11–20 of 227 posts
I understand the tragedy of the commons, cities' race to the bottom, Amazon not needing breaks, so on. I also think some of this could have been avoided if people felt like they were part of the process, instead of being told by the state "Hey we negotiated with a behemoth company for them to take over your community - trust me, you'll like it".
I suspect I'll never get why the notion of giving a tax handout to a company that's one of the most valuable in the world shouldn't be a non-starter. > Incredibly, I have heard city and state elected officials who were opponents of the project claim that Amazon was getting $3 billion in government subsidies that could have been better spent on housing or transportation. This is either a blatant untruth or fundamental…
Tax breaks are part of negotiation. Math is clear.
I think it's sad that the vocal minority was able to alter this decision. As the letter mentions, the project would have brought $27b in revenue to the state. This magnitude of revenue is material considering the fact that the state only collected $76b in taxes in the last reported fiscal year. I think there's reason to debate whether large corps should be able to hold an auction like this, but given the place we fin…
> there's no question this would have been a huge win for NY. But a loss for the US as a whole, assuming the HQ still gets built, but without special tax exemptions.
I understand the tragedy of the commons, cities' race to the bottom, Amazon not needing breaks, so on. I also think some of this could have been avoided if people felt like they were part of the process, instead of being told by the state "Hey we negotiated with a behemoth company for them to take over your community - trust me, you'll like it".
You cant involve public with everything, or it would lead to big overhead
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If google creates jobs in long island city, they would get the same handout though. Any company locating there does: it's a program NY state and NYC made to encourage development outside of Manhattan.
So in other words, you're suggesting that the handout was baked in from the get go because the HQ was in Queens, and Amazon being Amazon had nothing to do with it? If that's the case, the media have done a terrible job reporting this.
That site is currently a plastic factory next to a Superfund site and the infamous Queensbridge projects though. It's likely the cit/state would make the same concessions to anyone that could place clean high income jobs in the area.
I suspect I'll never get why the notion of giving a tax handout to a company that's one of the most valuable in the world shouldn't be a non-starter. > Incredibly, I have heard city and state elected officials who were opponents of the project claim that Amazon was getting $3 billion in government subsidies that could have been better spent on housing or transportation. This is either a blatant untruth or fundamental…
I cant see why hq2 location cannot be based on bidding. Tax breaks are part of negotiation. Math is clear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If google creates jobs in long island city, they would get the same handout though. Any company locating there does: it's a program NY state and NYC made to encourage development outside of Manhattan.
So in other words, you're suggesting that the handout was baked in from the get go because the HQ was in Queens, and Amazon being Amazon had nothing to do with it? If that's the case, the media have done a terrible job reporting this.
Mostly, yes. About $2.5 billion of the tax benefits were "as of right", meaning they're available to any company that fulfills certain requirements. There was also a separate Amazon-specific $500 million grant to assist with construction. More details at http://www.gothamgazette.com/state/8110-a-closer-look-at-the...
If that's the case, the media have done a terrible job reporting this.
Shocking, isn't it?
I think it's sad that the vocal minority was able to alter this decision. As the letter mentions, the project would have brought $27b in revenue to the state. This magnitude of revenue is material considering the fact that the state only collected $76b in taxes in the last reported fiscal year. I think there's reason to debate whether large corps should be able to hold an auction like this, but given the place we fin…
> there's no question this would have been a huge win for NY. But a loss for the US as a whole, assuming the HQ still gets built, but without special tax exemptions.
I think it's sad that the vocal minority was able to alter this decision. As the letter mentions, the project would have brought $27b in revenue to the state. This magnitude of revenue is material considering the fact that the state only collected $76b in taxes in the last reported fiscal year. I think there's reason to debate whether large corps should be able to hold an auction like this, but given the place we fin…
> there's no question this would have been a huge win for NY. But a loss for the US as a whole, assuming the HQ still gets built, but without special tax exemptions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> there's no question this would have been a huge win for NY. But a loss for the US as a whole, assuming the HQ still gets built, but without special tax exemptions.
How so? It's all state and local tax credits, not federal. How the state of NY runs its finances has no bearing on the US as a whole. It will of course be a benefit to wherever those jobs end up, but that's it.