Whether It Is Or Isn't Taking Over Isn't The Really Pertinent Question

The real question is twofold: First, why you would want anyone player, in what used to be a very broad competitive market, to be in total control; whether it provides cheap prices now or not. And secondly, what does that say about a economic operating system whose only main operating criteria now seems to be: whoever can win should win; no matter what the collateral damage might be (because "disruption" looks great when the numbers focused on represent "success" so disconnected from true costs, and basic social needs).

But this has always been the case when too much power gets placed in too few hands. And it always amazes me how little criticism comes through in the reporting of how well such new found giants are doing. All despite the fact that thousands upon thousands of retail jobs are disappearing as I write this, leaving folks not only with fewer avenues with which to purchase something with, but with diminished prospects of employment to purchase even goods at a cheaper price.

Is Amazon Taking Over the World? These Charts Will Give You a Hint

See Also:

PRIME RESISTER

Why I'm Never Signing Up For Amazon Prime

12 diggs The Verge Internet

It’s a valuable service and one that returns more value than its $99 annual cost, I’m not disputing that at all. But Prime has a lot of undesirable effects too, and those are the things I wish to avoid.