Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated • Hacker News Board

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

#171

Post by kerkeslager » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 5:42 PM UTC

melbourner wrote: post #94

I don't understand how amazon itself would create such a wealth imbalance among people. There are already so many big corporations that pay handsomely for those who work in Newyork city and the cost of living is same as SF or Seattle.

1. Straight off the bat, you're giving a gigantic subsidy to the largest retailer of the world, whose CTO is the richest man in the world. That's coming out of taxes paid by normal people. If that's not obviously increasing wealth imbalance I don't know how to make it any clearer. The other companies who pay for those who work in NYC do so without creating a gigantic competition to see what city will give them the most money.

2. There are many reasons to be skeptical of Amazon's promises to create jobs.

3. Many of the jobs created are for technical, mental labor that requires education. There is no shortage of these jobs already, and many of the jobs are filled by people moving into New York, rather than by the people who are already there.

4. The cost of living is NOT the same as SF, yet. Rents in SF are much higher still.

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

#172

Post by whatok » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 5:43 PM UTC

throwaway2048 wrote: post #167

whatok wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't think it's fair to compare China's housing policies to the United States' policies as they couldn't be more different.

Of course there are differences, merely pointing out if building more housing, even building more housing to an almost comically absurd extent solved affordability issues by themselves, China wouldn't have them.

I still don't see your point. No one acts as if housing supply is a magical fix-all to affordability. Almost all housing issues in America are caused by multiple factors and New York is no different.

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

#173

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 5:47 PM UTC

repsilat wrote: post #72

lr4444lr wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excellent question. It is hard to believe that only now did Amazon start caring so much about its already tarnished public image with worker rights and whatnot that they'd roll over so quickly on such a huge deal. I surmise that it was the mayor's office that called off their part of the deal, based on the public statements. The governor had been lacing into the recalcitrant lawmakers who joined the protestors. Both…

> I surmise that it was the mayor's office that called off their part of the deal Surmise away, but the mayor has been strongly and publicly in favour of the deal, and critical of the people trying to kill the deal. (The guy who really killed it was state senator Michael Gianiaris.) The problem was that the people who made the deal (de Blasio and Cuomo) didn't have the power, either de facto or de jure, to get it in…

[deleted]

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

#174

Post by mcphage » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 5:53 PM UTC

whatok wrote: post #145

mcphage wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 loo…

I'm not trying to shut anyone up. Please don't be rude. I'm wondering why all the blame is directed at Amazon when they sought to take advantage of (mostly) pre-existing programs. If the problem people have is with tax subsidies in general then isn't the government the real issue here?

> I'm wondering why all the blame is directed at Amazon

The first step is recognizing that there's a problem.

> If the problem people have is with tax subsidies in general then isn't the government the real issue here?

Maybe the problem people have isn't with tax subsidies. Maybe their problem is who the subsidies are being given to? People are realizing that Amazon isn't a good corporate citizen, and I don't think anybody thinks Amazon needs these subsidies.

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

#175

Post by akhilcacharya » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 5:53 PM UTC

hannasanarion wrote: post #14

barry-cotter wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd argue NYC rejected Amazon. Over 60% of NYC residents who had an opinion supported Amazon. Over 70% of Long Island residents supported them. This is a victory for some well organised political activists but to cast it as a victory for NYC is a bit much. At the very least it makes NYC a less likely competitor to the Bay Area. https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2019/02/am... > The Bay Area: NYC is n…

>At the very least it makes NYC a less likely competitor to the Bay Area. Nonsense. If the bay area were a competitor, that's where Amazon would have wanted put their new HQ, not New York. Amazon doesn't have an HQ in San Francisco. Nevermind the fact that New York has been experiencing a tech boom for the last decade or more, with Apple, Facebook, and Google all buying campuses similar in scale to Amazon's proposed…

> with Apple, Facebook, and Google all buying campuses similar in scale to Amazon's proposed one, and without demanding bribes from the state before doing so.

All of those companies are orders of magnitude smaller than Amazon.

Also for the record Amazon has a pretty big presence in SFBA (Sunnyvale, Palo Alto, SF proper).

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

#176

Post by bogomipz » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 5:54 PM UTC

repsilat wrote: post #130

bogomipz wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Now New York has even more of a reputation for corruption by making it clear they won't uphold the terms of deals they make." First of all New York didn't rescind the terms of any agreement. Amazon made the decision not to go forward. Second Governor Cuomo pursued the deal as a "General Project Plan", this is a state process that circumvents a local approval process that would involve the city council and any commu…

> New York didn't rescind the terms of any agreement. Amazon made the decision not to go forward. The State Senate put Michael Gianiaris in a position to veto it. Gianiaris called the deal "unacceptable." He said "If their view is we want your $3 billion or we're leaving, maybe they should leave." He said he wanted to renegotiate the deal from scratch. Maybe that was just his opening position, and maybe he would have…

None of which is at all the same as what you stated - that New York "was making it clear they won't uphold the terms of deals they make."

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

#177

Post by tlb » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 5:57 PM UTC

mcphage wrote: post #174

whatok wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not trying to shut anyone up. Please don't be rude. I'm wondering why all the blame is directed at Amazon when they sought to take advantage of (mostly) pre-existing programs. If the problem people have is with tax subsidies in general then isn't the government the real issue here?

> I'm wondering why all the blame is directed at Amazon The first step is recognizing that there's a problem. > If the problem people have is with tax subsidies in general then isn't the government the real issue here? Maybe the problem people have isn't with tax subsidies. Maybe their problem is who the subsidies are being given to? People are realizing that Amazon isn't a good corporate citizen, and I don't think a…

It's inevitable that tax subsidies, if available, will go to companies that can negotiate the best for them. Large enterprises have more lobbying power, and more ability to play cities against each other. So I think there's little hope of city officials finding the best corporate citizens to subsidize.

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

#178

Post by manfredo » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 5:58 PM UTC

throwaway2048 wrote: post #161

manfredo wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. The price of housing is not determined by the builder. Like any good its price is driven by what people are willing to pay. Here in SF, even 230 square foot studios are considered "luxury housing" because the shortage of housing is that extreme. Any new construction commands a premium over old housing. In effect, restrictions on building more "luxury housing" restricts the construction of most new housing even if…

Tell that to china https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19171099 They have something like 65 MILLION excess, unused apartments, almost exclusively targeting the luxury market (because they are created and valued as investment first, housing second), and they still have extreme affordability issues. Building more housing is absolutely not a complete solution.

Much of those houses in China are not built in desirable cities but in ghost town that have little to no people living in them. There aren't million of chronically vacant units in Shenzhen. One could just as easily point to vacant houses outside Detroit.

Housing isn't just about the number of houses in a given country. It's about having available housing where the demand is growing.

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

#179

Post by JMTQp8lwXL » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 6:00 PM UTC

bko wrote: post #162

cowmoo728 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The number of vacant apartments and the number of apartments listed for sale/rent are both at an all time high. Despite this, most new construction is priced at the high end of the market. In addition, there's been a big boom in ultra-high-end multimillion dollar apartments. https://www.6sqft.com/nearly-250000-nyc-rental-apartments-si... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/16/realestate/brooklyn-devel...

New construction of expensive high end apartments help lower the prices on other units. Wealthy people will move there rather than driving up prices on dilapidated brown-stones. Its kind of how the average new car price is 30k, which is off limits for many Americans. But the new car inventory drives down the price of older models.

The problem is likely more rooted in wealth inequality. As a smaller group of wealthy individuals control a larger portion of the nation's wealth, they will inevitably acquire all sorts of investments (stocks, real estate, etc) driving prices up.

If there weren't luxury multi-million dollar apartments to buy, they'd be buying the brownstones anyways. And given that the multimillion dollar units sit on the market far longer than the more affordable housing stock, is there even really high demand among the wealthy to own premium housing?

Luxury housing gets built because it's the only thing that's profitable to the builder once you take into account zoning and permits and regulations that need to be satisfied in order to build. What we really need is relaxed policy that allows for the profitable building of run-of-the-mill, average housing.

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

#180

Post by whatok » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 6:03 PM UTC

mcphage wrote: post #174

whatok wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not trying to shut anyone up. Please don't be rude. I'm wondering why all the blame is directed at Amazon when they sought to take advantage of (mostly) pre-existing programs. If the problem people have is with tax subsidies in general then isn't the government the real issue here?

> I'm wondering why all the blame is directed at Amazon The first step is recognizing that there's a problem. > If the problem people have is with tax subsidies in general then isn't the government the real issue here? Maybe the problem people have isn't with tax subsidies. Maybe their problem is who the subsidies are being given to? People are realizing that Amazon isn't a good corporate citizen, and I don't think a…

How do you design a subsidy program that actually benefits everyone if one of the criteria is likability? The more grey areas you introduce into a program like this, the more cronyism and corruption kicks in which more than likely results in an inefficient use of taxpayer money.