Amazon != Bezos, and Amazon's got obligations to its shareholders.

Bezos did put in the hard work and got results, so he can be smug.

People who will never amount to anything will of course claim it was just luck.

>> For the crime of the multitude of anticompetitive and shady behaviors that Amazon has engaged in, including using their position as a marketplace to leverage their suppliers out of business[1], supply chain fraud by commingling[2], workers rights abuses[3].

> Amazon != Bezos, and Amazon's got obligations to its shareholders.

That's a distinction without a difference. Bezos was the CEO and largest shareholder. The shareholders weren't going to fire him if he'd chosen not to have Amazon pursue "anticompetitive and shady behaviors."

By pushing down the people who will never amount to anything Jeff Bezos is not using luck to get ahead he is using power he obtained through prior luck.

Amazon is still Bezos. Ownership and leadership wise just not day to day.

You mean acting like pretty much any other retailer?!

I do. I think that we, as individual consumers and as free persons in a functional society, need to start drawing lines and pushing back on all retailers, Amazon included but not exclusively. That means picking our buying habits better and that means pushing back with laws and regulations that prevent or penalize abuse.

There are two things that have hindered those efforts: )1the race to the bottom is very fast, so by the time one retailer has had abuses exposed every retailer is doing it. 2) Enforcement efforts have been neutered, to the point where the fines are just cost of doing business - and that has it's own complicated history of abuse.