Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 1001 posts

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#591

Post by NathanKP »

hopler wrote: post #562
NathanKP wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me explain it in terms that any New Yorker should be able to understand: If you are a New Yorker you are no doubt familiar with the concept of "one month free rent". Most buildings in NYC will give you one month free when you sign your lease. If a building doesn't give you that offer its probably not as tempting as another nearby building that does. Yet the "one month free" isn't a losing money proposition for th…

That's the narrative, but too often the promised backside never arrives.

The solution to that is to make the incentives performance based. And that's exactly what was proposed: if Amazon hadn't delivered the promised results the tax breaks wouldn't have taken effect.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#592

Post by AngryData »

eanzenberg wrote: post #540
clydethefrog wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gentrification is the opposite of people moving up the economic ladder - it's the influx of more affluent residents.

Actually no, gentrification causes existing homeowners to increase their property values. It literally gives the existing community the opportunity to move up the economic ladder.

With that in mind, NYC is probably the worst possible place for that since almost nobody owns their own property there, it is mostly all rented out by multi-millionaires.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#593

Post by skookumchuck »

zelias wrote: post #55

If Amazon had just quietly announced plans to expand to LIC without the "HQ2 Search" dog and pony show they almost certainly would still be here. Google buys entire city blocks and nobody bats an eye. Turns out that publicly shaking down cities across the US tends to draw out the opposition. More publicity = more scrutiny = more angry opponents of your business decision

> shaking down

Shaking down someone for money is done by threatening them, i.e. extortion. Amazon did not threaten NYC, and therefore it is not a shakedown.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#594

Post by lordnacho »

koheripbal wrote: post #526
jcfrei wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, this was a huge communication error on Amazons and the politicians' side. Offering such huge subsidies to a single company will never go down well in the current political landscape - especially not in a city with a resurgent left.

> not in a city with a resurgent left. IRRATIONAL left. This investment on the part of Amazon gave way way way more to the city than it got back in subsidies. It's kind of ridiculous. If I were Amazon, I would drop NYC in a heartbeat if they didn't appreciate that degree of investment. The subsidies were 1.525 billion. Amazon's investment was expected to be around 2.5 billion. Only an irrational fool cannot do that m…

This is only irrational in a narrow accounting sense, and even then only if you believe in the numbers turning out as purported. You are considering a simple one-time game of "give me this and I'll give you that".

What is the long term effect of having government hand out money to every business that creates a hype? What is the effect of the amount of similar deals that will inevitably get hyped?

Should you play the game at all? Is it reasonable for someone to come along with this kind of deal? Is there no sense of fair play - that all corporations should be treated equally - whose logic is outside of the simple arithmetic?

The simple arithmetic that you are suggesting can potentially lead to unpleasant situations. What if the opposite were to happen? Supposed some big firm like Google decided to ask the government for money, or else they leave and sack every employee who doesn't want to go to their new location?

You could have firms queueing up to present you with new math problems.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#595

Post by andosteinmetz »

NathanKP wrote: post #547
lenzm wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It certainly means revenue for the city but we don't know that it means profit. All of those people are going to generate trash, take the subway and consume city services. Why shouldn't Amazon pay like everyone else?

Let me explain it in terms that any New Yorker should be able to understand: If you are a New Yorker you are no doubt familiar with the concept of "one month free rent". Most buildings in NYC will give you one month free when you sign your lease. If a building doesn't give you that offer its probably not as tempting as another nearby building that does. Yet the "one month free" isn't a losing money proposition for th…

What New York City do you live in? I have never been offered, nor do I know anybody who's been offered a month's free rent on signing a lease. Places that do this are overcharging and driving up rents. Your comment may just be emphasizing the fact that there are multiple "New Yorks." And I suspect the New York that Amazon HQ2 would benefit would be the New York that pays too much to live in a glass tower and gets offered a month's free rent.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#596

Post by fastball »

pzone wrote: post #539
fastball wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The average employee in that 25k cohort would need to be paying $12k worth of state taxes to NY every year for ten years in order to recoup the $3B tax break figure.

1. New York State has a high tax burden. They don't just collect income taxes - they also collect property, sales and capital gains. $12k per year all-in for a high income worker is pretty typical when you account for these additional taxes. 2. Amazon inc. will also be paying taxes. It doesn't fall entirely on individuals. 3. Ten years isn't that long for a four hundred year old city. Seems like an clean net positive…

A lot can change in 10 years.

What if Amazon decides they only need 10k employees in "HQ2" after 5 years?

Better bird in hand than two in the bush.

NY needs to focus on improving infrastructure now, which is the only guaranteed thing that will promote growth in the long term. And to do that, NY needs to be 1. less corrupt and 2. not give giant tax breaks to corporations that already have offices in the city.

Yes, maybe Amazon HQ2 will be a net positive 10 years down the road, but NY should focus on fixing its broken subway system and other structural issues so that the city can actually support 10 Amazons in 10 years. And HQ2 literally did the opposite of that (increasing ridership while decreasing revenue in the short term is not how you improve infrastructure, surprisingly).

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#598

Post by J5892 »

atoav wrote: post #584
bko wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most new Yorkers supported the project even when told about the subsidies. It's a vocal minority that sank the project https://www.wsj.com/articles/majority-of-new-yorkers-support...

It is always vocal minoirities who do things, even with very popular topics. Animal cruelty? There is only a vocal minority who takes a public stance, despite this beeing a very clear cut issue in terms of public opinion. Migration is the other way round: most people don't give a fuck, but have a loud vocal base that will even hurt themselves to make a point and you will be heard.

Animal cruelty isn't a great analogy.

It's not a vocal minority, it's a vocal subset of the majority.

A vocal minority is when the opponents of a popular viewpoint are louder than its proponents.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#599

Post by jhall1468 »

csallen wrote: post #557
untog wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's about as mildly condescending as anything can be. I'm all for civil discourse, but there comes a point where we're just sanitizing it.

I don't think any of us would say that to a stranger in real life without expecting to cause great offense.

I would, but then I'm the only one that knows the tone it was said in (at least in my head), which wasn't condescending, but more bemused sarcasm.

And that's the fundamental issue with moderating rhetorical devices. You're assuming you know how the other person intended to say something.

Moderating personal attacks is easy. Because that's not a rhetorical device and it's intent is quite clear.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#600

Post by ngould »

koheripbal wrote: post #526
jcfrei wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, this was a huge communication error on Amazons and the politicians' side. Offering such huge subsidies to a single company will never go down well in the current political landscape - especially not in a city with a resurgent left.

> not in a city with a resurgent left. IRRATIONAL left. This investment on the part of Amazon gave way way way more to the city than it got back in subsidies. It's kind of ridiculous. If I were Amazon, I would drop NYC in a heartbeat if they didn't appreciate that degree of investment. The subsidies were 1.525 billion. Amazon's investment was expected to be around 2.5 billion. Only an irrational fool cannot do that m…

You comparing apples and oranges. Subsidies are a direct transfer of wealth, whereas Amazon's investments would remain assets of Amazon.
Post reply on HN