Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by john61 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

john61

Reasons not to buy from amazon:

https://stallman.org/amazon.html

View on HN

This is ridiculous. "Reasons you shouldn't buy products from Amazon:"

- They sell e-books which are bad inherently

- They don't pay taxes everywhere

That's 80% of the list.

You should have noted that this list was for people who avoid stuff like Ubuntu for not being F/OSS enough, because this list is clearly intended for the hardcore anti-capitalist pro-freedom types.

They don't pay taxes everywhere

They're paying it in more jurisdictions than ever and the infrastructure they're setting up to support paying taxes in every jurisdiction will be sold as a service to other merchants. This will enable the technical ability for states and municipalities to finally collect revenue on Internet sales universally.

They pay taxes where they're required to. In 1992, the Supreme Court ruled in Quill Corp. v. North Dakota that states cannot compel out-of-state retailers to collect taxes without the company having a physical presence in the state.

We all know it's up to the consumer to pay the sales tax on their tax filings.

You obviously did not read it thoroughly. For example does he not say that e-books are bad per se: https://gnu.org/philosophy/the-danger-of-ebooks.en.html

Missed the domain name, huh?

Stallman is a terrible spokesperson for anything, but I'd like to think that "enforce restrictive DRM" and "systematically mistreat their hardest-working employees" are pretty legit points.

tl;dr because it's not a commune

I specifically find the argument funny that amazon "steals" from me because it doesn't pay "enough" taxes, even though they pass their savings to me more directly than the state ever will

You are confusing state redistribution of income and wealth with competitive offers. If the state was only to satisfy particular interests then you would have clientelism.

In the sufficiently left mind, you are unworthy to spend your own money, the state will spend them better; thus, passing savings to you is bad for you.

  The existence of the state is inseparable from the existence of slavery. 

  -- Marx

(who apparently was not "sufficiently left" - or maybe you're just ignorant of what the Left defends. Protip: the Democrats are not "left" by any reasonable standard)

Better tip - 99% of America would without hesitation agree with a statement like "The Democrat party is the main left-wing party in America". (Similar with 'right' and 'Republican').

Would the terms "left" and "right" have the same meaning in all parts of the world at all points in history? Of course not. But when people make a statement without context, you can assume they mean the terms as the majority of their contemporaries use them.

I'm not in America, I'm on Hacker News, which despite being composed mostly of Americans, is its own community with its own context. I don't see why we should accept the American's ignorant definition of Left any more than we accept their definition of 'hacking'.

Left and right are relative to where you are standing. I wouldn't call America's definition of left ignorant, as it is clearly left of center for America.

I disagree with the idea that wherever the majority lies it's automatically the center.

Hacker News, if anything, is probably to the right of most Americans, due to the number of libertarians and entrepreneurs.

Also, referring to "the Left" as if it were a single thing qualifies you as the "ignorant" one. Even back when the USSR existed, there were differences of opinion. You can look up Marshall Tito and the differences of opinion between Mao and Stalin if you're curious.

I'm not referring to the Left as if it were a single thing, on the contrary. It's exactly because it combines hundreds of different schools of thought that saying that the "sufficiently left" support the state is ignorant. But they're still all part of the Left.

Where I live, we have a Communist Party (Stalinist) and a Left Bloc party (merger of Trotskyist and Marxist factions) both in Parliament. They still call themselves part of the Left, even though they effectively refuse to do any kind of coalition.

This is not to mention the smaller parties and movements, such as the Reorganizing Movement of the Proletarian Party (MRPP) and, of course, the various Anarchist groups.

Hacker News, if anything, is probably to the right of most Americans, due to the number of libertarians and entrepreneurs.

Just one more reason for them to be aware of ignorant labeling. Or do Libertarians enjoy being considered fascists?

Actually, a lot of that 99% would respond "it's called the Democratic Party".

'This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: "We are told that Communism is already seen at the horizon, when the state will wither away." Then, what is a horizon?”

We’re answering: “Horizon is an imaginary line which moves away each time you approach it.”'

Oh they are passing on most of the tax for now, but what will happen when they really dominate? I saw what happened to Home Depot. They concored the market on prices. Competition folded. They raised their prices. It's now just an expensive big store with unhappy help.

except if you buy cree light bulbs :) $8[1] vs. $19[2]

[1] http://www.homedepot.com/p/Cree-9-5-Watt-60W-Soft-White-Dimm... [2] http://www.amazon.com/Cree-9-5-Watt-White-2700K-Light/dp/B00...

So we should punish successful companies that provide services people want through taxes because they might become too powerful? Increase the incentive for the company to influence politics? Feed the entity that has no competition by definition?

Pick any big company, certainly including all the big tech companies, any company with a brand you've heard of, and any government, and I could put together a dozen compelling "reasons" not to do business with them.

You need to decide whether a company offends your values on balance. Both as a customer of Amazon and as a supplier (author/publisher), I've found them better then average to deal with.

How are they as an employer? No personal experience, but better than WalMart and FoxConn, I'm sure.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com