Amazon Bows To Pressure To Bring Same-Day Deliveries To Poor Areas (fortune.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Fortune: After pressure from lawmakers, Amazon is revamping its same-day delivery service in response to complaints that it failed to provide service to poor, minority neighborhoods. The retail giant said it would bring its same-day delivery service to all Zip Codes in the 27 cities where its offered, not just in the wealthier areas, according to a Bloomberg report on Friday.

Comments

Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Once again, those poor stupid incompetent minorities are rescued from having to better themselves in any conceivable way, thanks to us heroic progressives who are always around to babysit and control them for their own good.

Re:Perfect

[beelsebob]

Right... I mean, not only should they better themselves, but they should do it without the resources that anyone else has...

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

I knew this was going to spark a tempest in a teapot, but seriously? Availability of same-day delivery from Amazon prevents minorities from having to better themselves? And somebody thinks this is insightful?

Re: Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Volunteering to be a delivery driver? So easy to tell others how to spend their resources.

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, because it's RACIST! /s

SWJ's don't let cold hard facts get in the way. Same day delivery must be offered equally, even if it doesn't make financial sense for Amazon to offer it. When this logic is applied to home loans, it should not have been surprising what the outcome was.

Re:Perfect

[ArmoredDragon]

I don't think it's so much about whether or not they're minorities so much as it's about those particular areas having very low demand for services that cost more, thus they can't take advantage of economies of scale.

Case in point, I have a friend who lives all the way across the country in Boca Raton who often asks me to order shit for him via amazon prime and he pays me back with venmo. Boca Raton is neither poor nor primarily minority, and in fact he lives in a somewhat upscale area in particular. Yet, Amazon won't do same day service where he lives where they do offer same day delivery in every single zip code I've lived in in the Phoenix area.

As somewhat of an off tangent matter, he's Persian, which means that if he ever fills out a typical questionnaire asking about race/ethnicity in the US, the closest option he can pick to his ethnicity is either caucasian or white, even though neither precisely fit. You may as well call a Native American an Asian at that rate.

Re:Perfect

[jedidiah]

Not engaging in blatant racial discrimination is nothing like intentionally writing bad loans because you have no skin in the game.

Re:Perfect

[SuricouRaven]

This is more accidental, racial discrimination. Amazon is discriminating upon something other than race (average income of a residential area) but which happens to have a correlation with race, and thus can give the appearance of racial discrimination. But that is not their intention.

There's a popular conspiracy theory that says Planned Parenthood is secretly carrying out a eugenics program. The theory survives for much the same reason: Planned Parenthood does try to focus resources on low-income communities, and low income communities in the US do tend to be black communities, so it gives the impression of an attempt to contracept or abort an ethnic minority out of existence. The real reason has nothing to do with race: Low-income communities just need the service more. That unplanned pregnancy might be a surprise blessing to a middle-class couple, but when you're already struggling to pay the rent and put food on the table then hard decisions must be made.

Re:Perfect

[ShanghaiBill]

It is silly that the politicians prioritized this as a way to "help the poor". Here is a handy checklist to help them prioritize better:

Priorities for helping the poor:
1. Jobs
2. Decent education
3. Affordable housing
4. Unleaded drinking water

Not a priority:
1. Expensive same-day delivery for junk that they don't need and can't afford.

Re: Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Amazon carries a bunch of stuff. Much of which is expensive. And which people don't truly need.

However, they also carry a variety of essentials, things people truly do need. Hygeine products, home cleaning and maintenance products, clothes, school supplies, etc. Often at prices lower than one might find at a brick and mortar school.

Having been poor at one point, and working a job that required 12-18 hour shifts, 4-7 days per week... The ability to have such essentials delivered to me at a low cost in a rapid fashion would quite honestly have improved my quality of life considerably.

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

"As somewhat of an off tangent matter, he's Persian, which means that if he ever fills out a typical questionnaire asking about race/ethnicity in the US, the closest option he can pick to his ethnicity is either caucasian or white, even though neither precisely fit. You may as well call a Native American an Asian at that rate."

The ridiculous thing is that race/ethnicity matters in the first place. It should be irrelevant. We are all people.

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Persians are Caucasian and Native Americans descent from Mongoloids who left Asia a long time ago, so why would you call them Asian?

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe he is just to racist to admit that people from Iran are Caucasian too.

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea, in Trump's world, the Caucasus mountains are part of Yellowstone....

Re:Perfect

[AmiMoJo]

It doesn't make financial sense to provide sewage or clean water to some areas. It doesn't make financial sense to provide them with telephone service either. In fact, you have to wonder why the government wastes money maintaining the roads in those areas, I mean there are roads in more populated areas that need fixing and would benefit many more people.

Obviously this is a meritocracy though, so if these disadvantages have any negative effect on people's lives, well it's their own fault for not trying hard enough.

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, little Johnny became a gangster and got caught selling crack only because he has been denied access to same day delivery by the privileged classes.

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

No, but let me also add that at that rate you can call Native Americans Mongoloids and our Persian friends Asian.

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Will be, unlike bernies world, where they will just sit on the outskirts of freedom, like Puerto Rico. Too lazy to work and too proud to beg. Or in Hillary's world, where you are related to everyone. Mostly because bill got there first.

Re:Perfect

[Mr D from 63]

Not engaging in blatant racial discrimination is nothing like intentionally writing bad loans because you have no skin in the game.

Banks had no skin in the game because the government took all the risk. They did this purposely to enable the writing of mortgages to low income people who otherwise might not be able to qualify. At the time, banks were being charged with racism for not qualifying more low income people. So it was a political move by the government in the name of helping the poor. It was motivated by serving the poor, just as is the pressure on Amazon to serve the poor.

Now, if you want to read racism into that, if you view the world through the lens of race, you can.

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

when you're already struggling to pay the rent and put food on the table then hard decisions must be made.

Yeah, like NOT FUCKING EVERYONE .....

Pregnancy is never a surprise...you have to do something first....

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Banks had no skin in the game because the government took all the risk. They did this purposely to enable the writing of mortgages to low income people who otherwise might not be able to qualify. At the time, banks were being charged with racism for not qualifying more low income people. So it was a political move by the government in the name of helping the poor. It was motivated by serving the poor, just as is the pressure on Amazon to serve the poor.

Now, if you want to read racism into that, if you view the world through the lens of race, you can.

Nope. Didn't happen that way. The CRA loans had lower defaults than the average. Far more of the foreclosures which the banks shoddily did (yes, look up the real story of the Foreclosure Criris) were above the cut-off lines for poor and minority loans that were protected. Many foreclosures included uncovered commercial loans. But the biggest problem? Outright fraud at the banks. Now how did that happen? How does telling bankers to serve minorities force them to lie in sworn affidavits?

No dude, if you want to do something, recognize the bigotry in blaming poor and minorities in order for executives at financial companies to avoid being considered responsible for their own selfish behavior that lead to a widespread crisis.

The only problem? They didn't get shot in a gun fight so people like you didn't even realize they were criminals. Heck, apparently nobody's going to jail, so you can't even watch a perp walk.

 

Re: Perfect

[cyber-vandal]

I bet if righties looked back at the history of their respective countries they'd see a lot of formerly poor people helped out by being given a helping hand, whether by government our charity or just by an employee who wasn't a robber baron.

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Iran is in Asia, so why wouldn't that be correct? Moreover, why does one have to fill in "race" or ethnicity in the first place? How is that ever relevant in a questionnaire?

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Once again, those poor stupid incompetent minorities are rescued from having to better themselves in any conceivable way, thanks to us heroic progressives who are always around to babysit and control them for their own good.

As long as they continue to vote democrat, they won't better themselves. Because that is the cause of, and the goal of, having them there... that vote.

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think it's so much about whether or not they're minorities so much as it's about those particular areas having very low demand for services that cost more, thus they can't take advantage of economies of scale.

That's exactly what they'll tell you, because they can't admit that "These people are icky minorities, so we don't want to serve them" because that would clearly get them in trouble.

Unfortunately for them, the law has already anticipated the existence of being racist and discriminatory while using some superficially plausible excuse, so it provides for consideration of actions having the EFFECT of being racist even without demonstrated intent.

Case in point, I have a friend who lives all the way across the country in Boca Raton who often asks me to order shit for him via amazon prime and he pays me back with venmo. Boca Raton is neither poor nor primarily minority, and in fact he lives in a somewhat upscale area in particular. Yet, Amazon won't do same day service where he lives where they do offer same day delivery in every single zip code I've lived in in the Phoenix area.

A single example is probably not convincing, we'd need to see the overall pattern in Boca Raton. Or Florida. It is possible for even the most racist of bigots to do something for reasons entirely unrelated to their racism, after all, but still be otherwise discriminatory.

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe Caucasian is too general a term to use to identify anyone, say like Asian...

Re:Perfect

[GoChickenFat]

Right... I mean, not only should they better themselves, but they should do it without the resources that anyone else has...

You're kidding, right? When has "giving" instead of "earning" ever worked? It doesn't matter if its a poor neighborhood that receives excessive tax payer and government attention (free school lunch, no income tax, significantly higher usage of police, fire, and ambulance, neighborhood redevelopment tax credits, Medicare, disability, planned parenthood, free cell phones, protection from getting utility cutoff for non-payment, EBT/food stamps, etc) - poor remain poor due to poor decisions, not lack of resources. The same "hand-out" instead of "hand-up" or "tough love" mentality also fails in the affluent households - think of upper middle class parents with lazy, drug addicted adults still jobless and living at home where the parents think continually giving them things actually helps their kids better themselves - it's never worked.

Re:Perfect

[GoChickenFat]

As somewhat of an off tangent matter, he's Persian, which means that if he ever fills out a typical questionnaire asking about race/ethnicity in the US, the closest option he can pick to his ethnicity is either caucasian or white, even though neither precisely fit. You may as well call a Native American an Asian at that rate.

News flash, most people don't get to pick their ethnicity. Caucasian is a race, not an ethnicity. Hispanic ethnicity is made up of a lot of people of the Caucasian race, etc. The whole ethnicity/race thing has been completely blurred by the 70's and 80's PC introduction of "African American" which is not a race and certainly confusing to people who actually come from Africa that could be of Negroid (black), Mongoloid (Asian) or Caucasian (white) race. When does "American" become and ethnicity anyway if we're all supposed to be equal in the end.

Re:Perfect

[GoChickenFat]

There's a popular conspiracy theory that says Planned Parenthood is secretly carrying out a eugenics program. The theory survives for much the same reason: Planned Parenthood does try to focus resources on low-income communities, and low income communities in the US do tend to be black communities, so it gives the impression of an attempt to contracept or abort an ethnic minority out of existence.

Maybe that theory comes from the founder of Planned Parenthood - Margaret Sanger -

from Wikipedia "After World War I, Sanger increasingly appealed to the societal need to limit births by those least able to afford children. The affluent and educated already limited their child-bearing, while the poor and ignorant lacked access to contraception and information about birth-control.[98] Here she found an area of overlap with eugenicists.[98] She believed that they both sought to "assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit." They differed in that "eugenists imply or insist that a woman's first duty is to the state; we contend that her duty to herself is her duty to the state."[99] Sanger was a proponent of negative eugenics, which aims to improve human hereditary traits through social intervention by reducing the reproduction of those who were considered unfit.[100] In "The Morality of Birth Control," a 1921 speech, she divided society into three groups: the "educated and informed" class that regulated the size of their families, the "intelligent and responsible" who desired to control their families in spite of lacking the means or the knowledge, and the "irresponsible and reckless people" whose religious scruples "prevent their exercising control over their numbers." Sanger concludes, "There is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped"

Re:Perfect

[SuricouRaven]

That's certainly a part of the theory - though even the quote you give there makes no reference to race (in the ethnic sense). There's only one from her that does speak of racial targeting, and that was her expressing concern that the black community might be distrustful of a white-run contraception campaign and seeking the support of black leaders. It wouldn't matter anyway - an organisation is not bound to enforce the views of a long-dead founder, and her views were not at all out of the mainstream in the 1920s.

Uncomfortable thought: Name any cultural hero prior to around 1940. It's almost certain they would be an intolerable racist by today's standards.

She did target the low-income though - and was entirely open and proud about this, simply regarding those who could not shoulder the financial burden of properly raising and educating a large family as those who most desperately needed the services she promoted.

Re:Perfect

[ArmoredDragon]

The point of that was how ultimately useless those race/ethnicity surveys are.

Re:Perfect

[wbtittle]

It is now truly discriminating to the underprivileged because we are letting people who don't have the funds to pay for "same day", have the option to use it. Sort of like the Lottery.

Two thumbs up to the people who love to keep the poor man down..

You are winning the game.

Re: Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Drug addict != poor.

Stop equating the two and you might open your eyes. Lots of hard working people live in the ghetto. Some want to be there. Some strive for more. There is proof in this as there are all types of people in ghettos, not just blacks. We also see this because black people also live in middle class/high end areas as well. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

You can't treat being poor like you do a drug addict. Most poor people don't want to be poor and live in the ghetto. But like I said, some do. One bad apple doesn't spoil the bunch.

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Water is a basic right. Next day Amazon delivery is NOT.

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

A better example might be this story about Texas Police.

You're just talking about your friend having a problem of personal identity. But there is a possibility of deliberate deception. An intent to bury a problem.

That's a very serious issue. It's worse than useless, it's misuse.

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, because it's RACIST! /s

SWJ's don't let cold hard facts get in the way. Same day delivery must be offered equally, even if it doesn't make financial sense for Amazon to offer it. When this logic is applied to home loans, it should not have been surprising what the outcome was.

Your understanding of the financial crisis is disputed by researchers in the field. Here is a National Bureau of Economic Research paper on the subject. For a summary, read this opinion post.

Re: Perfect

[WarJolt]

The real crime is that someone has to pay for these surveys and it's either the taxpayer collectively or the group that is suffering from an unfair disproportionate application of the law. It's a crime because the surveys sweep a problem under a rug and it's costing that community money.

Why do we elect these knuckleheads?

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

The government is welcome to get into same-day delivery business, service all areas equally in the interests of fairness, and pay for it all via taxes.

But why should a private company do so on its dime?

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Right... I mean, not only should they better themselves, but they should do it without the resources that anyone else has...

Not only should they [get out of poverty], but they should do it without [the wealth] that [some other people] have

Re:Perfect

[MisterSquid]

I don't think it's so much about whether or not they're minorities so much as it's about those particular areas having very low demand for services that cost more, thus they can't take advantage of economies of scale.

I don't think this has as much to do with economies of scale because the way in which deliveries are routed can be optimized if there are only a few deliveries in a low-demand zone.

The reasons cities want equal access for low-income areas are many and they include, for sure, non-discriminatory access. But they also include the preservation of future urban revitalization (aka gentrification). If highly-moblie affluent residents choose where to live based on amenities such as walkability, entertainment, restaurants, parking, cleaning services, etc, you can bet that same-day Amazon delivery will be one of those amenities.

If same-day Amazon delivery is not available in an area, it will be one more reason an affluent resident will not choose to live an a neighborhood despite that it may be more affordable in terms of rent which in turn would me revitalization efforts would be stymied.

So far, there are dozens of comments expressing confusion and anger that poorer neighborhoods would be guaranteed the availability of same-day delivery and much of that confusion and anger seem to signal race as problem (e.g. snide references to "SJW"s). To my mind, the issues of class and race have people so inflamed they cannot see that arguments that deprive citizens of access, for whatever reason, are actually bad for the economy, period.

Members of the socioeconomic middle class are not having a rough time because the Federal government is taking all their money and doling it out to poor people. They are having a rough time because they are shouldering the economic burden that the wealthy have shirked.

One day, all members of the middle class may realize that depriving the poor access to good actually accelerates rather than retards the economic disenfranchisement of the middle class. But given that the leveraging of racist and xenophobic sentiment by elites to pit the middle class agains the ranks of the poor, such a realization seems distant at best.

More likely, much of the middle class will continue to rage against the poor, arguing that the poor should be allowed to suffer and that the poor don't deserve access to the benefits of modern civilization. Unfortunately, these members of the middle class may all too soon find themselves among the ranks of the poor and disenfranchised and they may wonder why they deserve to suffer so and why they do not have access to the benefits of modern civilization all around them.

Re:Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm glad that you feel that way. Are you suggesting that companies shouldn't be able to offer services where they economically can unless they can offer it everywhere to everyone, or are you offering to pay for the losses they are going to incur doing so?

Re: Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

While I would say that is a crime, I would not phrase it as "the real crime" when it's quite likely covering up abuse by government officials.

Re:Perfect

[pnutjam]

Well said, the race to the bottom is not one we want to win.

Re:Perfect

[pnutjam]

Wow, It saddens me that this was modded +5. The poor aren't asking for a handout, their asking for a hand-up and a level playing field. Not everyone has your opportunity, although I'm sure you'll tell us all how hard you had it, a great story about how you started out with nothing. Plenty of people would be glad to start with nothing, instead of deep in the negative.

Re:Perfect

[GoChickenFat]

Wow, It saddens me that this was modded +5. The poor aren't asking for a handout, their asking for a hand-up and a level playing field. Not everyone has your opportunity, although I'm sure you'll tell us all how hard you had it, a great story about how you started out with nothing. Plenty of people would be glad to start with nothing, instead of deep in the negative.

And I'm sure your answer to all of this is more government "help". The real question is, if you actually care, then what are YOU personally doing to help someone "deep in the negative"...if you care to define what that means in the US anyway. It's not like we're born into a caste system or communism here. Again, a faceless "handout" from the government is not a hand-up. A hand-up can only come from an actual personal interaction of help that includes humility and appreciation from the receiver...not the entitlement handicap that government handouts have created.

Re:Perfect

[pnutjam]

The "welfare state" gives more hand-ups then any private social program out there. I could enumerate the many ways I try to make the world better through helping my fellow man, I start by NOT poisoning the well and/or begrudging the social safety nets that do exist.

Here's a quick reference article, in case you think private charities are some panoply that meets even a fraction of the need.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/mar/19/frank-keating/does-catholic-church-provide-half-social-services-/

Re:Perfect

[GoChickenFat]

It's interesting and that you refute my claim by assuming I'm referring to giving to charity - which I made no reference to. You've provided absolutely no evidence to refute my original assertion that the continual stream of government help is actually hurting more than it's helping. And you completely side stepped my request for you to clarify how someone in the US could start from below nothing. So, I guess this fruitless discussion is over. Maybe this would be worth a read http://jasonrileyonline.com/me...

Re:Perfect

[pnutjam]

I made a broad assumption about giving to charity, to what where you referring? The time I helped an old guy push his car out of the street and bought him gas when I noticed him rummaging for change in his floorboards? My point was I give and don't begrudge others the help they need. Government social programs are the most efficient way to help the most people.
As to hinder more then help, there may be some truth in that. Policies that break apart families or prevent people from getting work because they can't afford the gap in benefits. Most of these issues are because someone in the right place wanted to cause harm. There are many subtle ways to flip a helpful program to hurtful, and unfortunately there is an army of people who do just that. Look no further then Kansas to see what happens when ideology trumps compassion. Truly, look no further then your own heart.

I'm going to educate you on starting below zero, with the assumption you've just never considered it. I'll start with foster kids who age out of the system, what sort of support system do you think they have? Many end up homeless. Next we have the children of the poor, some are unfortunate enough to have parents who steal their identities to open credit or turn on utilities. Imagine if you rented your first apartment only to find out you had to pay the electric company an old $400 bill before you could get your electricity turned on? Or you could have your parents prosecuted. Maybe you just have to take care of an sick parent, who has no other safety net? Maybe you have a child before your ready, either through your own poor decision, or because you have been raped. I could go on.


The world is full of struggle, I fail to see how it hurts me to help them. I want my children to live in a better world, not a bitter world.

A thought about no go zones

[del_diablo]

I honestly think things like this is the best for society. Not because it hurts the retailer because its exposed to theft or vandalism. But because it forces society to actually deal with no go zones.
Once they actually exist, they are mapped, and they should be dealt with.
Even if it ends with a escort of armed police to the no go zones to get the package delivered, its a start. I agree that a start isn't a means or a end, but its a start.

Re:A thought about no go zones

[Anonymous Coward]

It wasn't about no-go zones. It was a calculation involving the number of Amazon customers for a population in an area.

Re:A thought about no go zones

[Anonymous Coward]

It's usually not the company that makes the decision to avoid no go zones, it's the drivers who refuse to go there...and for good reason.

Re:A thought about no go zones

[Anonymous Coward]

Repeated doing stupid and dangerous activities because it's the "right" thing to do is the business of SJWs, not businesses.

Re:A thought about no go zones

[Anonymous Coward]

"society"

So that's going to include you, right?

Re:A thought about no go zones

[drinkypoo]

It wasn't about no-go zones. It was a calculation involving the number of Amazon customers for a population in an area.

No, no it was not. It doesn't necessarily cost them more to deliver to other parts of the same city, especially in places like literally anywhere in the bay area, where the rich neighborhoods are closely interspersed with the poor ones. I lived in Bernal Heights, which is wealthy lesbian territory, and literally the bottom of the hill is a project with dumpsters in the street, and maybe stuff on fire too. Unless, of course, you've got trucks getting jacked.

Re:A thought about no go zones

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you even read the summary? It's about SAME DAY DELIVERY, not a "no go zone". Why pay for extra delivery vehicles/employees to cover an area when they are poor and will most likely not use same day delivery?

Once again, the regressive left just wants to find something to cry about instead of going after real problems.

Redlining...

[__aaclcg7560]

I guess Amazon didn't get the memo that a dollar is a dollar no matter where it comes from.

Re:Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

They're not going to be earning many dollars if their delivery people get robbed every 30 minutes.

Re:Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

The Amazon analytics system didn't care either. It only cares about the number of Amazon customers and Prime subscribers in an area. Not enough customers, no reason to offer same day delivery. It shouldn't be surprising that people in poor areas have more important things to spend their money on than an Amazon subscription. That's the cold hard facts, but facts don't matter to SJW's.

Re:Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

A low-risk dollar is objectively a better dollar.

Re: Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's negative dollars when your product is stolen and your driver was murdered.

But you wouldn't know that. You sit in your mansion on the hill, windows pointed away from the poor...never helping them. You disgust me.

Re:Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahh...but what if there aren't enough dollars being spent in these locations to justify the investment required to enable the 1 day service?

This is a far more likely explanation for the lack of offering the service to these areas in the first place than the discrimination card the article seems to want to play instead.

Re:Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

They understand it perfectly, which is why they didn't go where there are no dollars.

Re: Redlining...

[__aaclcg7560]

But you wouldn't know that. You sit in your mansion on the hill, windows pointed away from the poor...never helping them. You disgust me.

I live in a apartment complex in Silicon Valley where my Amazon packages routinely walk off when left behind by the mail carrier. Other than the people in the leasing office, I'm the only white person at this complex. I'm considered "poor" because I make only $50,000 per year as an IT support technician, don't own a McMansion, and take public transit. Boo-hoo!

The people who works minimum wage and speaks English as a second language thinks my situation is hilarious.

Re:Redlining...

[__aaclcg7560]

They're not going to be earning many dollars if their delivery people get robbed every 30 minutes.

Then Amazon shouldn't be in the delivery business. UPS and FedEx can get the job done.

Re:Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

Amazon isn't in the delivery business. They're in the retail business.

Walmart ships products to your door too, that doesn't mean Walmart is in the delivery business.

Re:Redlining...

[__aaclcg7560]

A low-risk dollar is objectively a better dollar.

If that was the case, Amazon shouldn't be in the delivery business. Not enough low-risk dollars to justify building out a delivery fleet.

Re:Redlining...

[JoeyRox]

How about if we make it our business to not decide how everyone else is permitted to run their business? My memory is fuzzy but I think some people call this concept free market capitalism.

Re: Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

I live in a apartment complex in Silicon Valley where my Amazon packages routinely walk off when left behind by the mail carrier. Other than the people in the leasing office, I'm the only white person at this complex. I'm considered "poor" because I make only $50,000 per year as an IT support technician

Making only $50k doing IT in Silly Valley? Sounds like you're doing something wrong.

Re:Redlining...

[__aaclcg7560]

Amazon isn't in the delivery business. They're in the retail business.

You haven't been keeping up with the news.

But some analysts believe that Amazon is putting together the pieces across the globe to launch a package-delivery service that will one day compete with UPS, FedEx and others. In addition to the Colis Prive deal, Amazon acquired the right to purchase 4.2 percent of Yodel, a United Kingdom parcel-delivery company, in 2014. Last month, Amazon announced adding thousands of trucks to its U.S. fleet to handle the growing load of packages it is shipping.

http://www.seattletimes.com/business/amazon/amazons-delivery-ambitions-take-on-industry-giants/

Re:Redlining...

[Tailhook]

Not enough low-risk dollars to justify building out a delivery fleet.

How, exactly, do you know that? Are you privy to Amazon's Prime subscriber maps and same day delivery sales figures?

Or did you just make that up to fit your preferred conclusion?

Re: Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

The drug dealer living at his apartment complex makes more than $50k, and he's probably the one stealing his Amazon shit too.

Re:Redlining...

[__aaclcg7560]

My memory is fuzzy but I think some people call this concept free market capitalism.

It's called redlining in the financial industry, where banks don't open branch offices in poorer neighborhoods and those residents pay outrageous interest charges to payday lenders because they don't have access to basic banking services. Bernie Sanders had proposed letting the postal service offer basic banking services to all Americans. Something that the post office used to do a long time ago.

In fact, Sanders's idea is quite sensible. "Postal banking"—which just means that post offices run savings accounts, cash checks, and perform other basic financial services—is common in most of Asia and Europe, and only about 7 percent of the world's national postal systems don't offer some bank-like services. Postal banking is a really good way to reach people who haven't had access to standard savings accounts. One estimate figures that more than 1 billion people have used post offices for making deposits.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/10/bernie-sanders-lets-turn-post-offices-into-banks/411589/

Re: Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

Like doing tier 1 support for COMCAST.

Re:Redlining...

[__aaclcg7560]

How, exactly, do you know that?

Because building out brick-and-mortar infrastructure is expensive.

Or did you just make that up to fit your preferred conclusion?

I recently had a half-dozen packages stolen from my post office box. An obvious inside job. The postal inspector inspector launched an investigation. I informed the vendors what happened, they sent out replacement packages. Because they had to offer free shipping to compete with Amazon and postal insurance pays a pittance, they had to eat the cost of $500 in merchandise. If the vendors are lucky, the postal inspector can recover the stolen packages. Amazon will have to absorb all the costs and risks that comes from delivering packages.

Re: Redlining...

[__aaclcg7560]

Making only $50k doing IT in Silly Valley? Sounds like you're doing something wrong.

Like what exactly? Not everyone in Silicon Valley is a newly minted millionaire.

Re: Redlining...

[__aaclcg7560]

Like doing tier 1 support for COMCAST.

I'm a senior system administrator for government IT.

Re:Redlining...

[Dahamma]

Except this whole article is about SAME DAY delivery, which no, UPS and FedEX can't do for Amazon - that's the WHOLE POINT.

They can already get 1-2 day delivery from UPS/FedEx/etc, but same day is done via Amazon couriers, and basically, they are hesitant to deliver to certain neighborhoods. It's basically like an Uber Black driver picking up in South Central LA. Will someone do it? Maybe, but they are going to charge $$$.

Re: Redlining...

[__aaclcg7560]

The drug dealer living at his apartment complex makes more than $50k, and he's probably the one stealing his Amazon shit too.

When I first moved into my apartment 10+ years ago, you could walk around the complex and smell 20 different kinds of weeds. Drug dealer moved out a long time ago. Today you could probably smell 20 different kinds of curry.

Re: Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

No, but seriously, if you are an experienced tech making $50k in SV in a full time job you are doing something wrong. Utterly unqualified new college grads are making $100k+ these days. For fuck's sake either ask for more (you seem sharp enough!) or stop complaining.

Re:Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

You are misconstruing two different types of access - physical access and creditworthiness. Those going to payday lenders aren't going because they aren't physically close to a bank - heck Walmart has bank branches inside these days. They are going because their assets/income/debt mix make them a poor credit risk for traditional lenders. Similarly, most check cashing businesses don't get patronized because they are convenient, they get patronized because they want the money faster.

I'm okay with the concept of postal banking, though in an age of online banks, I'm not sure what real advantage it serves. I'd prefer to pilot test it before rolling it out nationwide, but that's an implementation idea rather than a philosophical objection.

Re: Redlining...

[Gavagai80]

I suspect that packages may be more likely to be stolen from rich neighborhoods than poor neighborhoods -- because they're much more likely to have something valuable in them. I live in a low income apartment complex project. and nobody has ever stolen any of my amazon packages, which are often left outside by my door for a day. Thieves and neighbors probably realize I can't afford any orders worth the risk of stealing.

Re: Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody outside of USA uses checks.

Re: Redlining...

[SuricouRaven]

Organised thieves might also recognise the disparity in investigation though. Steal packages from the slums, the police couldn't care less - even if the crime is reported they'll just fill in the form and file it away. Steal packages from a rich enough district that the people there actually have influence and you risk instigating an actual investigation - the sort where they look at CCTV footage and numberplate recognition records, or even station an unmarked car and some bait packages. A thief would need to estimate just how valuable a district they can safely target. Low-income district thefts are more likely to be crimes of opportunity: See package, take package.

Re:Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

They're not going to be earning many dollars if their delivery people get robbed every 30 minutes.

I guess the bad guys are really discerning these days and want their loot FRESH. No way they'd be going after 2nd or 3rd day deliveries.... nope, same day ONLY!

If they're delivering to the area at all, it shouldn't really matter if it's same day or slower from a robbery perspective.

Re:Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

And Berkshire Hathaway owns NetJets.

When was the last time you heard anyone say Berkshire Hathaway competes against Delta Airlines?

Re:Redlining...

[SirSlud]

It's not your memory that's fuzzy. It's your capacity for thinking. Free market capitalism is an imaginary superhero that doesn't and shouldn't exist without reasonable oversight and regulation. It is the theoretical "solution" that people who don't want to think too hard invoke, in a desperate attempt to feel like they're contributing to a conversation.

"But .. but .. the free market!"

Re: Redlining...

[TheGratefulNet]

with the wage depression in active full-out attack on engineers (if you are h1b, you are fine; if you were born here, you can go die in a cardboard box down by the river for all the ceo's could care) - its FULLY understandable that even skilled and experienced software guys will be at poverty level in this area.

I can directly speak to that. been out of work for a while now, my savings are dangerously low and I'm not sure what is going to happen if I can't find work before the money runs out.

h1b is destroying the workers who depend on WORK to pay the bills. the rich who depend on their royalty payments or other forms of recurring 'do no work, get it automatically' income are fully ok, of course.

if you are an h1b, you will likely share a room with a roomate and if you are in a house, the house will be packed with people from your country. no one can afford to live well here unless you are connected or priviledged. and being white is actually against you, as the bulk of the hiring is only for asian and indian. if you were born here, you are skipped over by all the foreign born managers.

and so, I can fully understand someone being skilled, born here and trying to work their ass off to make ends meet and still being in poverty level, relatively. I'm nearly there myself; and not proud to admit it, either.

the war on middle class americans is VERY real. please have some compassion.

Re:Redlining...

[JoeyRox]

I agree with you completely, except about what exactly represents reasonable oversight and regulation.

Re: Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? In Canada, I pay my rent with post dated cheques.

I just started a business, the bank printed off sheets of 40 cheques. My accountant encouraged me to use cheque where I can.

I invoice and get paid with cheques.

I don't get the impression no one uses cheques anymore. No one uses them to pay for goods at the grocery, but its used for rent, payments and business to business dealings, etc.

Re: Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

Free shipping doesn't imply full insurance to me. My experience and expectation is the free $100 from courier and insurance for full amount is offered but able to decline.

Not charging/offering insurance might be an Amazon only thing? Maybe not Walmart, either.

But anyway, I'm just saying they can go to a charging insurance system to get out of those costs.

Re: Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

No, but seriously, if you are an experienced tech making $50k in SV in a full time job you are doing something wrong. Utterly unqualified new college grads are making $100k+ these days. For fuck's sake either ask for more (you seem sharp enough!) or stop complaining.

Exactly, they are plenty of cheaper cities in the USA where you can make $50k doing IT work.

Re: Redlining...

[__aaclcg7560]

Utterly unqualified new college grads are making $100k+ these days.

Must be a bachelor degree. I only got two associates degrees. The first one is A.A. degree in General Education after I graduated from eight years of Special Ed, skipped high school, and went to community college. A decade later I got A.S. in computer programming to get into IT.

For fuck's sake either ask for more (you seem sharp enough!) or stop complaining.

I'm not complaining. I don't have a problem living in Silicon Valley on $50,000 per year. Everyone else has a problem that I'm living in Silicon Valley on $50,000 per year.

Re: Redlining...

[__aaclcg7560]

if you are an h1b, you will likely share a room with a roomate and if you are in a house, the house will be packed with people from your country.

The H1Bs that I know are single males living alone in a brand new condo that they bought. They complain about the high ceilings all the time. Almost as bad as the hipsters complaining about their 30 minute commute from San Francisco.

I can fully understand someone being skilled, born here and trying to work their ass off to make ends meet and still being in poverty level, relatively.

Most people get into trouble because they want the big house, big cars, big women and big kids. That's very expensive to do in Silicon Valley. If you live a modest lifestyle, you're considered "poor" for not keeping up with the Jones.

Re: Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

The guys serving fries at McDonalds are making more money than you. Find another job.

Re: Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

Lol. Does it give you a smugness bones when you talk like that? Oooh, so disdainful - he must be right!

Cunt.

Re:Redlining...

[__aaclcg7560]

You are misconstruing two different types of access - physical access and creditworthiness.

Redlining in the financial industry is a well know problem that's been going on for decades. You're more likely to find multiple payday lenders than a bank branch in a poor neighborhood. You're also more likely to find more liquor stores, fast food restaurants, and industrial plants in a poor neighborhood. If the poor have no money, why are these business located here in an abundance?

I'm okay with the concept of postal banking, though in an age of online banks, I'm not sure what real advantage it serves.

You expect poor people to own a computer to access online banking? Oh, wait. I forgot the Obama phone. They can do online banking when they're not surfing the net and watching porn on the Obama phone. The crap some people believe in — and vote for.

Re: Redlining...

[__aaclcg7560]

The guys serving fries at McDonalds are making more money than you. Find another job.

I make a lot more than minimum wage ($15 per hour).

Re: Redlining...

[WarJolt]

Retail is the wrong word. For some reason we all forgot this stuff is called e-commerce.

Second Amazon is in the business of selling everything and logistically shipment is the last bit to be truly optimized with the kinds of data analytics that they are running in the rest of the distribution chain.

They can predict you will buy something before you buy it. The parcel companies can't optimize for that because they don't have the data.

Re: Redlining...

[Anonymous Coward]

RIP.

first world problems

[Anonymous Coward]

omg had to wait extra days, that's like oppression

Re:first world problems

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be a first world problem if it happened to all Amazon customers, annoying the rich people. Now it's typical third world problem, perhaps only with a lesser riot potential.

Re: first world problems

[Anonymous Coward]

it is a first world problem. Explain how overnight shipping is an Entitlment.

Poor!!???

[Anonymous Coward]

How many poor people have Amazon Prime and spring for the additional cost of this shipping?

fewer choices

[Kohath]

There are no Maserati dealers in poor areas either. I wonder why not?

Re:fewer choices

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure there are. They just deal carjacked ones.

--sf

Re:fewer choices

[drinkypoo]

Sure there are. They just deal carjacked ones.

Nope. Stolen exotics either get taken on a joyride and abandoned (or crashed and abandoned) or they get put into a container and shipped to the middle east where they blend in with all the other exotics, and probably get run into the ground and then abandoned in the desert, or just parked in a garage for all eternity. The mideast was just chock full of awesome barn scores (mostly Mercedes, they used to just fucking love to import those) until we blew it up.

Re:fewer choices

[SuricouRaven]

Or scrapped for parts. It's very hard to fence an entire car, but the parts alone are worth a fair bit and much easier to shift.

Re:Deliveries are for Cows

[sims 2]

Just because you get it faster from amazon does not mean it will be fresh.

Many food items are kept in storage for months before they are shipped out from amazon and typically there is no way to know before buying which amazon seller has the freshest stock or even how long its been sitting there in stock. Chocolate does go bad and twizzlers over a month old are as tough as Goodyear tires.

Amazon doesn't offer same day where I live anyway.

Do poor neighborhoods buy as much stuff as others?

[JoeyRox]

It seems to me the biggest cost of providing same-day delivery is the actual cost of delivering the items. If we presume that this delivery cost goes down as the volume of deliveries to a specific area goes up (more items delivered per trip, less travel time, less gas, etc..), then it would stand to reason that the service would be much less profitable in areas with a low concentration of same-day orders, ie poorer neighborhoods. Does Amazon not have the right to make a business decision on which tiers of service to offer which areas in order to maximize their profit?

Re: Do poor neighborhoods buy as much stuff as oth

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course they have a choice. What they are doing here is caving to pressure before it loses them any business. They will deliver at a loss to some areas for a bit and then stop delivering to those less profitable areas or offer customers a fee to cover their extra costs. I wish companies would be a little more risk tolerant, like this, with their rollouts.

Re:Do poor neighborhoods buy as much stuff as othe

[Anonymous Coward]

Agree with JoeyRox. Seriously.. why are we arguing why citizen X is somehow deprived of same-day delivery of items the can probably get by driving a few miles? No consumer left behind? Are these deliveries prescription drugs that keep these people alive? Big bad business needs to bleed their bottom line to right the social injustice of a neighborhood that by demographics doesn't order enough product to profitably support their current delivery model? Let's tone this down unless its relief supplies from a natural disaster, not a cost-based decision from a retailer that has a bottom line to hold and stockholders to answer to. Amazon isn't a first-party source for food/shelter/clothing/medicine so this argument is another frivolous attempt to attack the retail industry.

Peace out.

Re: Do poor neighborhoods buy as much stuff as oth

[drinkypoo]

To Amazon it's all the same regardless because either way they're in the red. The up side for them is that any competition basically has to follow suit. It's just another way to raise the barrier to entry, for them.

Re:Do poor neighborhoods buy as much stuff as othe

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm wondering if it's just more packages per delivery and/or fewer deliveries/day to make. My presumption is that there are fewer points to visit in affluent areas because fewer people live there and there will be fewer houses that need to be visited. So come cyber Monday, Amazon and the delivery systems they depend upon will be able to better meet delivery schedule targets because they need to stop at fewer places.

What the hell are you mouthing off about?

[westlake]

Once again, those poor stupid incompetent minorities are rescued from having to better themselves in any conceivable way, thanks to us heroic progressives who are always around to babysit and control them for their own good.

These neighborhoods are poorly served and over-charged by local retailers.

It should tell the geek something when subscribing to Amazon Prime at $99/yr can save the urban poor time and money they do not have to spare. It is a revelation on the same scale as the Sears, Roebuck catalogs were to rural communities of all shapes and colors in the 1890s.

Re:What the hell are you mouthing off about?

[Anonymous Coward]

And why do those local retailers over-charge? Because of low demand and higher rates of theft. The market prices things fairly, let it work.

Re:What the hell are you mouthing off about?

[ShanghaiBill]

These neighborhoods are poorly served and over-charged by local retailers.

Then why don't the people living in these neighborhoods open competing shops, and drive the bad retailers out of business while making a nice profit?

Re:What the hell are you mouthing off about?

[sugar and acid]

"Then why don't the people living in these neighborhoods open competing shops, and drive the bad retailers out of business while making a nice profit?"

That is the point of cooperatives, though for some reasons they are not popular in the US for setting up retail and grocery stores as elsewhere in the world. I grew up in a small remote town with one town cooperative grocery store. This was to ensure there was an accessible grocery store that did not price gouge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_cooperative_movement

One of the dynamics that allow price gouging in poor neighbourhoods is lack of transport options. If you don't have a car or can't afford to run it and have to take public transport then your options are limited. It's what you can walk to, what you can easily get to on the bus, or what gets delivered to your door. It's not like the middle-class suburban lifestyle of being able to easily drive to a number of difference retail and grocery options without thinking about it.

Re: What the hell are you mouthing off about?

[Anonymous Coward]

The CO-OP in my old town growing up was more expensive than a Foodland grocery store.

The CO-OP had better paying jobs, cleaner, brighter store, but had annual membership dues.

The poorer people shopped at Foodland, the middle to upper class shopped at CO-OP.

Re: What the hell are you mouthing off about?

[Anonymous Coward]

Good god that is a legitimately privileged viewpoint! Not quite "small loan of five million dollars" but still pretty bad. Normally I loathe to use the term due to it being poisioned by repeated overuse and misuse.

Setting up a store requires a lot of money. Which you know poor people don't have!

Re:What the hell are you mouthing off about?

[pnutjam]

Because the free market is a convenient fiction (convenient for some people).

Re: The Muslim Problem

[Anonymous Coward]

You're going to feel pretty stupid when it's your turn to be led to the stoning pit.

I would have told them to go take a hike

[BlueCoder]

Same day delivery is a luxury. As a business you want to please as many of your customers as possible as it correlates to making a profit.

Wealthier neighborhoods order more stuff. Those customers in effect do get (and rightly so) more of a consideration when it comes to service. Smaller areas that correspond to more business. You need fewer drivers than for servicing an entire city. Those customers are paying for better service by doing more business with amazon.

I will give better service to customers that deserve it. Period.

Re:I would have told them to go take a hike

[twistedcubic]

Look at the map of Boston in the article. The missing service area, Roxbury, is dead in the center of the city, completely surrounded by areas serviced by Amazon. Don't assume this is a simple "it's not cost effective" reason, for you don't know.

Re:I would have told them to go take a hike

[AmiMoJo]

If you want to live in a mertiocracy, then everyone has to have the same opportunities. While same day delivery might seem frivolous, like many important things you can't arbitrarily pick what counts and what doesn't. For example, bus and taxi services refusing to go to certain areas to clearly going to disadvantage those areas.

Re:I would have told them to go take a hike

[Tom]

So true. Business needs to make profit, and limited resources need to distributed so that it maximizes shareholder value. For example, if you are the water company, wealthier neighborhoods use more water, and in effect rightfully get more of a consideration when it comes to services, quality and whether or not you will repair that broken pipe. You need less pipes, just thicker ones. These customers are paying for better water by filling their pools with lots and lots of it, while the poor just drink it and shower once a week. Let's give better service to customers that deserve it.

Re:I would have told them to go take a hike

[Anonymous Coward]

I want to live in a meritocracy where EVERYONE EARNS WHAT THEY GET!

Re:I would have told them to go take a hike

[Lumpy]

And when taxi drivers keep getting robbed there, they have a full right to not send them.

Sorry, but fuck the part of the city where crime is the highest and you risk the lives of others to provide service. Pizza places that refuse to deliver to the poor parts are smart. You don't have your employees killed over a pizza and $40, It's the smartest thing to do.

Re:I would have told them to go take a hike

[Anonymous Coward]

If the omitted neighbourhood in the city centre the problem is probably that traffic makes deliverery time consuming and thus expensive. It's probably excluded for a different reason than poor areas, which tend to be quite far away from city centres.

Re:I would have told them to go take a hike

[Anonymous Coward]

Roxbury is also a very high crime area, with around double the violent and property crime rate of the national average. Having to ship the same order multiple times due to theft is not cost effective.

Re:I would have told them to go take a hike

[onyxruby]

Chances are it's not cost effective due to the impact of crime on business.

That the area happens to be an area filled with black people likely never crossed anyone's mind. Chances are whoever (could well be an algorithm) made the decision to serve or not server certain areas did so based on profitability. Chances are also good that whoever made the decision lives in another part of the country, or could even be in a different country altogether. If you aren't a local, how are you going to know?

Re:I would have told them to go take a hike

[Kohath]

A better question is why do people stay in Roxbury if it's run down and crime-ridden and hopeless?

If you look around for a new place, there's always somewhere else to go eventually. My only guess is that the people there are trapped by subsidy checks that will be taken away from them if they improve anything. Perhaps you have a better guess?

Re:I would have told them to go take a hike

[SvnLyrBrto]

I would expect that it was simply analytics. Take the ZIP codes in a city. Amazon knows the number of prime subscribers in each ZIP code. They know the dollars worth of sales in every ZIP code. Divide either figure by the square mileage of the ZIP code, and you get an easy metric. If it's above a certain threshold, add same-day. If it's not, don't. I'm sure in reality, the metrics are more complex... a combination of the two I mentioned, plus travel speeds on the roads in each ZIP code, distance from distribution nodes, lossage and replacement figures from packages that go missing, rental and administration of Amazon lockers if a lot of customers in that ZIP code use them, and so on. But I would bet good money that the decisions were 100% data-driven. I really, Really, REALLY doubt that Jeff Bezos has issued a directive that Amazon avoid offering services to it's non-white customers.

Re:I would have told them to go take a hike

[Anonymous Coward]

What cock knob voted this down? He is right not servicing a part of a city for the safety of your employees is a good thing to do.

WTF? kind of asshole is against the safety of people who work for a living?

Some questions

[Okian Warrior]

Same day delivery is a luxury. As a business you want to please as many of your customers as possible as it correlates to making a profit.

Wealthier neighborhoods order more stuff. Those customers in effect do get (and rightly so) more of a consideration when it comes to service. Smaller areas that correspond to more business. You need fewer drivers than for servicing an entire city. Those customers are paying for better service by doing more business with amazon.

I will give better service to customers that deserve it. Period.

Out of curiosity, does that position include other luxuries such as cable and internet service?

I bet those companies could roll out good service to "selected" areas that give a great profit, and ignore the marginal profit areas.

Or how about phone service? The per-person infrastructure cost for people in rural areas is staggering!

Maybe we should let the phone company dial back their service in unprofitable areas.

Or how about electricity? Same thing.

Re:Some questions

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep. If it costs a whole lot to provide internet connectivity to an apartment block where only one person will buy it, or to an isolated farm, the government shouldn't force a company to provide it.

If the government decides that universal internet connectivity is a worthwhile thing, then it may choose to pay, from taxpayer money, for a company to provide service to these otherwise-unprofitable customers. Or it may choose to offer some other inducement - like a government-enforced monopoly - for a company to provide universal coverage.

Both of these have happened for services that we consider to be basic utilities. But simply demanding that a company provide a service to unprofitable customers is unreasonable.

Re:Some questions

[Solandri]

Out of curiosity, does that position include other luxuries such as cable and internet service?
[...]
Maybe we should let the phone company dial back their service in unprofitable areas.

Or how about electricity? Same thing.

Nobody will argue that necessities for a modern lifestyle shouldn't be made available to all.

They will however argue that same-day delivery from Amazon is not a necessity for a modern lifestyle. OP opened with, "same day delivery is a luxury." Not sure where you get off implying cable and internet are luxuries, then seguing into phone and electricity as if they too were luxuries. They are not at all the "same thing."

It's also worth pointing out that the unprofitability of installing landline phone service in Africa has been made moot by widespread cellular phone service. If we'd forced companies to install landline phone lines in Africa, it would've become a waste of money circa 2000. Sometimes the expense of an older tech is what helps fuel a newer tech's widespread adoption. Forcing the subsidized adoption of the older tech in the pursuit of "fairness" can weaken the incentive and demand to roll out the newer tech. My workplace is in a low-income area which long ago contracted with Verizon to offer DSL to all customers. Since everyone can get Internet (albeit 1.5 Mbps Internet), the local government lost any leverage to force cable companies (which began offering Internet later) to provide service to everyone. So you have this weird patchwork where a few areas get 45 Mbps, while everyone else gets 1.5 Mbps.

Re:Some questions

[DogDude]

You're right. Utilities are important to everybody. But same-day delivery of overpriced commodity consumer items from a money-losing fake Internet company isn't critical to anybody at all.

Re:Some questions

[scamper_22]

Extreme arguments are not 'the same thing'.

Whenever things like this come up, I always defer to the idea of what is 'reasonable' for a person to do.

Yeah electricity, phone, cable... what would a rural person have to do if the electric company didn't provide service to their area? Yeah, their ability to use appliances and communicate drops dramatically... maybe even disappears.

What does a person do if Amazon doesn't offer same day shipping? They umm... you know... wait a day. The 'cost' not just in terms of money, but time, availability... is simply not that great.

And this changes as society does. If for example society starts functioning mainly under the assumption of high speed internet access. Then maybe high speed internet in rural areas becomes more of a need.

Maybe in the future, local stores are scarce and most things are done through delivery like amazon, so you can't stop by the local store and pickup soap, tampons... whatever your fancy. In that case yeah same day shipping might be considered non-luxury.

But the way the world is now, same day service is a definite luxury. I've never tried it personally as I just don't have such a great need.

Re:Some questions

[Kohath]

People who do valuable things for others can afford to hire others to do valuable things for them. Meanwhile, people who just sit at home watching TV during the day, doing nothing for anyone, have fewer opportunities.

You seem to think non-workers should have a whole range of valuable service choices to choose from, even when they don't provide any service to anyone themselves. Why is that?

Meanwhile in Canada...

[Anonymous Coward]

What is this "same day delivery" thing? I could understand that being an option if they sold digital products like movies or streaming. It's a good thing they only sell watches and paperback books or we might be inclined to write a strongly worded letter.

Sincerely,
all Canadians

Re:Meanwhile in Canada...

[U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M]

I never pay for "next day delivery" because that could never happen in my small, far away town.

"Same day delivery" sounds like either a miracle or a lie.

Re:Meanwhile in Canada...

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't even offer it most places. It's a very limited area. http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2016/04/07/amazon-expands-same-day-delivery-11-more-cities/82744082/ You shouldn't see it as an ordering option if you're not somewhere that they do it.

Next...

[OpenSourced]

As a next step, they will be forcing Starbucks to open the exact same number of stores in poor, depressed areas as in the center of the city.

Also, city servants will have to spread their living quarters evenly across the cities.

In related news, touristic tour operators will change their sightseeing routes so that an appropriate amount of time is devoted to the dreariest parts of the city. The legislature is divided on the issue of forcing the tourists to take an equal amount of photos in every area, because the egalitarian push will clash with the desire not to offend inhabitants of the slums with the feeling that they are into some kind of zoo. The delicate balancing of these opposing traits is what keep your tax dollars at work.

Re: The Muslim Problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you retarded ?

No, seriously...are you ? because you sure as fuck seem like it.

I bet you're sad you're not living in the 30's. You'd be one of those Nazi apologists, screaming abuse at "Naziphobes".

There's only one religion that has as its central figure a murdering, lying and stealing pedophile.

There's only one religion that is trying to spread itself by the sword, right now. Not 400 years ago, now. RIGHT NOW.

There's only one religion that has, in the states that have adopted it as the basis for their laws, decreed the death penalty for homosexuals, apostates and atheists. Not 600, 400 or 200 years ago. RIGHT NOW.

People like you make me sick.

Re:Deliveries are for Cows

[tlhIngan]

Just because you get it faster from amazon does not mean it will be fresh.

Many food items are kept in storage for months before they are shipped out from amazon and typically there is no way to know before buying which amazon seller has the freshest stock or even how long its been sitting there in stock. Chocolate does go bad and twizzlers over a month old are as tough as Goodyear tires.

This actually applies to other stuff as well - there are many products that actually do have an "expiry date" and just because it's on Amazon, doesn't mean it's actually all that recent.

I know I found a neat glow-in-the-dark hardhat on Amazon which I was going to use for a halloween costume. So I bought it, and the date on the hate was 2012. Now, this was fine for me (I'm not needing it for safety purposes), but I do know that hardhats need to be typically replaced after about 5 years, and being 2015, with a hate dated to 2912, well, I'd be pissed if I was using it for its intended purpose. (Heck, the bag it was packed in was already falling apart)

More specialty stores rotate their stock enough that it won't be more than a year old.

The last laugh goes to Amazon . . .

[PolygamousRanchKid]

Once again, those poor stupid incompetent minorities are rescued from having to better themselves in any conceivable way, thanks to us heroic progressives who are always around to babysit and control them for their own good.

Amazon has just hired a specialist to handle deliveries to difficult areas.

His name is Aaron Hernandez.

Oh please

[Sycraft-fu]

If you can't see the difference you are being deliberately dense. If Amazon offered NO service to an area, that's one thing, however same day delivery service is a pure luxury. Not only is it not necessary to get something same day, you can always get it next day or later, it is something you cannot get in all areas period, or on all items. Not every city or state has same day delivery, and even if your area does, only some items have it as they have to be stocked at the local warehouse.

So trying to argue that not bringing it to some area is somehow the same as not having electricity is asinine.

Further, you discover that in fact some services are NOT available in all areas. Move to a really rural area and try to get cable service. You'll find out the cable company will just flat out say no. The cost is too far in excess of the returns, they won't run the wire. You have to settle for satellite.

Also things like electricity and phone are different in that they are public utilities, specially regulated and subsidized. You generally have no choice in who your electric transport provider is, there's only one grid, and so the government regulates it. Part of that regulation can be provisions for access to difficult areas, paid for by taxes and fees. Part of your phone bill is fees to pay for phone service to remote locations where there is tens of thousands of dollars in radio links and long-haul lines so that the person who gets the service can pay the same as you.

So if you are arguing Amazon should be a regulated utility ok, but that is a different argument, also a pretty nonsensical one given that they are a retail goods store, just one of many.

Re:Oh please

[NitWit005]

I would like my government mandated back massage now. Stop abusing my human rights!!

Re:Oh please

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody "deserves" luxuries. That's why they're called luxuries. You "deserve" them if you're able to pay for them.

How about curbing same day package thefts?

[Anonymous Coward]

Package thefts are huge in the poor areas, Friends that bought a big victorian mansion for next to nothing are constantly getting packages stolen off their porch because the neighborhood is more hood and very poor. Sorry but if I was amazon, sending packages to poor areas means you have to re-send the package 3-4 times in hopes it doesn't get stolen.

Re:How about curbing same day package thefts?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have they considered a parcel delivery box? One'd think that might be affordable if you get your mansion that cheap?

First world problems

[Anonymous Coward]

One of the dynamics that allow price gouging in poor neighbourhoods is lack of transport options. If you don't have a car or can't afford to run it and have to take public transport then your options are limited. It's what you can walk to, what you can easily get to on the bus, or what gets delivered to your door.

There's also the bike. Of course, here in Europe there are plenty of places where even if you live on the outskirts of a city* you might hit the centre by biking there in 15 minutes. But there's also the moped. It certainly is not a SUV dual-cab pick-up, but it'll get you there and cost very little to run.

It's not like the middle-class suburban lifestyle of being able to easily drive to a number of difference retail and grocery options without thinking about it.

O irony, where it's the working poor that get to staff the big out-of-city big brand parking lot shitstains. With multiple jobs and so multiple commutes eating a large chunk of their already low pay. But yes, you've built 'murica such that you can't quite conceive getting around without a car.

Back to the topic, though, I really don't see how same day delivery is important when you're poor. Getting your order delivered on the next day or the one thereafter is just as good if you plan ahead a little, something you have to do anyway if you are having to make your limited means cover your usual expenses. So to me this ruckus makes no sense. Why would you make your existence depend on whether someone else gets to your door today?

"Same day delivery" is an instant gratification shtick to get you to spend more of your disposable income. If you're poor, you don't have income to dispose on frivolities and so you really don't need to let yourself get lured in such spend, gratification, spend more, spirals toward bankrupcy. So I have this dark hunch that this isn't the poor crying out, but some SJW middle class idjit with no clue to use their surplus of world-improving indignation productively.

* You might call it a town. Cities are towns or even villages that acquired city rights. In a way, that means the townsfolk cared enough about their city to spend on acquiring city rights, and it's that attitude that counts. It's where "citizen" comes from, after all.

Yet Another Argument Based on Race / Income

[PeteJanda]

Any subject can be viewed through a racial or economic lens, but does that mean the argument has legitimacy or merit? Methinks not. Step 1: Pick a historically disadvantaged minority or a currently underperforming group. Step 2: Data mine some negative, unique aspect of said group. Step 3: Start a crusade to right the perceived wrong. Example: Pick a group like Native Americans. Point out that they don't have the same access to the myriad varieties of pasta sauce as everyone else. Write a Bloomberg article about the injustice of Prego's distribution strategy and then watch the ad dollars roll in from the click bait piece. This absurd example is effectively what Bloomberg did with its analysis. Good grief. Amazon would be happy to make money off of quadriplegics if it could. Race has nothing to do with its strategy. Leave the company alone.

Re:Yet Another Argument Based on Race / Income

[Anonymous Coward]

I like Fritos BBQ corn chips... The regular ones, not the shitty twists or honey BBQ ones. But Fritos stopped distributing them to the west coast areas of the USA decades ago. Yes, I could order them from Amazon, but they are marked up 300%. I think this is racist against western USA. Any SJW lawyers want to fix this for me? I want my Fritos BBQ corn chips in S Cali!

Re:Yet Another Argument Based on Race / Income

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't have enough information to decide one way or another about Amazon's decision. The company's choice probably had nothing to do with race, but the outcome is something that plays out in other realms. "Historically disadvantaged communities" will remain disadvantaged if Amazon's reasoning is used for other services, which has been the case. Roads, schools, services, accessibility of voting booths are worse in these parts of town because of historical baggage. The community falls further behind and they are blamed because (in the minds of those who don't pay attention) "everyone has the same opportunities, 'they' just don't care to improve their situation."

Re:Yet Another Argument Based on Race / Income

[Anonymous Coward]

This is true. Fritos won't sell these on the west coast.

Is this really a problem?

[Rick Zeman]

How many ghetto denizens use Amazon to begin with, much less wanting to/being able to pay extra for same day delivery?

Ignorant Leftists

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you know that, *gasp* I live in an area that's too expensive for water or sewer, so I have a well and septic? Holy shit! And even worse, there's no cell service. In fact, the phone company doesn't even do ADSL! Yes, there's a part of hte country that's not new york city or southern california.

Re: Ignorant Leftists

[Anonymous Coward]

You chose to live in that area though.
Most poor people don't want to live in the ghettos. You chose to move to an area with well/septic and it's feasible there. Are you saying people in the city should dig their own wells? How dare them demand access to clean water just like the rest of us have. (Doesn't matter if it's a well or not).

The reason cell service/internet sucks for you is because you probably have like 5 people to service in a lot of square Miles. Or basically you live in the sticks. Compare this to the ghettos who have an abundance of people to support. And since ghettos are usually in big city areas, they have access to big city resources. They should not be cut off from those resources just because they are poorer than most. You don't cut off your nose to spite your face. That's why they have good internet and a full signal on their phones. More people to service == more money.

Basically it all comes down to money.

typical progressive attack on minorities

[ooloorie]

This means that Amazon is effectively going to subsidize delivery business into areas where they are making a loss. But now that they are forced to deliver there, they are effectively going to compete with local businesses at those subsidized prices, and they are likely going to skim off their most profitable customers. It's the local equivalent of what politicians always complain about in international trade: dumping.

The net effect is going to be that these areas are going to be more dependent on a corporate behemoth, small businesses are going to disappear, and poorer people are going to have even less choice. Progressive lawmakers like Ed Markey are really doing everything they can to drive up prices, kill minority businesses, and generally impoverish minority communities.

Re:typical progressive attack on minorities

[eWarz]

Not really, their 2 hour delivery service was always merely a partnership with local (primarily) grocery stores. Amazon doesn't lose a dime regardless of where they provide this. Grocery stores (in my area...nashville) like publix (vs a much cheaper kroger or wal-mart) set the prices and the cost of delivery is built into the total cost of the service. No real 'poor' person will use it anyway. I don't mean to insult amazon, in some 'loss leading areas they provide quite a bit of value, but when I can take product X on their 'prime now' app and compare it to the amazon.com price as well as my grocery store price...guess who comes out way ahead? Wal-mart usually...barring that? Kroger. Definitely not Amazon or Publix.

Re:typical progressive attack on minorities

[ooloorie]

Fact is: Amazon didn't consider it profitable to go into these areas. That means that other businesses there (perhaps locally and minority owned) meet the demand that exists there more efficiently. If forcing Amazon to deliver to those areas has any effect, it's going to be that Amazon is now going to compete with those local businesses. And if they have to expand their business to those areas anyway, they are going to make sure that they are minimizing their losses, which means that they will try to drive as many competitors out of business as they can and get as many customers as they can. How can that possibly be good for those neighborhoods?

Expected Results

[Anonymous Coward]

So when what everyone at Amazon (and everyone with common sense) knows will happen comes to pass, what will people think? Drivers and vehicles WILL be robbed, you can bank on it. Can it happen in nicer areas? Sure, but it WILL happen in the shit-holes that liberal ivory tower types never dare to visit but feel compelled to force others to do so.

Books

[Anonymous Coward]

Books will be the only items not stolen from the vehicles / delivery people. Probably get a few drivers killed when the ghetto denizens find out their newly acquired loot is nothing but printed material.

Fuck right off!

[Anonymous Coward]

Good grief I can't believe this shit shill gets upmodded. Amazon is not a UTILITY, it's a SERVICE COMPANY. Now you have goddamn social justice warriors _and_ courts capturing businesses by propaganda based opinions. Dipshit opinions who believe the propaganda are being praised as so enlightened..Gah! You are a moron and so are the people that believe this shite!

Telling a baker that they have to change their business model and stock right right toppers for whoever walks in the door at their own expense was a step, and we are falling right down the slippery slope everyone used to cast doubt on the takeovers.

Utility != Luxury

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop comparing apples to trout, tis a dumb ass comparison!

Re:Utility != Luxury

[Tom]

Really, is it so far removed? I'm quite sure that 99% of Amazons revenue is not from diamond rings and yachts. Maybe not from necessities like water, but the exaggeration merely illuminates the point.

Do we want to live in a society where everything depends on money? Are we homo sapiens, or homo economicus?

Re: The Muslim Problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Guns are worst than swords. What's your point? The weapons they use are irreverent. Stop moving the goal posts around.

LOL at your guardian article. You are comparing 1 Californian lawyer to a whole religion. That law one person was advocating, won't go into effect, but there are already muslim laws that kill people for such things already. Happening now in other countries.

You are an apologist just admit it. I believe in freedom of religion, this is not a religion. It's a cult. If history does not cater to your standards of belief then look at what is happening right now all over the world.

The Islamic beliefs are a lot like Microsofts strategy: embrace, extend, extinguish. It's that simple people.

The OP is 100% correct. When they reach a point of power and start dictating how you should live by THEIR book, it's already too late. He is also correct when saying that when a war comes who do you think those westernized Muslims will fight for? They won't fight against their brothers of religion. They are going to give in and join the ranks.

How people are not seeing this is absurd to me. I understand not all Muslims are bad. But when those Muslims outnumber us, then there is no other option but to live by their rules and Muslim beliefs. They will accept nothing less. mohammad laid out a fucking blueprint that they are still following to this day. They won't be happy until everyone is 100% muslim. Then they will fight each other. Each believing their views are greater than the next mans. Don't believe me? It's already happening in some parts of the world. Also why we have ISIS and other terror organization.

History and current events are your friends. Don't ignore them, it's dangerous.

What these responses indicate...

[Anonymous Coward]

These responses indicate loudly that either a lot of responders are not Amazon Prime members, a lot of responders have never spent any time in poor neighborhoods, or both...

Amazon should extend their service to poor neighborhoods for the best reason of all: Money. Contrary to the stereotype of the poor neighborhood, there is no shortage of money being spent in them and as a result, no shortages of businesses doing business in poor communities. I for one welcome the potentially positive products Amazon has to offer alongside the junk food, alcohol, and tobacco products that are typically available in great abundance.

Barbershops, Hairdressers, Payday Loans, Rent to own shops, Pawn shops, Car dealerships, convenience stores, Cell phone stores like Ntelos, Frawg, MetroPCS, Sprint, Boo-Boo, etc... There are all kinds of businesses that can be found in so-called poor neighborhoods... WHY? Because unlike in countries like say Bangladesh, most people in America are not poor because they don't have money, they are poor because of their inability to advantageously manage their money in ways similar to the fact that many may not be as nourished as they could be NOT because they don't have access to food, but rather because they have abundant access to cheaper bad foods.

Amazon should therefore service poor neighborhoods for the same reason WalMart does: It's profitable. They can offer better products at lower prices at a higher level of convenience. The USPS delivers to poor neighborhoods, as does UPS and FedEx. Why shouldn't Amazon deliver to poor neighborhoods? The dollars are worth the same amount no matter what zip code they originate from. Prime Now service may or may not extended to poor neighborhoods, but if it is, it won't be out of the good of Jeff Bezos' heart. There won't be any charity involved. It will be good old fashioned American capitalism at work.

"Oh, but the drivers might get robbed"

This is what ultimately kills me: No matter how middle class you may be or consider yourself to be, in today's global economy, you have a far better chance of ending up in the poor class than ending up in the rich class... So here's an idea: Stop judging people and get your heads out of your asses.