Unions increase the wages of all workers. The decline of unions has directly led to a decline in real wages across the board.
This really shouldn't be hard to understand. Unions increase the bargaining power of workers, and wages depend upon worker bargaining power.
Considering that Amazon already allows Prime users to stream content to iOS devices, clearly the in-app purchases aren't a limiting factor. Besides, they can just get around these fees entirely, if they so choose, by forcing users to purchase their subscriptions over the web instead of using in-app purchases. Some content providers allow users to use in-app purchases, but increase the prices to make up for the 30% fee.
Amazon is free to produce their own app for Chromecast or Apple TV. This is probably more an issue where they want to push people into buying their own devices instead of Apple or Android devices.
Furthermore, Amazon does not have a fundamental right to refuse to sell anything it wants. Certain refusals similar to this one are outlawed (see here). According to the FTC's website there, if a company is refusing to provide a product in a strategy to acquire or maintain a monopoly, then it's illegal. I don't know whether this applies in this case (IANAL), but it certainly is a practice that harms consumers, and therefore should be outlawed.
That's a good question. ChromeOS is a heck of a lot more convenient if all you want to do is use web apps (the nearly instant boot time is a big plus: Android devices can take more than a minute for a simple boot, and 45+ minutes for an OS update), but Android offers a much broader variety of functionality. Because of this, I suspect many people will continue to go for ChromeOS devices. I suspect this one is using Android primarily because it doubles as a tablet, and ChromeOS really isn't designed for that.
Prices are set by the overall money supply*. A UBI would have net zero impact on the overall money supply, and so wouldn't have much of an impact on prices. Some prices would change, due to the fact that different people would have the money with a UBI than without. But the overall impact would be pretty minimal.
* With some caveats related monetary velocity, but those aren't really relevant to the point at hand: inflation is actively managed by the Fed, and a UBI won't change that.
No, they don't do it just for the hell of it. They do it because they can, and because they're shitty people.
Many of the more successful companies (such as Google) go out of their way to make sure their employees' needs are taken care of, and that they have a decent work environment. There's a reason why this is a good strategy: happy, mentally healthy employees are more productive, and less likely to leave for another company (it takes time and money to train new employees).
And if you think that people can just walk away right now, clearly you think people can just stop eating and still be okay.
As for people not going to work anyway, a UBI won't ever be big enough for people to live well.
Well, if you want to get technical the best way to do public policy is to employ an experimental approach that compares outcomes to find the best solutions. I'd be perfectly fine with the implementation of a UBI following this kind of experimental approach. But I have a hard time seeing how it would be anything but massively beneficial.
So much wrong.
For one, increasing the minimum wage doesn't increase everybody's wages, and overall inflation is fixed by Federal Reserve policy. So no, you won't have a situation where prices rise to compensate for the wage increase. Some prices will go up. Others will go down. Overall there will be very little average change.
Second, since the 1970's, hourly wages have been falling compared to productivity, and are now around half of what we would have expected given the productivity of the US economy. There has been massive redistribution of wealth away from workers and towards the rich. That needs to be reversed. Also, given that the period from about 1950-1980 had higher economic growth than any period since, there's good reason to believe that redistributing the income back to where it was back then (when you could support a family on a full-time minimum wage job) would help rather than hurt the overall economy.
Also, illegal immigration makes US citizens richer. It's high time we stopped abusing them for helping us.
And there is no job shortage? What rock have you been living under?
Getting unconditional basic income would be a huge boon for workers. If leaving work becomes a viable option for nearly everybody, then employers will no longer be able to abuse their employees. They'll actually have to offer decent working conditions, or the workers will just walk away. This should end bullshit practices like firing people for not working on holidays, or getting pregnant, or complaining about sexual harassment.
It wouldn't happen immediately, but a UBI would dramatically improve the employment marketplace for employees.
What this country needs is a dime that will buy a good five-cent bagel.