Amazon Ditches it's second HQ in NYC because of Politics.

[spanishninja]

Nothing guarantees that return.
Also, by not granting this advantage to Amazon, NY can better support other companies, for similar long-term returns, without paying out similar money as what is essentially a bribe. Again; the idea that it's Amazon or nothing is a fundamentally silly argument.



For the return in actual health care, yes, it is cost effective.

None of this is about the total amount. It's about the results.

I fail to see how other companies are going to go anywhere near NYC now.

I don't know what you mean by "not guaranteed", this article breaks it down in good detail. Then you think about not just the 25k jobs that would have contributed income tax, but the several fold more in supplemental business created because these workers were there now. pizza places, courier services, etc.

This was purely a dogmatic move, as the real impact of Amazon moving in would have been significant. This is why the move was supported by a majority of people there. People like AOC wanted a symbolic victory over "giving billionaires tax breaks" over bringing tangible benefit to the community. But hey, I don't live in NYC so I don't really even mind it happened. Just feel sorry for the people there.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/majorit...ws-11549967400

[dippinsawse]

Hubcap, you wouldn't know an actual socialist program if it harvested your organs to donate them to orphans.

This is literally what you look like when you try to pretend that AOC is "socialist":

You can't model things off of norway for a country like the US. Norway is able to have strong social policies because it is already a wealthy country with a homogenized group of people. When everyone is fairly similar, they have a lot of money to go around, and they don't really have to deal with massive wealth inequality it is much more feasible to have a system like they do. They have a lot of resources and land and very few people which means the wealth they do have is easy to spread out. Basically Norway has so many innate advantages that it doesn't really matter what their government is like, they have a huge margin for error.

You simply can't reasonably apply that to the US. We have one of the most diverse people in the world with different healthcare needs, beliefs, and levels of income. We have far more people compared to the wealth we have and we have much more wealth disparity. We don't have the benefit of having far more wealth than we do people like Norway does. If you want universal healthcare and other such programs, that's great, but it's not really possible. Americans already spend more on healthcare per year than the government even collects in both income and payroll taxes combined. You know that whole looming threat of social security failing? Yeah, well that's not even half of what we spend on healthcare and we can't even afford to keep that shit going for much longer let alone add on trillions more in spending.

Also, AOC IS an actual socialist. She isn't just a "scandinavian socialist". She's a legit socialist who wants a "democratic" government system to control the economy and ensure jobs etc. The democratic socialists of america are tied with several full blown socialist groups and openly say on their own website that the end goal is to do away with capitalism altogether--they just know it won't happen over night so they want to slowly ease the population into socialism by getting them to vote for socialist policies.

[Dsonsion]

So basically, the whole country has to bend over for the rich or they will punish you?

This is getting ridiculously close to a new version of feudalism.

[dippinsawse]

So basically, the whole country has to bend over for the rich or they will punish you?

This is getting ridiculously close to a new version of feudalism.

Well the problem isn't really that people have to bend over in order for someone to invest in a community and put a business there. The problem is that companies like amazon are so big and have such a stranglehold on their respective industries that there isn't enough competition to create a strong enough opposing bargaining position for workers.

It's okay if a business wants incentives to decide to put its business in a certain community. That's extremely common and core to economic strategy. It's not really bending over backwards for them, it's trying to make your community more appealing to them so they decide to give your people jobs that they otherwise wouldn't have.

The thing now is that you can't really start a business anymore. You can't just do what you want and make a living. People rely too much on big businesses to survive now and can't really just go start a farm or something and live on their own. There are too many regulations and big monopolistic entities are too efficient and have too many friends in washington. So there is now so little viability for competition that they could put their HQ wherever they want and the communities basically have to beg for it otherwise they have no jobs.

That is why we have laws against monopolies and why the globalization of the economy is a problem. This is why, in my opinion, we need to be breaking up these massive companies and helping people create more local businesses again so that they are able to go work and do what they want without being at the mercy of massive global corporations. It's not that businesses and local governments shouldn't be able to bargain to make a given area more appealing to invest in and build industries in. It's that these companies have too much power and too many options whereas the average worker has too little value and bargaining power when these companies could just pay people in china a third of our minimum wage to do the same job for example. And the US worker doesn't have the ability to just start their own business that can compete with such a massive corporate entity so they are forced to bargain unfavorably.

[Sorshen]

Wasn't her district or decision. Amazon failed to strongarm NYC. But that won't stop Zenkai from shitposting with Fox opinion pieces about how everyone should be thankful the corps are willing to throw a bone from their table... for bending over. Just another day in gen-ot.

[Endus]

I fail to see how other companies are going to go anywhere near NYC now.

Oh, yeah, companies are totally going to abandon a major market for shits and giggles. NYC is totally a struggling economy.

Do you think about this stuff before you post it?

I don't know what you mean by "not guaranteed", this article breaks it down in good detail.

I mean there's no legal guarantee of that return. The $3 billion in tax breaks isn't tied to a certain amount of revenue. The "pledge" described is not legally binding. Amazon can engage in some building, gain the tax breaks over that construction, and later decide to put their HQ somewhere else and they'll repurpose or sell the building and NYC gets nothing. That's the issue with these things; there's no guarantee on the return. If the company chooses not to follow through on their end, the city or state is SOL.

Then you think about not just the 25k jobs that would have contributed income tax, but the several fold more in supplemental business created because these workers were there now. pizza places, courier services, etc.

Again, the idea that Amazon is the sole possible company to take advantage of NYC is . . . silly. This isn't a case of "Amazon or nothing". It's "Amazon with a $3 billion tax break, or literally anyone else for some other deal and possibly no incentives required".

This was purely a dogmatic move, as the real impact of Amazon moving in would have been significant. This is why the move was supported by a majority of people there. People like AOC wanted a symbolic victory over "giving billionaires tax breaks" over bringing tangible benefit to the community. But hey, I don't live in NYC so I don't really even mind it happened. Just feel sorry for the people there.

There was a ton of pressure by the community to push Amazon out. Amazon has a poor employment record, and strongly opposes unionization, and NYC is a strong union town.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/majorit...ws-11549967400

Really not the strong support you claimed. Also, there was less support for the subsidization than for locating the HQ in Queens, which is the number your source is citing.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/14/n...land-city.html

I'm not even arguing it's definitely the right move. Just that it's not an unreasonable one.

[Varvara Spiros Gelashvili]

I'm 50/50 amazon moving in would have raised rent and hurt citizens. They can also get another deal in the future. New york also has an unemployment rate of 4.5%. There are smaller areas that could use the jobs and the other hq is getting built there. Google moved into to new york and rent went up massively. Citzens well beings over some change isn't a bad thing. Well it's change to new york, Texas, and california.

New yorks current gdp is 1.103 trillion USD and 13 billion is fucking change in comparison.

[AceofH]

The big mean AOC doesn't bow down to the corporate giant..booo hoo. lol

and when 25,000 people are out of jobs because amazon isn't there to employ them, you know who to blaim.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, it's so unfortunate when a politician stands up for the people who voted for her, rather than submitting to the whims of an international megacorporation.

Tragic.

slash-fucking-S.

her people wanted amazon in new york because it meant JOBS and MONEY.

[Varvara Spiros Gelashvili]

and when 25,000 people are out of jobs because amazon isn't there to employ them, you know who to blaim.

New York has an unemployment rate of 4.5% and over 1.1 trillion dollars in gdp they don't need Amazon. Amazons move would have raise rent and inflated prices. Citizen over corporations. California is super business friendly and now people can't find homes at decent prices. There is a balance and priorities. The current government deserve shit for being business unfriedly but this isn't neccesarily a bad thing for the average citizen whose just ignored.

[AceofH]

New York has an unemployment rate of 4.5% and over 1.1 trillion dollars in gdp they don't need amazon. Amazon move would have raise rent and inflated prices. Citizen over corporations. California is super business friendly and now people can't find homes for decent prices. There is a balance and priorities.

and yet according to studies people have cited, 70% of the people wanted amazon to come to NY. so yeah congratulations.

[Varvara Spiros Gelashvili]

and yet according to studies people have cited, 70% of the people wanted amazon to come to NY. so yeah congratulations.

I know, the current government deserve shit but overall it's not a bad thing being the business hub of the world can take a back seat when it comes to helping the people who actually live there. Unless you want New York to equal California. Texas is starting to have housing problems.

Can you link that study?

[Collegeguy]

You can't model things off of norway for a country like the US. Norway is able to have strong social policies because it is already a wealthy country with a homogenized group of people. When everyone is fairly similar, they have a lot of money to go around, and they don't really have to deal with massive wealth inequality it is much more feasible to have a system like they do. They have a lot of resources and land and very few people which means the wealth they do have is easy to spread out. Basically Norway has so many innate advantages that it doesn't really matter what their government is like, they have a huge margin for error.

You simply can't reasonably apply that to the US. We have one of the most diverse people in the world with different healthcare needs, beliefs, and levels of income. We have far more people compared to the wealth we have and we have much more wealth disparity. We don't have the benefit of having far more wealth than we do people like Norway does. If you want universal healthcare and other such programs, that's great, but it's not really possible. Americans already spend more on healthcare per year than the government even collects in both income and payroll taxes combined. You know that whole looming threat of social security failing? Yeah, well that's not even half of what we spend on healthcare and we can't even afford to keep that shit going for much longer let alone add on trillions more in spending.

Also, AOC IS an actual socialist. She isn't just a "scandinavian socialist". She's a legit socialist who wants a "democratic" government system to control the economy and ensure jobs etc. The democratic socialists of america are tied with several full blown socialist groups and openly say on their own website that the end goal is to do away with capitalism altogether--they just know it won't happen over night so they want to slowly ease the population into socialism by getting them to vote for socialist policies.

Norway is a pretty bad example. Much of their economy is on oil. Probably a better one would be Germany.

Also, we have far more people than we have wealth? Have you seen the US military budget? Why is the US still spending like it's in WW2.

[Arenis]

The lost jobs would have paid on average $150,000 per year.

That's a cheeky way to hide all the pretty much minimum wage earnings. More interested in the median or outlier-adjusted wages. But it's fauxnews so proper reporting = lulz.

[TheBeardedOne]

Norway is a pretty bad example. Much of their economy is on oil. Probably a better one would be Germany.

Also, we have far more people than we have wealth? Have you seen the US military budget? Why is the US still spending like it's in WW2.

Well I hope they keep up spending as someone needs to burn China to the ground soon.

[AceofH]

I know, the current government deserve shit but overall it's not a bad thing being the business hub of the world can take a back seat when it comes to helping the people who actually live there. Unless you want New York to equal California. Texas is starting to have housing problems.

Can you link that study?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/majorit...ws-11549967400
WSJ says 56% supported. best i can find myself on short notice.

[Varvara Spiros Gelashvili]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/majorit...ws-11549967400
WSJ says 56% supported. best i can find myself on short notice.

Yea but rent would've expoded happened after google moved in as well. They can prioritize local businnes and citizen over chump change sucks most states lost the geography game though. I also wished california tried it once. Texas is just starting to feel the effects of becoming a massive business hub so there is still time.

How many of those people wanted a renegotiated deal? It might not even be 56% when other factors are included.

[AceofH]

Yea but rent would've expoded happened after google moved in as well. They can prioritize local businnes and citizen over chump change sucks most states lost the geography game though. I also wished california tried it once. Texas is just starting to feel the effects of becoming a massive business hub so there is still time.

How many of those people wanted a renegotiated deal? It might not even be 56% when other factors are included.

what do people want? they want jobs. that's 25,000 jobs right there that don't potentially exist anymore. 25,000 jobs that the majority wanted and supported. that being the point.

[Varvara Spiros Gelashvili]

what do people want? they want jobs. that's 25,000 jobs right there that don't potentially exist anymore. 25,000 jobs that the majority wanted and supported. that being the point.

I know but 4.5% unemployment rate there are other local business and such that could be hurt by letting amazon in as well. The answer isn't just black and white but a spectrum at least to me.

The majority wanted a deal but there are other factors to consider like how many wanted it renegotiated and such.

[AceofH]

I know but 4.5% unemployment rate there are other local business and such that could be hurt by letting amazon in as well.

look you can keep pointing out whatever you want but the fact is this
56% of new yorkers wanted amazon, and the jobs and revenue they would have brought.
and yet they were chased away by the 35% that didn't want it.


nothing changes that. the few ruined it for the many.

btw, the unemployment rate in the US is 4%. seems like those 25,000 jobs could help bring down the NY levels and thus the national average.

[Varvara Spiros Gelashvili]

look you can keep pointing out whatever you want but the fact is this
56% of new yorkers wanted amazon, and the jobs and revenue they would have brought.
and yet they were chased away by the 35% that didn't want it.


nothing changes that. the few ruined it for the many.

It was 36% new york times blocked me off for the paragraph. That's not technically true because your poll leaves out options like a different deal or such. 13 billion is chump change compared to a 1.1 trillion budget.

You kind of trying to use facts you don't have.