• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Amazon a no go in NYC. AOC slams Bezos

Lol. The Progressive Movement in this country is so clueless. Sadly Republicans have nothing to worry about because as bad as they say screw it up they'll be handed the keys of power again.
 
there is a difference between place-based and people-based development

there is not much doubt that half the Amazon HQ2 would bring in high paying jobs, increase the tax revenue for the city, and raise the profile of New York

there is also not much doubt that it would raise rents/housing costs/property taxes for people already living there, bring in mostly non-NYers to the city, and eat into the short term spending on public items, like schools, transit, job programs, etc.

I'm not aware of any concurrent programs from Amazon or the city to ensure that current residents won't be displaced -- residential property tax freezes in the area, job training programs, public school programs, etc.

median real wages have not gone up since the 1970s -- Amazon coming to an area benefits only one class of people and it's mostly not the people who currently live in Queens

as pointed out, Amazon had an effective federal tax rate of -1%
 
ChrisL68 said:
Lol. The Progressive Movement in this country is so clueless. Sadly Republicans have nothing to worry about because as bad as they say screw it up they'll be handed the keys of power again.
Click to expand...

Yep.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
right, and AOC, as the representative of the people that live there and not the ones that might someday live there, pushed back on it
Click to expand...

https://nypost.com/2019/02/12/majority-of-new-yorkers-want-amazons-hq2-in-queens-poll/

“In New York City, where some local activists have voiced opposition, voters approve of the deal by 23 points,” he adds.

Minorities were the biggest Amazon boosters.

Among black voters, 70 percent backed the deal while only 25 percent objected.

Among Latinos, 81 percent supported Amazon while only 17 percent were opposed.

Whites were in favor, 51 percent to 40 percent.

Amazon has been criticized for being inhospitable to unions. But even voters in union households support bringing the retail giant to the Big Apple — 53 percent in favor compared to 40 percent against.
Click to expand...

Great job "representing" the people that live there.
 
in New York, sure, but what about in West Queens?

and as your article says, that was one poll -- the other had less than half of NYers supporting it
 
Liquid Karma said:
Yay, let's celebrate 25,000 jobs not coming to our area. Wheeeeee...

Really fucking tone def celebration by AOC.
Click to expand...

Juice already touched on this, but not remotely this simple. Targeted tax incentives to big corporations are bad economics and generally net negatives for communities.
 
First of all saying what Amazon actually pays in federal taxes based on their financial reporting filings is a Fool's errand. However definitely one of the main drivers would be the extreme disconnect as to how stock compensation is accounted for in financial reporting versus how it's accounted for in tax reporting. In reality how it's accounted for in tax reporting makes much more economic sense. There can easily be situations where the employee exercises a stock option worth $150 that the employee exercises for $50. This would be a $100 transaction according to basic cash movement. The company deducts $100 and the employee pays $100 in taxes on wages. For financial reporting purposes, the company could have recognized $10 for book expense related to these options.
 
Last edited:
look at all those right-to-work southern states that offered big incentives to move manufacturing south from the Northeast and Midwest -- how did that work out, on the balance?

look at FoxConn

look at Boeing, who shook down Seattle in the 1990s when they announced they were going to move their HQs if they didn't get another round of incentives, which Seattle conceded, only to have Boeing move HQs to Chicago a few years later
 
A little nuts to me to not put some blame Amazon for this -- their excuse for not going through with it was pretty pathetic and not coming to the table to talk was a lame move.
 
Shooshmoo said:
A little nuts to me to not put some blame Amazon for this -- their excuse for not going through with it was pretty pathetic and not coming to the table to talk was a lame move.
Click to expand...

This. They took their ball and went home instead of working with the local population to address their concerns. There is a sizable middle ground between no and yes and Amazon didn’t even want to sit at the table. I would hope LK, CL, and even Junebug would see the value of actually working with locals rather than bulldozing their way into a community with government backing.

Also, a $3B investment can create a lot of jobs without having to go through Amazon. Just do the math. Spending $3B in taxpayer money to create 25,000 jobs averaging $100,000 a year that will mostly go to people who didn’t pay those taxes isn’t a good deal at all. That money could be spent on current residents and be a much better investment.
 
PhDeac said:
This. They took their ball and went home instead of working with the local population to address their concerns. There is a sizable middle ground between no and yes and Amazon didn’t even want to sit at the table. I would hope LK, CL, and even Junebug would see the value of actually working with locals rather than bulldozing their way into a community with government backing.

Also, a $3B investment can create a lot of jobs without having to go through Amazon. Just do the math. Spending $3B in taxpayer money to create 25,000 jobs averaging $100,000 a year that will mostly go to people who didn’t pay those taxes isn’t a good deal at all. That money could be spent on current residents and be a much better investment.
Click to expand...

There is a very large difference between granting $3 billion in tax breaks and spending $3 billion.
 
PhDeac said:
This. They took their ball and went home instead of working with the local population to address their concerns. There is a sizable middle ground between no and yes and Amazon didn’t even want to sit at the table. I would hope LK, CL, and even Junebug would see the value of actually working with locals rather than bulldozing their way into a community with government backing.

Also, a $3B investment can create a lot of jobs without having to go through Amazon. Just do the math. Spending $3B in taxpayer money to create 25,000 jobs averaging $100,000 a year that will mostly go to people who didn’t pay those taxes isn’t a good deal at all. That money could be spent on current residents and be a much better investment.
Click to expand...

the government that is elected by the community?
 
ImTheCaptain said:
the government that is elected by the community?
Click to expand...

Yeah. And government that was elected by more than the community, like the entire city of NYC and the state of NY.

BiffTannen said:
There is a very large difference between granting $3 billion in tax breaks and spending $3 billion.
Click to expand...

Either way, not taxing $3B to net less than that in jobs is a bad idea. I'm sure current businesses would appreciate a share of $3B in tax breaks if the government really wants to spend it.
 
any of the people hating on AOC et al care to address the lack of evidence in support of corporate welfare?
 
Junebug said:
The CNN article says 25,000 jobs at an average of $150,000 per job. That’s $3.75B.
Click to expand...

I saw several articles that said 25,000 at an average of $100,000 per job. Either way, most of the higher paying jobs will go to people outside of the community and it will drive up costs for current residents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top