Live data from Hacker News

Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

techcrunch.com

131–140 of 281 posts

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#131
post #69
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if not for Bezos, those funds would have gone to other companies—some of which might have actually needed them, and weren’t just using their clout to try and get free cash while floating on billions in profit.

So now we're going to blame Bezos for using a incentive-program the way it was expressly meant to be used? Perhaps we should also start shaming white collar professionals who take advantage of 401k plans and Mortgage Interest deductions. If they didn't try to reduce their tax bill, that money could have gone to others who actually needed them. Don't hate the player, hate the game.

> Don't hate the player, hate the game.

Why not both?

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is the subsidy was only 10% of the expected tax revenue and only $500mm was exclusive to Amazon (mostly in the form of property rights). The rest is available to anyone who sets up shop outside of Manhattan. As far as tax breaks go it’s fairly minuscule. But because of poor numeracy and a poor understanding of the conditions of the break or the nature of tax deductions, a lot of people had sticker shock at…

Some people misunderstood that the $3B was a credit, not real cash being gifted to Amazon. But even among people who understand the nature of a tax credit, we felt that NYC should not forego revenue that another company would have to pay. In other words, the city has enough bargaining power to collect all the taxes that it would be owed. Amazon can flounce and run off to Virginia or Nashville or wherever, but NYC wil…

How can the Bay Area have less than 1/8th the GDP of NYC when Apple’s revenue alone (~300B) is over 1/3rd of NYC’s GDP (~800B per Wikipedia)?

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a business. It shouldn't operate like one. Your views seem quite old-fashioned, neoliberal, maximising shareholder value. Both concepts that are increasingly under a lot of scrutiny as they seem to have failed to deliver on any of their promises for anyone apart from the super rich.

And if those shareholders were the very citizens of the city would you still find fault with my argument? This is a representative democracy is it not? Who do the elected officials of the city represent but the people that live and work within its boundaries? Therefore it should be thought of as a business. The city’s share holders are its inhabitants. It should run in such a way that it invests in the interests of t…

I think President Obama said it best:

The final thing I’ll say is that government will never run the way Silicon Valley runs because, by definition, democracy is messy. This is a big, diverse country with a lot of interests and a lot of disparate points of view. And part of government’s job, by the way, is dealing with problems that nobody else wants to deal with.

So sometimes I talk to CEOs, they come in and they start telling me about leadership, and here’s how we do things. And I say, well, if all I was doing was making a widget or producing an app, and I didn’t have to worry about whether poor people could afford the widget, or I didn’t have to worry about whether the app had some unintended consequences -- setting aside my Syria and Yemen portfolio -- then I think those suggestions are terrific. (Laughter and applause.) That's not, by the way, to say that there aren't huge efficiencies and improvements that have to be made.

But the reason I say this is sometimes we get, I think, in the scientific community, the tech community, the entrepreneurial community, the sense of we just have to blow up the system, or create this parallel society and culture because government is inherently wrecked. No, it's not inherently wrecked; it's just government has to care for, for example, veterans who come home. That's not on your balance sheet, that's on our collective balance sheet, because we have a sacred duty to take care of those veterans. And that's hard and it's messy, and we're building up legacy systems that we can't just blow up.

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#134
post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should New York get rid of all business tax incentives? A majority of that $3bn was from existing programs available to any qualifying business.

The $500M exceptional credit was the issue. That’s a lot of money.

Please. No one was talking about the 500m. Everyone was talking about a 3bn giveaway.

While some people understood what was happening, most opposition intentionally confused onlookers.

And even with the misinformation, the deal was still popular, particularly among Queens residents & PoC.

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#135
post #70
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point isn’t whether Amazon should or shouldn’t be paying a Federal taxes, it’s whether—given this prior behavior—we would expect them to pay state or city taxes, instead of finding or creating a loophole to get out of them.

There are a lot of large businesses headquartered in New York. They all seem to be pretty smart. If there are widespread tax loopholes out there, others surely have taken advantage of them by now. If they had, you would see outrage articles on that as well.

> If there are widespread tax loopholes out there, others surely have taken advantage of them by now. If they had, you would see outrage articles on that as well.

Given the response to Amazon doing so is "how dare you complain about Amazon using these loopholes, it's their fiduciary duty to bilk the government out of all the money it can", I don't think there would be widespread publicity to other companies using loopholes.

Instead we'd have people like you trying to shut up anyone talking about them.

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#137
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is the subsidy was only 10% of the expected tax revenue and only $500mm was exclusive to Amazon (mostly in the form of property rights). The rest is available to anyone who sets up shop outside of Manhattan. As far as tax breaks go it’s fairly minuscule. But because of poor numeracy and a poor understanding of the conditions of the break or the nature of tax deductions, a lot of people had sticker shock at…

So if the subsidy were 95% of expected revenue, would you still support it because hey, 5% is 5%?

If the 5% were a true accounting of all the costs involved, yes. When it's 90% you can get away without an accurate accounting since the margins are so huge.

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#138
post #113

> The livability crisis that’s currently afflicting Seattle and San Francisco is evidence of how cities need to be careful what they wish for when it comes to the explosive growth of technology companies (and the attendant wealth that comes with it) in their metropolises. Let me get this straight, New Yorkers should view Seattle and SF as cautionary tales for what happens when high-paying jobs arrive in a metropolita…

New York definitely has an affordable housing issue but a vast over supply of luxury housing (a lot still going up to) that I'd imagine a good portion of these hires would be taking up.

In what sense is there an oversupply of luxury housing? Are there lots of vacant luxury units?

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#139
post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should New York get rid of all business tax incentives? A majority of that $3bn was from existing programs available to any qualifying business.

The $500M exceptional credit was the issue. That’s a lot of money.

No one opposing Amazon actually pieced out that portion of it as their reason for opposing it. Be honest. If the $500mm is the real beef with the whole thing then break it down vs jobs:

$50mm/yr vs 25,000 jobs paying an average of $150k/yr for a total of $3.75bn of taxable income.

At New York State's lowest tax bracket of 4%, that's $150mm. At New York State's highest tax bracket of 8.84%, that's over $330mm.

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#140
post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New York definitely has an affordable housing issue but a vast over supply of luxury housing (a lot still going up to) that I'd imagine a good portion of these hires would be taking up.

In what sense is there an oversupply of luxury housing? Are there lots of vacant luxury units?

There are a lot of vacancies and nearly unheard of concessions being thrown out there. A ridiculous amount of construction as well. If there's prolonged weakness, concessions eventually turn into rent decreases.

https://ny.curbed.com/2018/4/12/17227574/new-york-rent-marke...

Post reply on HN