Amazon doesn't need to make a profit now, they're seizing market share. The banks and railroads colluded to do the same monopolistic practices in the 1870s+ until people eventually hated them so much we almost had a revolution (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Railroad_Strike_of_1877 ) and then later in the progressive era started to break up the big trusts.
Ultimately there is a problem with the e-economy that didn't exist as much in the brick and mortar days, at least post trust busting period: the way you generally become successful online is by cornering the market. Eventually there is one company with a majority of the market share in search engines (google); one with a majority in ride sharing (uber); one with a majority in b&b/house renting (air bnb); one with 43% of all online retail shares trying to become a majority (amazon).
My brother-in-law works for Audible, which is the Amazon company for audio books, which has well over 90% market share in the audio book industry. His job is basically to research their "competitors" and then to decide which ones are real enough to buy out. Then they buy them out, often making the founders of those companies a big cash offer they feel like they can't refuse, and their near monopoly continues.
The traditional economy generally didn't work that way. There were dozens of audio book companies when it was books on tape. There were five or six big hotel chains in addition to the mom and pops. Even in the most mega-corporate world of all, fast food, there were always several different chains to choose from and thousands of individual franchise owners.
Even if you don't think these e-commerce companies are an anti-trust issue (obviously I do), at the bare minimum, shouldn't it give you pause about giving them big tax breaks that their competitors don't have? Why should the government be in charge of picking winners and losers in the business world, if you don't trust government generally? It's bizarre to me that people who would probably otherwise hate Bill Peduto, Tom Wolf, and Rich Fitzgerald now want to provide them political coverage to make a huge move.
If you don't see the problems here, check out Adam Smith,
The interest of the dealers [referring to stock owners, manufacturers, and merchants], however, in any particular branch of trade or manufacture, is always in some respects different from, and even opposite to, that of the public. To widen the market and to narrow the competition, is always the interest of the dealers. To widen the market may frequently be agreeable enough to the interest of the public; but to narrow the competition must always be against it, and can serve only to enable the dealers, by raising their profits above what they naturally would be, to levy, for their own benefit, and absurd tax upon the rest of their fellow-citizens. (Wealth of Nations)