This is an amazing article for me who has little perspective on the relevant issues. I now live in a small village satellite of a large city, and see faint signs of a once thriving local community which seems to have disappeared decades ago.
Does anyone have some counterpoint to what is discussed?
There’s no reason to think locally owned downtown shops will be competitive with Amazon unless they are so high-end as to be a destination shopping experience.
I'd restate that a bit more broadly because they have to offer something some advantage over Amazon which enough people want. If you're dealing with things which don't ship well, for example, that might work on its own — I don't hear of many people buying building supplies online for that reason even if they ruthlessly shop around for the best deals on tools.
Since volume tends to rule in the commodity space I think that usually means finding a way not to be a commodity. Specialty bookstores are an example because some are doing quite well because they have top-notch staffing; others followed Barnes & Nobles’ attempts to use cheaper staffing and have largely failed. I don't know about other speciality clothing stores but the places selling hiking, biking, etc. gear seem to be doing well around here because people like advice & the ability to try something on before dropping a fairly large amount of cash.
This is the same logic I've heard when 'selling' malls to the local community.
The ruthless answer is, 'There will always be someone cheaper and better than you. Just give it time.' Do not forget that capitalism attempts to seek the bottom at all times.
Right now, Aliexpress is cheaper than Amazon by a long shot. Ebay is cheaper on certain goods. Other area-specific upstarts are challenging Amazon in their own ways. And Amazon has significant problems with counterfeits everywhere in their supply chain due to gross mismanagement.
I would much rather go to a local business, and pay a bit more, than to deal with some of the online businesses. But the deal city and state governments make is to value the $BigCo, and not the small business.
More and more Amazon Distribution centers are being opened up. I know of 2 offhand from my location within an hour each direction. I don't know exactly how big the facilities are, but I do know they're massive.
I also know that they 'process' workers horrendously. Timed bathroom breaks, quick firing over trivial matters. In essence, they make walmart look like a saint with regards to employer practices.
Worse yet, the communities fight crazily over getting that Amazon warehouse. 10 year tax abatements are only the beginning of the 'bargains' made on the taxpayers' backs. Donated land is another gimmie, as is subsidy of city-related services. All this is on the hopes that workers will pay tax. And it amounts to a bad deal for everyone, well, except for Amazon.
Oh sure it's stupid to give Amazon incentives for warehouse locations. (If only there were a higher-level entity that could govern the short-sighted actions of municipalities so that they could coexist in a more prosperous state...) The point is that the warehouses they're getting aren't white elephants like old malls are. A warehouse doesn't need a huge utilities build-out, and it doesn't require a valuable location. Warehouses will always be needed, and as long as Amazon owns them they'll have up-to-date tech.
But what the Walmarts and warehouses and these kinds of businesses do, is destroy the local businesses. And when the walmarts shutter or move away, or when the factories close, what are we left with?
We're left with few local businesses, higher unemployment, and a dying community.
Does anyone have some counterpoint to what is discussed?