02-15-2019, 03:16 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2019, 03:20 PM by WRXtranceformed.)
(02-15-2019, 03:05 PM)G.Irish Wrote: So a couple of points:
Did NYC government actually renege on any of their promises?
I don't think they did. A bunch of people were making noise but I haven't seen where anything was cancelled on the government side.
The tax incentives were $500 million, not $3 billion
The $3 billion number was existing tax incentives that any company could've taken advantage of, they weren't created for Amazon. $500 million in tax incentives was offered for Amazon, and that was contingent on them creating jobs at the specified salaries. The increased tax base from high paying jobs would've paid for the tax incentive and then some, based on NYC tax rates. But people kept throwing out that $3 billion number like it was some windfall concocted just for Amazon.
If no one cancelled anything, it's weaksauce for Amazon to pull out
Amazon should've expected criticism for making a reality show out of their HQ2 process. They were playing cities against each other to extract tax incentives, so of course some people were gonna be salty about it. I don't see what the point is of taking your ball and going home just because some mean old politicians and disgruntled citizens said mean things about your company.
The tax giveaway bonanza sucks, but that's the way our government is set up
I don't really believe in municipalities doing this tax break song and dance to win business but at the end of the day each state can make its own tax policy. And each state can use its tax policy as a carrot. If you try to outlaw tax incentives for individual businesses, states will just change corporate tax policy to woo companies. And I don't see a way you can ban than without fundamentally altering state sovereignty.
So this kind of stuff is here to stay. If citizens make a stink about tax incentive favoritism more often, less companies will be as brazen about playing the game, but I think the lobbying will just shift towards lowering corporate tax rates.
All points well taken. On #1, I swear I read that some of those politicians were pushing to send the deal back to the table or try to block it entirely, hence my reneg comment. If I was wrong on that point I'll own it.
Edit: Yeah while they hadn't renegged yet, Amazon assumed it was most likely heading that direction based on the backlash they were receiving from Left Trump and others, and the appointment of a Queens rep to that board. From the NYT (one of my least favorite publications):
Both the mayor’s and the governor’s offices reassured Amazon executives that, despite the vocal criticism, the deal they had negotiated would be approved. But the company appeared upset at even a moderate level of resistance, said the person, who, like many of the people describing private conversations at the company and with elected officials, did so on the condition of anonymity.
A decisive moment appeared to come when the Senate Democrats selected Senator Michael Gianaris of Queens for a state board with the power to veto the deal. Mr. Gianaris had once supported the efforts to bring Amazon to New York, but became a vocal critic after learning the details of the plan.
Kathryn S. Wylde, the chief executive of the Partnership for New York City, an influential business group, said the reception Amazon had received sent a “pretty bad message to the job creators” of the city and the world.
“How can anyone be surprised?” Ms. Wylde said. “We competed successfully, made a deal and spent the last three months trashing our new partner.”
(02-15-2019, 03:12 PM).RJ Wrote:(02-15-2019, 02:19 PM)WRXtranceformed Wrote: I would maybe get off the hyper-lib podcast juice though bro, that stuff rots your brain as much as the right wing media does
It likely came from either Freakonomics & Planet Money. Try harder next time.
And yes, cities do plenty of dumb shit and they are free to spend their money however they like - and if the residents dont like it they can vote in a new mayor. But historically a lot of incentives havent shown a net positive on the economy like they were promised to so my point was to not take these deals at face value.
Mhhhmmmm I see the trash you quote and cross post on Facebook (when you're not getting owned by GCs)

Love you boo
Posting in the banalist of threads since 2004
2017 Mazda CX-5 GT AWD Premium
Past: 2016 GMC Canyon All Terrain Crew Cab / 2010 Jaguar XFR / 2012 Acura RDX AWD Tech / 2008 Cadillac CTS / 2007 Acura TL-S / 1966 5.0 HO Mustang Coupe
2001 Lexus IS300 / 2004 2.8L big turbo WRX STI / 2004 Subaru WRX / A couple of old trucks
2017 Mazda CX-5 GT AWD Premium
Past: 2016 GMC Canyon All Terrain Crew Cab / 2010 Jaguar XFR / 2012 Acura RDX AWD Tech / 2008 Cadillac CTS / 2007 Acura TL-S / 1966 5.0 HO Mustang Coupe
2001 Lexus IS300 / 2004 2.8L big turbo WRX STI / 2004 Subaru WRX / A couple of old trucks
