Electile Dysfunction (Current students plz look!)

[.RJ]

I dont have time to go digging, and my only source of info is podcasts, but historically tax incentives are not a good deal for the city when viewed in light of where else that money could be used. Its not very clear cut. Amazon coming to NYC is good, the tax incentives to get them there are not clearly good.

[Apoc]

Amazon coming to NYC is good, the tax incentives to get them there are not clearly good.

This.

[.RJ]

Companies have a long history of using tax incentives to pit local economies against each other and screwing the tax payer for their benefit, so I'd expect any new deal, especially as large as Amazon, to be looked at with a lot of skepticism. The worst offense of this is the FoxConn fiasco.

[WRXtranceformed]

If that's all that we're arguing is the philosophical issue that states or cities shouldn't dangle tax incentives in front of companies, I don't have a position on it either way. It is what it is, states and cities use their tax powers on way dumber stuff (like Atlanta building a foot bridge for $100M+ for the Superbowl that didn't even get used). 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

[G.Irish]

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.

[.RJ]

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.

[WRXtranceformed]

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.”

---

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

[.RJ]

Mhhhmmmm I see the trash you quote and cross post on Facebook (when you're not getting owned by GC'd) 

Love you boo

smooches.

fuck old houses. where's my tax credit for this shit

[WRXtranceformed]

Mhhhmmmm I see the trash you quote and cross post on Facebook (when you're not getting owned by GC'd) 

Love you boo

smooches.

fuck old houses.  where's my tax credit for this shit  

They should issue tax refunds for "Homeownership Pain and Suffering"

[.RJ]

thoughts and prayers

[Apoc]

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.

Perhaps you forgot the failed Head Tax for large Seattle employers that was championed by the most vocal opponent of Amazon on the city council? Words today; policy tomorrow.

[G.Irish]

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.

Perhaps you forgot the failed Head Tax for large Seattle employers that was championed by the most vocal opponent of Amazon on the city council? Words today; policy tomorrow.

Was there extended saber rattling about that?  Didn't it get struck down fairly quickly?

[Apoc]

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.

Perhaps you forgot the failed Head Tax for large Seattle employers that was championed by the most vocal opponent of Amazon on the city council? Words today; policy tomorrow.

Was there extended saber rattling about that?  Didn't it get struck down fairly quickly?

Yes, probably a year's worth. It got revoked by the same people that passed it because the opposition raised enough signatures in a few days to put it to public vote. Most of the city council members who voted for and then revoked it have decided not to run for re-election. The original champion of it is one of the few running for reelection. Her language is more extreme than AOC because she's a socialist, but they sound very similar.

Seattle City Council also passed an income tax on high earners, that was struck down for being unconstitutional at the state level (municipalities are banned from enacting such laws).

Words matter.

[Apoc]

Anecdotal, but I know literally know one who wanted them here and everyone was more excited that it is now gone.

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

A December poll showed a majority of New Yorkers welcomed Amazon, especially those in the Bronx, Queens and Staten Island. The move was also popular among blacks and Hispanics.

[Deceus]

Oh boy that post did not disappoint haha. Yeah I thought it was pretty clear why they bailed. People like AOC are getting a metric ton of exposure and that kinda of heat can't be good for business. I'd want to be as far away from that dumpster fire as possible if I were them too. I imagine after seeing their stocks dip 2.4% after a single Trump tweet, they weren't looking to play that game.

I also agree, while the tax breaks are kinda shitty they're ultimately unavoidable under the current system we have. Things like this just make you wonder why things just can't be simple. Set a flat tax, throw in a few things on the upper end in for good measure and budget accordingly. That will sadly never happen. People are too attached to the idea of taxes being a way to punish the rich.

[G.Irish]

People are too attached to the idea of taxes being a way to punish the rich.

It's not that at all. It's that people are too tied to the idea of using taxation to modify behavior. Governments use taxes to woo businesses or get people to stop doing something unhealthy or encourage people to buy something or to support one lifestyle over another (kids vs no kids for example).

Erase all of that and there's no carrot, and no stick.

Taxes don't really punish the rich in the US at all since the tax code is riddled with vehicles the rich can leverage to lower their tax burden. A lot of wealthy people pile on more wealth with investments and from the start that tax rate is 15%, which is less than half of what working stiffs pay. From there, there are a bunch of ways to get that burden even lower.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[Deceus]

I wouldn't say it's not that at all but will agree it's not that entirely. I was mainly speaking of the aspect of people getting a raging hard-on for luxury taxes thinking they're going to finally stick it to rich bastards everywhere. Rand Paul made a statement a while back that hit the nail on the head: "you can't punish the rich". The outrage I saw from that statement was eye-opening. Taxes don't punish the rich not mainly because of loopholes but because they have options. Slap a tax on yachts and they'll buy them somewhere else, jack up property taxes and they'll move, hit their industry with tariffs and they'll raise prices to match. It's the shipbuilders, neighborhoods and customers that suffer not the rich but time and again I've seen people think the solution to taxes is simply taking it from the rich.

[.RJ]

There's a bit of class warfare going on, and even raising the taxes on the super rich, where does that get us for our economy and our future?

[WRXtranceformed]

Severely penalizing the rich and the super rich (ie. the idiotic proposed 90% tax) and milking the upper middle class and middle class with proportionately heavy taxes IMO discourages a capitalistic mentality and pushes us toward a socialistic mindset. The vast majority of Americans do not want this. I think cities and state municipalities can do a better job of allocating their taxes (see conversation above) toward social programs and creating opportunities for the lower class if that's what their people want. ie. $100M would go a lot further toward helping "the poor" of ATL vs. a bridge that's going to collect dust.

Blindly taxing anyone who is successful just puts more money into federal coffers, and the fed has mostly proven that they can't handle programs of mass charity (IMO)

[CaptainHenreh]

I wouldn't say it's not that at all but will agree it's not that entirely. I was mainly speaking of the aspect of people getting a raging hard-on for luxury taxes thinking they're going to finally stick it to rich bastards everywhere. Rand Paul made a statement a while back that hit the nail on the head: "you can't punish the rich". The outrage I saw from that statement was eye-opening. Taxes don't punish the rich not mainly because of loopholes but because they have options. Slap a tax on yachts and they'll buy them somewhere else, jack up property taxes and they'll move, hit their industry with tariffs and they'll raise prices to match. It's the shipbuilders, neighborhoods and customers that suffer not the rich but time and again I've seen people think the solution to taxes is simply taking it from the rich.