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

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

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 281 posts

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

#251

Post by untog »

joyeuse6701 wrote: post #237
untog wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, not $0. NYC is a desirable place for many companies, and others will move in to the place Amazon intended to occupy. It might take longer and the companies may be smaller, but it's not like there is now a giant black hole in Queens that can never be filled.

I think many businesses will think twice about attempting a move to this particular part of NYC, who knows if your company falls into the 'acceptable' category of the government and it's representatives new ideology?

I don't think they will. Unless you are a company the size of Amazon (and literally only a couple are) you are not going to have the same problems.

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

#253

Post by KorematsuFred »

This eventually boils down to NIMBY vs YIMBY. Like that remote rural area of USA who thinks that immigrants are destroying their way of life the settled population of these large cities resist any progress because that might threaten their current state of life.

It is a very hard problem without any obvious solutions. The only concern I have here is that few vocal groups will make the minority or less loud opinions seem non-existent. The best way to resolve this would be to have a fractal localism where the decisions are made closer to where the action is happening and by giving more importance to locals who actually are closer to the project location rather than being part of the larger city.

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

#254

Post by Bartweiss »

derekdahmer wrote: post #229
Bartweiss wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen quite a few takes suggesting NYC will be transformed by the sudden arrival of high earners, like the Seattle city councilors who went to NYC to warn the city about their mistakes.[1] Whatever Amazon's merits, the specific arguments seem ludicrous. Seattle lawmakers talked about how Amazon took up 20% of the city's office space. That was 45,000 workers in a city of 730,000 (6%), and a metro area of 3,800,000…

What a lot of people don't realize is Manhattan in 2018 still has less people living in it then it did in 1950. The massive immigration of young working people in the 1920s led to large scale development high density housing. Living costs were out of control and people lived 8 to a room in extremely unsafe tenements but the upside is the city's housing and transportation infrastructure was built for a capacity it sti…

This is a really interesting point, thank you.

I hadn't realized NYC's population as a whole was only up 300,000 since 1950, either. Maybe most interesting, the 2 boroughs that gained population are larger (combined) than the 3 that lost it, and even today Queens and Staten Island have the lowest population density. The metro area has grown massively, but for the city proper it looks like not only has growth been slow, it's been steadily evening out density.

I wonder how this has played out elsewhere; are there patterns of outcome (and relative unhappiness cause) for population spikes/declines and for lower, prolonged levels of excess demand?

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

#255

Post by Tempest1981 »

ThomPete wrote: post #192
Tempest1981 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simply the rate of change/growth, and the pressure it places on cities and long-time residents, are valid reasons for caution. You imply that these issues are easily solved, if people like NIMBYs "simply" change their mindset. But history shows that mindset-change is a slow and stressful process. Cautionary tales are a chance to study such issues, and find solutions, or at least strategies -- something that govt is u…

How is it putting a pressure on long-time residents exactly? New York is always changing it's a very expensive city to live in and it's getting more end more expensive. That's how it is for us living here. Everyone. I don't see the argument in what you are saying.

Many long-time residents are renters, who get pushed out. Isn't New York over 50% renters?

People see and fear gentrification. Granted, it can't be stopped, but it shouldn't be ignored.

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

#256

Post by CoolGuySteve »

nihonde wrote: post #122
CoolGuySteve wrote: post #81

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…

Everything you said about NYC really applies to Manhattan. The point of the incentive is to encourage development outside of Manhattan.

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

#257

Post by kingkawn »

whatok wrote: post #183
kingkawn wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but those additions would’ve secured support for the deal to go through. That’s how it works: not a marshaling of principles but an exchange of met needs. Edit: also as New Yorkers seems to be aware DeBlasio is fairly powerless in relation to the governor.

It obviously could have gone either way but given how adamant politicians were on guaranteed union jobs and Amazon's refusal to entertain the idea, I don't know what they would have been able to meet in the middle on.

I think Amazon would’ve been able to find a compromise, the unions in nyc are some of the most professionalized in the country. They’re not starry eyed leftists, just businessmen looking out for members of their labor conglomerate.

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

#258

Post by gigatexal »

mattmanser wrote: post #133
gigatexal wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 st…

Great President but I think he's wrong.

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

#259

Post by crispyambulance »

rlanday wrote: post #99
crispyambulance wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this really highlighted the kind of leverage a big company can hold over even a huge metropolis. Agree, it was a gross display of cynical power. Amazon played a dozen large cities off each other, forcing each to bend over backward to offer up as much freebies as possible. In exchange for what? A tentative fungible "promise" to deliver 50000 high-pay jobs to the lucky city? In response, even poor cities like Philade…

Well, no, actually it turns out there’s only going to be one HQ2 after all. NYC got complacent.

Yeah but it was clear when they announced "two winners" that this was all an exercise for Amazon's benefit at the expense of the cities.

And what is an HQ2 anyway? How many "headquarters" does one need? And what's up with the curious round number of 50k? Was that just pulled out of thin air by some PR dude? Is there any accountability at all for throwing around numbers like that and then reneging on the deal?

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

#260

Post by ThomPete »

Tempest1981 wrote: post #255
ThomPete wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it putting a pressure on long-time residents exactly? New York is always changing it's a very expensive city to live in and it's getting more end more expensive. That's how it is for us living here. Everyone. I don't see the argument in what you are saying.

Many long-time residents are renters, who get pushed out. Isn't New York over 50% renters? People see and fear gentrification. Granted, it can't be stopped, but it shouldn't be ignored.

This is exactly the kind of thinking that makes no sense.

First of all the prices have gone up long before Amazon came in that's just how New York work them moving in will affect housing prices NOT renting prices.

There is no way you can spin this in favor of the local politicians. They just cost many of their fellow neighbours 25K jobs many of them high paying which is important in New York.

Post reply on HN