-
Almost a third of Amazon's output is from "other indirect emissions
Right, so ignore the guy profiting from this and blame individuals.
That's punters buying shit and having it delivered, something I would argue is a product of them being the market leader rather than inherent evilness.
You know how amazon became a market leader? By avoiding paying taxes and other costs that retail businesses had to pay just to exist, undercutting any competition and forcing them out of business.
But again, its the individuals fault for all this ...
branwen-
You know how amazon became a market leader? By avoiding paying taxes and other costs that retail businesses had to pay just to exist, undercutting any competition and forcing them out of business.
There's two stories here. The first is how did they get rich selling commoditised stuff. Books then whatever widgets. When they did that, any mail order co. could set up and play by the same rules as Amazon. Plenty of other pure play e-commerce outfits were setting up. Amazon were just better than both the new entrants and the established retail cos. where it mattered; business, tech, fulfilment, customer experience, which risks to take, luck. The combined effect of Amazon and the others put some slow old businesses in trouble. This it turns out was small beer.
The second story is how did they become a market leader in being fucking massive. They took big risks whilst delivering what people wanted; ridiculously good subscription buying services (Prime), a marketplace platform, a media platform that wasn't shit, and then they re-sold the tools they used to deliver their services to other businesses. They pretty much created a market for these. Nobody was really 'retailing' this kind of stuff.
Personally I don't think tax avoidance enabled this. I don't think being stingy with employee pay and conditions enabled this. I think both of those are a symptom of how big they are now. It's undeniable that they do it, but I don't think you can claim their success is because of it.
tl;dr they were dominating where it mattered before they were 'evil'.
Howard
Thanks. I agree that it's important to look at the bigger picture. But I don't think some of the comparisons made by this (and other ctrl+c variations) are especially useful - e.g. to countries. There are something like 40 countries that don't even emit 1mt while the US, EU and China make up over half the annual contribution.
What do those stats actually tell us?
Shocker, riches places buy the most shit and the largest manufacturers make the most shit.
Almost a third of Amazon's output is from "other indirect emissions (e.g., third-party transportation, packaging, upstream energy related)". That's punters buying shit and having it delivered, something I would argue is a product of them being the market leader rather than inherent evilness.
Personally I think 8% of your wealth is a big number.
I'd never say that there wasn't more to do, or that there isn't a PR angle (and apparently an HR one too). But I don't think it is as easy to dismiss as some of his other "acts of philanthropy", which are essentially laughable.