Small businesses are important for a whole host of intangible reasons.

They provide dignified employment (as opposed to invisible work in a warehouse), they encourage entrepreneurship, they increase the tax base of a locality (by ensuring money stays within a local economy), and they contribute to local culture, community and character.

Amazon killing small businesses has sucked even more of the life force out of small towns, and that’s sad because said towns were already shellacked by the death of manufacturing.

It’s hard to argue with Amazon’s excellent customer experience, but the externalities involved are nontrivial and IMO outweigh the benefits.

For every small business that treats their employees well, there is another hiring and abusing people with limited options such as undocumented immigrants and felons.

I would also claim that keeping taxes in the local economy, while a very worthy goal, does not require the presence of small business. Big business can be made to support local community and culture. Just because the Walmart headquarters are outside of my small town, doesn't mean they don't have to pay a percentage of their earnings from the local warehouse to that community.

Also, minor grammar nit, you may have meant to use "shell-shocked" instead of "shellacked", but shell-shocked wouldn't fit the context you're going for either.

"shellacked" means "physically beaten", though it's usually used metaphorically.

I find all your reasons are either fluff, or just saying that small businesses are good for their owners. Economic efficiency is net positive, and people who aren’t small business owners benefit a lot from online, efficient shopping. If some segment of society needs charity, they need to convince either the gov or nonprofits to give them some money, not rent-seek on other people.

this is mistaken: you need multiple small businesses because competition trumps everything. competition results in lower prices, better customer service. to amazon, though they've excellent customer support or used - you're just another customer.

The small businesses you say were exploitative is because they were the only shot in town. i.e in a monopolistic position.

multiple small businesses result in a robust economy. if one goes bust there's plenty to keep providing a similar service. MSB's enable other auxiliary business look at Japan | German's economy for an example - mutliple suppliers etc. more employment. Guess the jobs the masses work at amazon - drivers, warehouse workers.

What amazon, provides could've been easily provided by a standardized api connecting different small merchants. some industries already do this - a flower shop needs roses, it can easily contact another flower shop to get roses to it's customers. everyone wins.

netflix yeah was a net positive. it's content so end of day, it was going to be aggregated in Ben Thompson's terms.

Uber is good for me as a consumer. But is it good for the driver, for the environment. if the US had robust public transportation, Uber wouldn't be necessary.

> The small businesses I was forced to use previously were inefficient, slow, overcharging, had terrible customer service, exploited employees, etc.

Amazon is substantially worse on most (if not all) of those metrics.