171–180 of 286 posts
Collective bargaining is probably the wrong metaphor. This is the principle-agent problem. The citizens would be better off if the elected officials worked to make their city the best possible place to do business for all companies on an even playing field. The city would then attract plenty of good companies simply on its merits. The elected officials instead benefit from granting favors, being able to brag about ho…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I certainly don't want you riding a car into a crowded downtown. I personally walked to work in downtown Seattle (to Amazon, ironically). I'd vote for any local candidate who pushed for an aggressive pedestrian-only zone in the city with a strategy for expanding mass transit access and park and rides. The technology for affordable mass transit is almost a century old; I think incremental, sustainable progress on that…
Seems to me that more of the blame for homelessness should be placed on the government than on Amazon. Not working at Amazon is hardly the reason for someone's homelessness.
Should they be responsible for this indirect effect? Well, that's the issue at root of a lot of externalities companies produce, like environmental pollution.
I'm certainly sympathetic to the idea that the government should step in and support the homeless, in return for Amazon's tax dollars. But that requires reserving a lot of new housing development for low-income renters, which makes housing more expensive for Amazon's employees, so they have an incentive to discourage doing anything about the homeless.
It's a great example of how market forces can fail a community, actually.
I commend the position of Toronto's mayor John Tory who said (I am paraphrasing here): "no tax breaks, if you come - come based on our merits as a city alone". Toronto is not likely to get Amazon for various reason (political climate being probably more important than tax breaks)
cough cough Vancouver aka Hollywood north
Here's an idea: don't let states make targeted tax breaks to race to the bottom. That seems to work in the EU. Apple paid 1% in Ireland and simply had to pay up the difference to the normal tax rate.
Don’t let ... The only one that can do that is the US Supreme Court.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> strengthening the housing market, and much more. That's interesting that you call it pollution. Talk to anyone who grew up in Seattle or SF pre-tech boom and you might find a different perspective. I think it's worth considering that while it's great for us in tech it's not like it's a net-win for everyone else. If you work in an industry outside of tech(or a part of tech that doesn't track payscales like the game…
But on the flip side, I can't imagine that people living in Detroit were thrilled by the decades of urban decay there. I think I'd rather live in a city that's so popular that infrastructure can't keep up than to live in a city where entire neighborhoods are empty and are razed due to neglect and criminal activities.
Because they are not a collective; only one of them gets Amazon HQ2.
Let's project this to actual "collective bargaining" in labour. If you and 19 other people were negotiating in such a way that only one of you gets a raise and improved working conditions, and the remaining nineteen others get fired, would you still engage in "collective bargaining"?
I commend the position of Toronto's mayor John Tory who said (I am paraphrasing here): "no tax breaks, if you come - come based on our merits as a city alone". Toronto is not likely to get Amazon for various reason (political climate being probably more important than tax breaks)
Political climate is something that could go either way. A city like Seattle would be comfortable for existing employees. It would do nothing to attract talent that dislikes that political climate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Homelessness is not Amazon's problem. Automation is good. Do you want us to ride horses to work? Agreed. Agreed.
"Homelessness is not Amazon's problem." But it is the problem of the city. They absolutely need to keep this in mind while negotiating with Amazon, who has a reputation for driving housing prices sky high, thus exacerbating the homelessness problem. "Automation is good. Do you want us to ride horses to work?" Automation is neutral, as it does cost people jobs, not all of whom can be retrained for something else. It a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amazon workers are highly paid, thus bringing the average income up, and contributing to taxes, strengthening the housing market, and much more. That's interesting that you call it pollution. High paying tech jobs are pollution? That doesn't compute to me. Companies that compete for talent will be pissed, but for lots of others it's a huge win. The only way I see it as a "bad" thing is if you are in a small city that…
"Strengthening the housing market" Other than code for "making everything much more unaffordable", what does this mean? And yeah, it's pollution for those who don't have high paying tech jobs. There are more people living in those cities than Amazon employees; their interests and needs need to be taking into consideration as well.
Owning a house has been a part of the post-WW2 American dream for good reason, and it should remain so. And people buying homes should want their property to retain value