81–90 of 180 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I saw this video about LA a few days ago and it is very sad how these tax incentives are ruining entire states. [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWTic9btP38
If one state didn't offer a tax break, then another would and win the business. There are 50 states, and most of them compete for businesses with tax incentives fairly competitively.
Big corps love to brag about "adding jobs", but don't like to brag about the "tax incentives" they are getting. There are usually huge costs for the whole community. Austin tax incentives for Apple seem to be relatively small [1], but Foxconn factory in Wisconsin is an extreme case. I highly recommend the Replay All podcast episode on this [2][3] [1] https://www.statesman.com/news/20120901/austin-council-oks-8... [2]…
On the other hand the benefits they bring to the community are enormous.
Do any of these large companies build campuses in other countries?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. People can be generally pro-development and also oppose development that just consists of sticking tall apartment buildings here and there while leaving public transit, auto infrastructure, and other public works as an exercise for the indefinite future.
This doesn't make much sense. Transit follows population. You wouldn't build transit before there was a need for it.
Curious how much of this is “natural”, how much is forced by stupid CA policies and COL, and how much is “spread out jobs and investment to reduce government risk/gain government support at state and federal-legislative levels.”
I seriously do not understand anyone in the Bay Area that’s anti development. How can you justify yourself in good conscience to be anti development when CoL is so high?
Bear in mind too that a fair number of people either can't or won't understand basic economics. I can't tell you how many times I've had or heard conversations that go like this:
Person A: We should kick out all the greedy developers who are raising the price of housing.
Person B: Housing costs are set by supply and demand; if the supply does not increase, prices will rise further.
A: That's not true! When new housing gets built, it's more expensive than existing housing.
B: That might be true of a particular unit, but that's because most people prefer new housing to old housing, and it's extremely hard to construct anything.
A: Just look at that new development: it's more expensive. We need to ban new housing. Plus, I don't want my neighborhood to look like Manhattan.
B: Missing Middle housing will not turn your neighborhood into Manhattan: http://missingmiddlehousing.com/
A: I've lived here for five years and I still don't want to see the neighborhood change.
You can go on for a long time in this vein, with more or less invective.
Big corps love to brag about "adding jobs", but don't like to brag about the "tax incentives" they are getting. There are usually huge costs for the whole community. Austin tax incentives for Apple seem to be relatively small [1], but Foxconn factory in Wisconsin is an extreme case. I highly recommend the Replay All podcast episode on this [2][3] [1] https://www.statesman.com/news/20120901/austin-council-oks-8... [2]…
Tech employees are very cheap for the community. They take very little government aid, their use of roads is quite moderate (and is getting lower as "working from home" picks pace), and they usually pay enough property taxes to pay for local schools. On the other hand the benefits they bring to the community are enormous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If one state didn't offer a tax break, then another would and win the business. There are 50 states, and most of them compete for businesses with tax incentives fairly competitively.
This is why the EU has laws against this kind of race to the bottom between nations
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I seriously do not understand anyone in the Bay Area that’s anti development. How can you justify yourself in good conscience to be anti development when CoL is so high?
How can you justify yourself in good conscience to be anti development when CoL is so high? Bear in mind too that a fair number of people either can't or won't understand basic economics. I can't tell you how many times I've had or heard conversations that go like this: Person A: We should kick out all the greedy developers who are raising the price of housing. Person B: Housing costs are set by supply and demand; if…
Person B: (points out the cost of unionized workforce)
Person A throws a tantrum.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they are adding people to your community- what roads will these new people be driving on? What schools will their children be attending? The additional revenue is not being added in a vacuum.
Aren't roads funded from gas tax? And schools are almost entirely paid by the local property taxes, at least in the communities where most of Apple employees will live.
No. Not much at all. Highways, once upon a time, mostly. Local roads not really ever. https://frontiergroup.org/reports/fg/do-roads-pay-themselves
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In some cases they are. There was an episode of Planet Money where they were discussing Kansas City Kansas and Kansas City Missouri competing for the same companies and companies going back and forth across the state border to whoever would give them the best deal. The companies were squeezing all of the benefits from having the company be there out of the city. It took decades for some cities to wise up and realize…
I guess (e.g) Las Vegas, Atlanta, and Seattle didn’t get the memo. Odd since Seattle and Atlanta recently lost franchises that they’d add new ones if it wasn’t worth it.