Bernie and Trump are wrong on Amazon

[TexasTowelie]

135. For the sake of brevity, I can only address some of your points.

They source a shit load from china or other nations with cheap labor, affecting locally made products...they do what is technically illegal but hard to prove, and price competitors out of the market because they can simply take a loss for an extended period of time, and once they have a bigger share of the market they can re-stabilize their prices.

Yes, companies are going to find the least expensive way to produce a product so I can get a better price myself. It's called the "economies of scale" and it is good business sense. It should also be considered that the companies that follow that practice are also consumers--in that case they are wage labor consumers.

...once they are the only real known "trusted" source for something, they can raise their prices to higher than previous market value, assuming people have to buy said goods.

There are limits to that statement. A recent example was when Mylan hiked the price of the Epipen. The manufacturer gouged the consumers so another competitor entered the market because they saw a way to turn a profit. As stated earlier, there may be short term price aberrations but eventually the equilibrium in the market will reestablish itself. It might mean some hassle for the purchasers to get a prescription written for a generic option rather than a brand name, but regulating Walmart or Amazon won't change any of that.

Huge operations need less executives than hundreds of operations that used to exist in their stead.

And that is a bad thing? Personally, I want to pay a manufacturer for the price of materials and labor that go into making and delivering a product rather than provide for the financial security of a bloated executive workforce. Yes, it might mean that wages for some may decline but if the wages were excessive to start off with, then it is another example of equilibrium being met in the marketplace. I also have little sympathy for overpaid execs that are price gougers whether they run a business with no other employees or they run a conglomerate.

As far as people complaining about the prices of non-essential items there is a very simple solution:
Don't buy the product! Is it necessary to get the latest book two days after it has been published at full price or can it wait when the price has been discounted or it can be checked out of the library?

The arguments that you presented about the influence of big business on government is always popular. However, if you are concerned about the loss of high paying executive positions, then you should be equally concerned about the loss of high paying lobbying positions and the negative effect on wages overall if those jobs are lost.

Finally, we can also look back in history to see the failure of government getting involved in the marketplace. Nearly everyone agrees that when Nixon implemented price controls it didn't work. When the price controls were lifted it set off an inflationary spiral. Regulations can also artificially increase the price of products because people will think that since the government intervened the cost of the product is legitimate when it could actually be lowered.

Ultimately, the burden falls to the consumer to decide whether to spend locally, or online. The same also applies as to whether to spend with big companies or a proprietorship. I can understand why some people prefer Amazon, particularly if they live in rural areas, are disabled or have transportation issues. There are some people that benefit from Amazon so why would anyone want to punish those beneficiaries by increasing prices or limiting the options available to them?