Amazon to Build Second HQ in North America

Post by prostoalex » Fri, Sep 08, 2017, 5:22 AM UTC

3pt14159 wrote: post #334

kemiller wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless money is being funneled into private politicians’ hands, it’s not corruption. The choice is between amazon + tax breaks and nothing. These cities clearly believe that they’re better off, net net, with Amazon and they’re probably right. This is not at all the same as accepting bribes. There are certainly bad deals out there, but mismanagement is not the same as corruption. Now if you can show that the politicia…

It's a race to the bottom. It results in one state or city that pollutes for the whole country. Governments should set things up so the whole economy benefits, sometimes that means banning defections so that game theory doesn't fuck things up for everyone.

Post by rdslw » Fri, Sep 08, 2017, 8:32 AM UTC

kemiller wrote: post #389

3pt14159 wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a race to the bottom. It results in one state or city that pollutes for the whole country. Governments should set things up so the whole economy benefits, sometimes that means banning defections so that game theory doesn't fuck things up for everyone.

I'm sure that the tax benefits are not the only criterion here. There are plenty of things cities can do to attract companies that aren't tax breaks — SF and NY and others are already there. Amazon wants a place that its employees would actually want to live, too. But that doesn't mean tax breaks and other incentives shouldn't be on the table. But my point isn't even whether they're good or bad, it's that they're not…

Post by icebraining » Fri, Sep 08, 2017, 10:18 AM UTC

rdslw wrote: post #287

jpatokal wrote: post #24

The RFP is rather more interesting than the marketing page: https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/G/01/Anything... The 2nd criterion is basically the total amount of sweet, sweet taxpayer dollars available to subsidize them: Please provide a summary of total incentives offered for the Project by the state/province and local community. In this summary, please provide a brief description of the incentive item,…

what a year do I live in that governments must bow to corpos and politely submit RFP document asking for tax money .... reduction. There was once a story on hackersnews why this (demanding tax cuts) its unethical on much larger scale than race etc. It went like this (forgive my memory, english, and feel free to correct it): There were two states, neighboring, with similar budgets and number of people. They werent ric…

Post by kamaal » Fri, Sep 08, 2017, 10:52 AM UTC

Pxtl wrote: post #399

Animats wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most such deals are a net loss for the community. Some of the bad ones have been for data centers, which employ very few people. Neither do manufacturing plants, which just don't need that many people.

Warehouses employ lots of people but they're the shittiest of jobs.

Post by dkrich » Fri, Sep 08, 2017, 11:38 AM UTC

apendleton wrote: post #338

dkrich wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My money would be on D.C. Lots of access to government agencies that could add a lot of AWS business, a major concentration of highly-skilled tech workers and colleges, close to the Washington Post, and a lot of up and coming neighborhoods in the southwest/southeast quadrants of the city. Also wouldn't hurt that it's on the opposite side of the country to add some geographic diversity.

As someone who lives in DC: I'm with you on the DC metro making some sense, but DC itself is probably out. There's not enough green space to build a campus the size of their Seattle HQ anywhere in the city, given how the severe building height limits here would balloon the total required acreage. They might have some options someplace in the suburbs (maybe Arlington, or out along the Silver Line), or they could look…