Don't blame Amazon. Blame that pea-brain Senator Cortez. She was against it from the beginning, and convinced local businesses that they should campaign against it. Well, she won! 10,000 jobs, gone!
Yay, liberals!!!!
Don't blame Amazon. Blame that pea-brain Senator Cortez. She was against it from the beginning, and convinced local businesses that they should campaign against it. Well, she won! 10,000 jobs, gone!
Yay, liberals!!!!
Tristate wrote:
Don't blame Amazon. Blame that pea-brain Senator Cortez. She was against it from the beginning, and convinced local businesses that they should campaign against it. Well, she won! 10,000 jobs, gone!
Yay, liberals!!!!
Besides the obvious things that are wrong with this post (blasting off on a female POC legislator and just hurling insults when it wasn't even her district), there is absolutely nothing wrong with the people that were involved in this thing trying to hold a company like Amazon more accountable. Amazon wants to make as much money as possible while paying people as little as possible. It is not unreasonable to ask that the jobs be union and that workers can really see how much money amazon might have to share with them. Amazon refused to move off of their all or nothing proposal. It is, again, not too much to ask that Amazon provides good jobs. I wouldn't want 10,000 low paying jobs moving into my neighborhood with all of the other problems that that would bring.
Also, Amazon could pay a little more in taxes.
http://fortune.com/2019/02/14/amazon-doesnt-pay-federal-taxes-2019/As a NYer since September I think the whole thing shows some of the dysfunction in the city.
Let's start off I'm against corporate welfare.However, a plan is going to be in place to incentivize companies, then it should be transparent and open to all.
Yet with this deal no one knew what it entailed until it was announced. Now that means it's a) either not transparent or b) the mayor and governor just want to pretned they have more power than they do. (ie politically they wanted to pretend it was them bringing Amazon to town rather than some program in place for all).
I'm thinking a) happened.
As once the deal was announced, actually nothing was set in stone. No leases signed, politicians could still stop the deal. That leaves things up to corruption or at they very least certain pet projects getting more $$$. ie local pol bitches about amazon so amazon throws $20 million to favored group XYZ.
In a state where the governor's campaign manager (didn't know that), head of the Senate, and head of the House all are or were in jail things need to be way more transparent.
I still don't see how this city is always short on money. It has a) really wealthy people b) high taxes c) expensive real estate and d) even public transportation that is packed.
Only thing I can think is they aren't spending what they take in effectively.
Article below implies they spend 6 times more than Paris would have to expand the city. Paris is a very expensive city with good paying union jobs. Costs should be comparable but they're not. So some politically connected group appears to be benefitting very well but no one notices. If we saved $10 billion on the subway expansion then they wouldn't have to charging the cabbies $400 million a year with a new surcharge to pay for subways.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-construction-costs-congress.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-construction-costs-congress.html
Just googled these on amazon
http://gothamist.com/2018/11/13/amazon_queens_nyc_subsidies.php
http://www.gothamgazette.com/state/8110-a-closer-look-at-the-tax-incentives-in-the-amazon-deal
and Texas get some criticism for its slush fund
No.
heh Chris Derrick, nice well composed argument! glad to see you got the most out of your scholarship.
What a ridiculous post - dbags. My brother deserves every bit of merit thrown his way. Single mother home. Abuse, misery, you name it. 4:10 mile as a sophomore. in high school. Phi Beta Kappa in college (in math) and a good runner, not on talent, but on toughness. Dislikes running now but he used it rather than let it use him. Went to get his Phd on a fellowship - professor for a while - and now renowned in his field . Went to school to study economics back when it was viewed as an important field to prevent another depression a noble calling. You couldn't last five minutes with him intellectually, but then again, very, very few could. And he damn well knows economics, and the notion that economists can't understand the domestic economy is foolish. Now, opinions differ when they run up with politics, but that is understood. By the way, I have given you enough information to discern his identity, but I suspect with your miniature sense of possibilities and intellect it is easier to call someone a liar.
Ahh, Let's Run - home of the many who are perpetually insecure. Mention someone who ran fast, has achieved a lot in life, both intellectually and professionally, and wow, the idiotic comments kick in.
I agree with gallant pig wrote:
Top flight economists do understand economics. My brother, a former 3:40ish 1500 guy, is a renowned investment guy and very skilled PhD economist. He posts on this board from time to time and is remarkably apolitical. My brother stays away from politics as he wants his clients to truly understand the dynamics with the billions upon billions they invest with him, believes that all too often political talk is emotional, rather than fact based. People who approach him wanting to persuade him of one political shibboleth or another quickly become overwhelmed with data put within a sound economic framework. And the economics of states like New York, Illinois, etc., are easier to analyze than the federal government because they cannot print money, and it is relatively easy to assess the long term impact of the intensive borrowing to which these states engage, especially when taking into account the liens on future tax revenues and restrictive covenants the investment banks impose (one reason banks give a lot to Democrats because Democrat run states and cities engage in borrowing on very one sided terms). Economists clear,ly can explicate the problems of states, and are very good at doing so (read those who write for the Bond Buyer publication, a publication admittedly slanted towards bond issuers over taxpayers, but even with that bias, pretty clearly spell out the circumstances of various states, include the deep blue ones which are a mess).
Hi Gallant Pig!!!! 3 different handles, amazing!!!!!
Everyone keeps looking at this from the NYC perspective.
What about from Amazon’s view?
Amazon shopped itself around looking for deals.
It picked NYC not for the deal but for what they offered in infrastructure and talent pool.
Good luck finding tax credits elsewhere to makeup for that.
This is also Amazon’s loss.
Amazon could have simply determined they like the NYC area and started to set up shop there. They can afford it.
And they would have still gotten a good return.
Are they now going to double down on the DC area?
Find the talent they need in Wyoming?
I see the complaints on what NY missed.
But Amazon loses, too.
Bib #1 wrote:
FugaziNYC wrote:
There is no 3.7 billion. It’s a rebate, meaning if the taxes are never paid, there is no savings. That’s what people fail to realize. No ones money was being redirected or taken from them and given to Amazon. The city and state were just going to take less money from Amazon in exchange for 25,000 high paying jobs. They would have surely made that up and tons more by taxing the employees.
Exactly. AOC and company traded in 90% of $30 billion for 100% of nothing
I intended to post something similar, but you did so much more succinctly. It's a big win for leftist propaganda about Amazon "taking our money" or whatever. I never thought I'd be on Cuomo's or De Blasio's side on anything ever, but they were right on this one. If you want to take a stand against corporate greed and taxes, this was the exact wrong situation to do so where the company can easily call your bluff and go elsewhere, depriving the city of jobs and tax revenue.
They should locate their headquarters in Grand Cayman or Singapore just to set an example.
Smart Move! all the way from A-O-C, she's goona be #MegaRich withing 2yrs time of her representative,
with all the Big Corporations PAYING OFF HER to shut her up against them.
This will be fun to watch...
Trump would have worked it out............
To Amazon he would say: "Yes, you will pay fair amount of taxes".
To liberals he would say: "Get out of the way of people who want to work hard, pay their taxes, and raise their families."
NYC taxes subsidize the vast majority of a very rural state. If we were ever really going to run the country like a business we’d shutdown huge swaths of the rural towns that are disproportionately expensive to maintain.
[quote]wejo wrote:
As a NYer since September I think the whole thing shows some of the dysfunction in the city.
Let's start off I'm against corporate welfare.However, a plan is going to be in place to incentivize companies, then it should be transparent and open to all.
Yet with this deal no one knew what it entailed until it was announced. Now that means it's a) either not transparent or b) the mayor and governor just want to pretned they have more power than they do. (ie politically they wanted to pretend it was them bringing Amazon to town rather than some program in place for all).
Farmer Joe wrote:
NYC taxes subsidize the vast majority of a very rural state. If we were ever really going to run the country like a business we’d shutdown huge swaths of the rural towns that are disproportionately expensive to maintain.
Not. Rural sections of NY and most other states subsidize the welfare programs that dominate in urban centers of those states.
Since when did AOC switch from the house to the senate? I must’ve missed that.
Try again https://www.politifact.com/new-york/statements/2016/oct/14/chris-jacobs/state-spends-more-western-new-york-it-receives-tax/ And the portion of NY north of Albany and Syracuse is significantly worse
Farmer Joe’s accountant wrote:
Farmer Joe wrote:
NYC taxes subsidize the vast majority of a very rural state. If we were ever really going to run the country like a business we’d shutdown huge swaths of the rural towns that are disproportionately expensive to maintain.
Not. Rural sections of NY and most other states subsidize the welfare programs that dominate in urban centers of those states.
Farmer Joe wrote:
Try again
https://www.politifact.com/new-york/statements/2016/oct/14/chris-jacobs/state-spends-more-western-new-york-it-receives-tax/And the portion of NY north of Albany and Syracuse is significantly worse
Farmer Joe’s accountant wrote:
Not. Rural sections of NY and most other states subsidize the welfare programs that dominate in urban centers of those states.
The article starts with “The state said it could not break out total spending by region.”. There you go. All other claims in the article are therefore blemished.
Amazing that she (or her Social Media manager) plunged into this Twitter trap.
I guess Publicity is more Powerful than Ignorance on Display?
