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

851–860 of 1001 posts

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#851

Post by JDiculous »

mancerayder wrote: post #785
JDiculous wrote: post #740

As someone who lived in NYC for 5 years, I can't understand how anyone can not consider this a loss to NYC. Don't get me wrong I hate corporate welfare as much as anyone else and I have no desire to work for Amazon because it seems like a corporate sweatshop, but 25k jobs at an average $100k+ salary would've been a boon to the city, even despite the $3 billion in tax subsidies. The additional revenue for workers and…

There'd be a lot to unpack to reply fairly and completely to your message here... so to be brief... I'd say the MTA's problems around poor oversight wouldn't be magically solved by NYC taking control. For example, NYCHA was under NYC control. Sure, over the years the Federal Government has diminished funding from their side -- but that should not overshadow the contractor and union corruption that NYCHA, whose head w…

Wow, I'm just learning about these scandals (I left NYC a year ago) and they are very disturbing. The fact that these employees haven't faced any civil/criminal charges and haven't even been fired is despicable.

You're clearly right in that the NYC taking ownership wouldn't magically solve the issue. There's a bigger systemic problem here - piss poor management and complete lack of accountability. The fix isn't as simple as changing ownership since clearly these organizations are being misproperly managed regardless of whether NYC or NY State are in charge.

More drastic reform is necessary. I don't know what that looks like. Maybe we can start by giving politicians more direct control and oversight over these "public benefit corporations" that they're bankrolling.

If your property appreciating in value by 20+%/year? That's insane.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#852

Post by pertymcpert »

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…

NY does not need 25k jobs, it's growing fast. So no, it'll be better off with real tax paying businesses. Maybe they'll start slower, but it won't be a problem.

So no, that's NOT the choice to be made. That choice is something you've pulled from nowhere.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#853

Post by tanilama »

whynotminot wrote: post #431
djsumdog wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this exactly the opposite? Amazon would have destroyed the general economy in NYC like they did in Seattle. This is the city ignoring the big corporation and listening to their people. NYC doesn't need Amazon. It needs to fix it's rail system.

How is the Seattle economy destroyed?

It is not. Period. People just likes to fantasize about the past like it is a paradise.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#854

Post by Wowfunhappy »

jfnixon wrote: post #542
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…

So why did NYC bother to compete for HQ2?

We shouldn't have. That's why I'm not bothered to see Amazon pulling out.

This is New York City. There will be other businesses—ones that don't need to be lured by special deals.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#855

Post by subpixel »

prepend wrote: post #711
asdff wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all of those 25k jobs are highly paid tech workers. There will still be highly paid workers living there as they do now, commuting to Manhattan.

Not all, but very many will be highly paid. My comment is about tech workers working in that area. I think this is better for that area to have highly paid workers in remote queens who can live or commute in. There’s already a ton of tech companies in Manhattan and Brooklyn. The new change would be to have a tech hub in LIC.

Better for who? Better how? Queens is already richly diverse in both income and in every other category worth listing. There is nothing that the borough lacks that mythical tech workers will bring in their wake.

On the contrary, much of what makes Queens quite unique is threatened by the one thing we know would follow on the heels of something like an Amazon HQ landing here: even more heated real estate speculation fueled by absentee capital, small businesses losing their leases, rent hikes, and general homogenization.

Nothing about Queens needs to be preserved in amber, but neither does anything about Queens require some intervention to bring up to par. Possibly public transit but that is true of every borough.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#856

Post by int_19h »

trhway wrote: post #843
int_19h wrote: post #815

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suppose we change it slightly: a Saudi prince wants to become a US citizen in exchange for some considerable investment into our economy. Do you find it objectionable? Because that's literally one of the available options today. https://www.uscis.gov/eb-5 And schemes like these exist in most countries out there, it's not just a US thing.

There is no personal tax rate decrease in EB5 in exchange for the investment.

The point is that we're already selling citizenship for money.

In your original example, the only reason why it would ever make sense is if the Saudi prince in question can somehow produce more wealth for the public than they'd pay in taxes. In that scenario, it's exactly the same in the end, once you balance everything - you have sold them citizenship for money.

And if they don't pledge to earn you more than you'd save, then why would you even consider such a deal?

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#858

Post by asdfasgasdgasdg »

ghaff wrote: post #820
balls187 wrote: post #771

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately I am not an accountant and cannot give you tax advise, however, NJ has a non-resident income tax form, which you may be required to file: https://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/taxtables.shtml Edit to add: According to my interpretation of this: https://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/pdf/current/1040nr... Assuming your income is over $20,000, you ARE required to file a NJ state tax return. Also, n…

Agreed. I see no exemption there for “I was just attending a conference and just stayed in a hotel for a few days.” Much less spending weeks at a remote company location or job site.

I also am not a tax lawyer. However, at least the NY non-resident form specifies that the tax is only owed on NY sources. Probably, when you are on a work trip, the "source" of your income is still the office you work at in your home state. Also worth noting that if you're only there for a week, you'd have to make a great deal of money annually before you got above the standard deduction cutoff for that state.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#859

Post by door5 »

zanny wrote: post #846
door5 wrote: post #811

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alexandria Ocasio Cortez & Bernie Sanders openly espouse many of those ideas and are two of the most popular politicians in America. These ideas have a tremendous amount of traction and their advocates are getting closer to the centers of American power. This isn't a complete fantasy -- it's not an inevitably, but it is absolutely a viable part of political discourse & struggle

Even if one of them were elected president - which, again, faces staunch resistance by the olgiarch controlled DNC - a vast majority of congress is bought and paid for by globalist interests. The Occupy Wall Street movement was probably the last possible chance to correct course. Further attempts need to somehow capture a greater mindshare than the immediate aftermath of Bush's imperialism, wanton greed and corruptio…

This is extremely fatalistic. I agree that the system is severely flawed, but your conclusion that struggle for a better country is pointless is hopeless, and is not shared by a lot of the country. for many people, political struggle is necessary. This sort of fatalism is only really a tenable position when your livelihood is not at stake.

Re: Amazon Pulls Out of Planned New York City Campus

#860

Post by chucksmash »

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…

Not a landlord, but I imagine there are oodles of benefits to it from their perspective. If I can rent you an apartment for $4000.00 a month but tell you "$3666.67 (net rent w/ first month free)", then:

- Come next year, the default position is "you get a 10% rent hike by just paying the number on the lease."

- if you leave after a year, I've got price history at $4000 a month and can use that as an anchor for negotiations with the next tenant

There's nothing that says I have to start from fair market value and take a month off either. Say I call the apartment price 12/11ths of market value, but then advertise the net number and each month your great deal lets you pay only 11/11ths of FMV.

Bloomberg had something about this today[1] - something like 45% of leases in NYC have similar concessions.

[1]: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-14/manhattan...

Post reply on HN