss office.

This is patently not true, but perfectly legal, all that wealth is leaving these shores to be invested elsewhere.

edit. sorry it's Luxembourg

[prendrelemick]

They are rivals to Netflix because they are offering the same thing. It is a brilliant strategy, bundle the film download service with fast delivery service - then prime customers who need the next day delivery, will cancel their Netflix or will never sign with them.

[Dreamwoven]

Learn something new each day...

[North Star]

The situation in the UK is a little different, (if I have it right). Amazon UK as was, is a huge operation with a turnover of over £4 billion. It pays only around £3 million in corporation tax to the UK Government, claiming all this activity is carried out by a subsidiary branch of their small swiss office.

This is patently not true, but perfectly legal, all that wealth is leaving these shores to be invested elsewhere.

edit. sorry it's Luxembourg

There are indeed enormous problems in tax legislation of European countries, but it is foolish to think that international corporations won't or shouldn't utilize the loopholes. A company is designed to make as much money as it can, within the law. Mere boycotting of one such company would probably only result - if it were to have any effect at all, that is - in a displacement of it by another similar company.


Just seen the latest adverts for Amazon Prime, where next day delivery saves the day in a pleasent heart-warming way.

What it doesn't say is that you will be paying extra for downloading films whether you want to or not, because their focus is not so much on the customer as on destroying Netflix.

So it doesn't say "Watch unlimited movies and TV shows with Prime Video" here? http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00DBYBNEE/ref=nav_prime_try_btn
Also, saying "you will be paying extra for downloading films whether you want or not" as if that is somehow robbing the customers is as absurd as complaining that people who don't need 4WD still pay for it if they buy e.g. an SUV with 4WD, ergo those SUV dealers are evil.
You can always just pay for faster delivery when making purchases at Amazon so there is no real reason for a 'no-frills' version of Prime to exist.

I suppose it's an Anglo-Saxon thing that instead of legislation and labor unions, people want the capitalists to be the force protecting the middle classes and poor, and making sure that they pay as much money in tax as the government will accept from them. . .

[prendrelemick]

Surely If you want a car, but don't need a 4wd you don't have to pay for one. That's my point.

In the UK, people were selecting fast delivery and finding they had unwittingly signed up to Prime.

There are some legal shenenigans on going with the tax thing, has been for years.

That's the problem. If they dodge taxes and pay low wages their rivals are forced to do the same or be wiped out.

I just find their whole ethos distasteful and what else can I do but take my buisness elsewhere.

[North Star]

Surely If you want a car, but don't need a 4wd you don't have to pay for one. That's my point.

In the UK, people were selecting fast delivery and finding they had unwittingly signed up to Prime.
That is a different matter, certainly, if Amazon signed customers for Prime if they selected the faster delivery option. And I didn't write 'car', I wrote 'SUV'. Granted, there are people who want an SUV but don't need 4WD.


There are some legal shenenigans on going with the tax thing, has been for years.

That's the problem. If they dodge taxes and pay low wages their rivals are forced to do the same or be wiped out.

I just find their whole ethos distasteful and what else can I do but take my buisness elsewhere.
My whole point was that the problem is not Amazon, but the system that allows dodging taxes and paying low wages. Amazon is not forcing others to do it. If Amazon did not do it, some other business would, and they would be what we know by the name Amazon.

[PeachSodaLover]

I buy from Abebooks. Its a very good site.

[Gutted]

I buy from Abebooks. Its a very good site.

owned by amazon :O

[Jackson Richardson]

But at least Abebooks also supports small secondhand bookshops.