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

611–620 of 1001 posts

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#611

Post by tom-_- »

lkrubner wrote: post #528
koheripbal wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A "tax break" is just a reduction in taxes that otherwise wouldn't be paid at all . It still means a profit for the city. It's not like NYC is paying Amazon to come to NYC. NYC would still make huge tax revenues from additional sales, real estate, income taxes, and corporate taxes. Now they're turning that all away. It's such an irrational decision that if I were Amazon, it would raise a big red flag for me as well.…

This is incorrect: " that otherwise wouldn't be paid at all " The opposite is true, 100% of those taxes will be paid by some other business. Maybe you could make your argument about the New York City of the 1970s, but you sure as heck can not make that argument about the New York City of 2019. New York City is not starving for investment, rather, its biggest challenge nowadays is managing its fast growth. Other busin…

How long would it be before other businesses would fully occupy the particular block of Long Island City Amazon was prepared to invest in?

And would the employees of these businesses earn on average equal to or greater than the average NYC Amazon employee?

These aren't rhetorical questions, and I don't know enough about Long Island City to have a confident guess at the answers but when evaluating whether Amazon HQ is economically a net positive, these are important to know.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#612

Post by mayukh »

ceejayoz wrote: post #439
siruncledrew wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon's spectacle reminds me of Lebron's "The Decision". It's one thing to work out the details and make an announcement, but to purposefully turn it into a show about "What can you do for me?" instead of "Here's what I can do for you" made it not sit well with people. Also, the pull-out letter also basically dumps the blame on state/local officials for not wanting Amazon, despite not all stakeholders being present…

Not just "What can you do for me", but "We'd never consider you for a HQ in a million years, but by all means give us a bunch of business intelligence gathered on your own dime we can use to site fulfillment warehouses..."

Curious, what kind of data would these public entities have that Amazon wouldn't already ?

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#613

Post by bluecalm »

loeg wrote: post #430
bluecalm wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not mainly Bezos. It's mainly investment/index funds - entities that that hold people's saving and retirement accounts.

The point stands — it's taking money out of the pockets of NYC residents, and delivering it to AMZN shareholders.

Tax cuts/credits are not taking money of NYC residents. Actually the residents will get less money than if the deal was made. I hope this is obvious.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#614

Post by jshaqaw »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #396
rsj_hn wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think NYC (or SF or any high cost of living area) is a crazy place to put HQ2. In terms of subsidies, while it's easy to dunk on Amazon, and no business should be getting subsidies IMO, there is a real issue here: Cost of Living in NY is higher and Amazon will have to pay higher wages if it puts jobs there rather than a place like Nashville. That's higher wages for the same job. Pretty much every company has a cost…

There's a reason you get superstar hubs, instead of companies and employees equalizing to somewhere else as soon as one metro gets a bit more expensive. Network/ecosystem effects are a real thing. Google already has some dev offices in cheaper areas, like Pittsburgh, where office space is cheaper and the salaries they pay slightly lower. And yet, they still choose to double their headcount in NYC. Just saying, "well…

There is another aspect of this which some younger people miss. A hub city means a dual professional couple can both find long term career paths in the same place. That’s much harder to do in a non-hub city. Top talent tends to marry top talent as per assortive mating.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#615

Post by AlexandrB »

jemfinch wrote: post #456
munificent wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah but they will get that tax break regardless I just don't understand this argument. It's like "Someone's gonna get fucked, so I'd prefer it be me." That tax break is real money . Money that your community will not be able to spend on education, infrastructure, police, parks, all the things that make a place worth living in. Why would you hand that over to a company that doesn't need it?

> That tax break is real money . Sure, but it's real money that your community doesn't get either way . You're living in a fantasy world if you believe that the choice was legitimately between "Tax money and 25,000 jobs" or "No tax money and 25,000 jobs." No, the choice has always been between "No tax money and 25,000 jobs" or "No tax money and no jobs." You're not getting the tax money either way. Either Amazon buil…

> Your decision is really between "Do you want 25,000 jobs, or not?"

Except that's not the choice either - as others have pointed out. If Amazon doesn't build something in NY, some one else will over the same time period. Will it be more or less than 25,000 jobs? Who knows. But NY is already an attractive metropolitan area judging by its density and property value. It's not a struggling rural town that can't attract talent and capital.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#616

Post by waisbrot »

MockObject wrote: post #581
lkrubner wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is incorrect: " that otherwise wouldn't be paid at all " The opposite is true, 100% of those taxes will be paid by some other business. Maybe you could make your argument about the New York City of the 1970s, but you sure as heck can not make that argument about the New York City of 2019. New York City is not starving for investment, rather, its biggest challenge nowadays is managing its fast growth. Other busin…

> The opposite is true, 100% of those taxes will be paid by some other business. Can you explain this some more? Are you suggesting that governments establish a target figure and adjust that year's tax policy to make sure it's met? The existence of budget deficits suggests otherwise.

> Can you explain this some more? Are you suggesting that governments establish a target figure and adjust that year's tax policy to make sure it's met?

They are just suggesting that the site that Amazon would have occupied will be rented by some other business. Probably, that business will not have gotten all the tax-breaks that Amazon did. Therefore, the tax collected by NYC on that space will be larger with Amazon gone.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#617

Post by NathanKP »

andosteinmetz wrote: post #595
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…

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 off…

I live in Williamsburg, Brooklyn which is obviously a significantly gentrified area. Not just the "glass towers" but most of the older brownstones I looked at over the past month while searching for a new place also offer one month's free rent. I can't argue with the fact that Amazon would contribute to gentrification because that is true. But I can also say that Amazon pulling out of the plans isn't going to stop gentrification.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#618

Post by snowwrestler »

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.

Increasing property value shows up on the balance sheet and the only way to access it is to sell the property and leave, or take on debt.

Increasing property values also mean increasing property taxes, which show up in expenses and are due every year whether or not you have the money to pay them.

Does taking out a home equity line to pay your taxes sound like a good idea to you? Me neither, and that's why rising property values are often not welcomed by residents who are not already financially well-off.

This does not even get into the impact on renters, who might face being evicted so a property owner can sell, or rents rising faster than their wages.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#619

Post by jpatokal »

hart_russell wrote: post #607
atoav wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What's the debate about animal cruelty?

Most people are quite happy to keeping buying cheap factory-farmed meat and dairy, despite vague awareness of the generally horrific conditions of the animals (and humans) producing it.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#620

Post by nodesocket »

yourbandsucks wrote: post #578
nodesocket wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagree, this constant propagation of rigged system or unfair game is not accurate. I know lots of people who came from very little and were able to work themselves up to economic success. In fact many of the people on the Fobes list came from poor upbringing and backgrounds.

And vastly more of them are not on the Forbes list. People have done studies on income mobility and inter-generational income mobility. The studies say that it's getting worse, not better. Yes, people can move up/down, but most don't, and it's happening less over time.

Going from the top, Jeff Bezos himself and Warren Buffet both grew up in middle class environments. Bezos worked at McDonalds as a short order cook while Buffett while young was notoriously hard working and frugal. Buffett would take his paper route earnings (mere dollars) and invest in stocks.

Anyway, I don't have the resources and time to go through the entire Forbes list, but I suspect there are a lot more people than most would believe and perhaps like to acknowledge from middle class or "lower" class environments.

Post reply on HN