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

Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon

governor.ny.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 227 posts

Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon

#121

Post by tptacek »

blacksqr wrote: post #110
tptacek wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No? I don't understand how you're connecting these dots. It's not like we have to wonder whether the union strategy worked here. It demonstrably failed. Amazon didn't buckle, they didn't accept Whole Foods unionization as a condition of setting up shop in Queens, and the union will not in fact see a single additional job as a result of what happened.

"the union will not in fact see a single additional job as a result of what happened" That assumes that all union organizing will now cease or come to nothing, and the unions will get no benefit from keeping a huge, dedicated anti-union company out of their back yard.

No, it just means that this particular transaction was net-negative for unions.

Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon

#122

Post by sitkack »

kortilla wrote: post #113
gcb0 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

believing in a system where you have to be vigilant 24/7 is very counterproductive. The fact that our system was corrupted to the point of requiring it is not a point to elate! it is a point to contempt. > the age group that votes least often. That's a very disingenuous argument that you yourself refuted in the first paragraph...If it doesn't matter only voting, does voting alone matters? At which point is political…

>because amazon deserves to pay zero since they did participate in politics, unlike me Stop repeating this meme. Amazon paid no income tax because of carried losses, which has absolutely nothing to do with its involvement in politics and carrying losses is available to every business (including sole proprietorships).

Anything amazon loses they lose on purpose. Most of us don’t have the opp to structure our tax liability like this.

We are pawns to lose in a game between Alpha Go and the IRS.

Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon

#124

Post by Redoubts »

graeme wrote: post #5
ddebernardy wrote: post #3

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…

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 what was the deal Amazon negotiated, and why does the public opinion matter on what ultimately is just a land purchase?

Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon

#125

Post by asabjorn »

pas wrote: post #89
zamalek wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most of these "deals" were put together secretly without input from the public. Millions (or in NY's case, billion+) of dollars were packaged and presented without community input or oversight The letter specifically addresses this. That $3B was effectively a loan with massive ROI.

I think, based purely on the separation of concerns, it'd be good if states wouldn't finance loans to companies. It's problematic, because it's hard for states to provide equal treatment (ever firm should be equal in the eyes of the law), states shouldn't be in the business of analyzing business plans and taking on risk. That said, NY would have probably benefited from HQ2, though it's not that there's a lack of upwa…

"loan" is here a figure-of-speech, not an actual loan. It was a $3b tax incentive, where amazon would still be paying $27b in taxes over the same period.

Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon

#126

Post by blacksqr »

tptacek wrote: post #121
blacksqr wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"the union will not in fact see a single additional job as a result of what happened" That assumes that all union organizing will now cease or come to nothing, and the unions will get no benefit from keeping a huge, dedicated anti-union company out of their back yard.

No, it just means that this particular transaction was net-negative for unions.

So your argument is that the unions should have just taken the deal as dictated to them without considering their larger self-interest?

Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon

#127

Post by alexandercrohde »

rossjudson wrote: post #88
alexandercrohde wrote: post #37

Reads as unreliable (presumably factually accurate but too motivated to be trusted as presenting a full picture). Anybody who pretends to be thinking about "loss for the city," is full of themselves. It's all politics, and disingenuous to imply otherwise. And morally, most other areas in the country need this more than NYC does. It sounds like the thrust of the article is "Look how stupid the decision making process…

Factually accurate is a pretty good place to start. If you feel part of the "full picture" or "larger issue" is missing, then feel free to provide it.

I did. It's a disingenuous political move, swinging clumsily at unions, and hoping to rile up New Yorkers (such as myself).

Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon

#128

Post by asabjorn »

viburnum wrote: post #51

If they start handing out billions for corporate HQs it won't stop with Amazon. Google and everybody else will like up for theirs too.

Amazon would generate $30b in tax revenue over the deal length, for which it would be given a $3b break given certain conditions.

That is not a handout, because amazon generated all the money in question.

Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon

#129

Post by asabjorn »

blacksqr wrote: post #112
pas wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lack of a streamlined and efficient construction approvals process is really hurting (some ?) US cities. Or the real estate developer community is really spoiled there. And by streamlined I don't mean just rubber stamp everything. But instead have clear rules, and check the plans fast whether they are compliant with them. (Basic civil engineering stuff, fire hazard, environmental protection, noise, traffic management…

Sounds like there's plenty of stuff to blame besides low-income people wanting a place to live.

Yes, but getting more units in a building that won't be build doesn't help said low income residents.

This is a moral argument that does not fit the facts we know, and hence can't have a morally good outcome.

Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon

#130

Post by blacksqr »

asabjorn wrote: post #116
presty wrote: post #38

Quote of the Day: "The seventy percent of New Yorkers who supported Amazon and now vent their anger also bear responsibility and must learn that the silent majority should not be silent because they can lose to the vocal minority and self-interested politicians."

Another favorite: > You don't need to be the State's Budget Director to know that a nine to one return on your investment is a winner. The politicians as well as activists involved in this train-crash showed what the consequence is of electing and pandering to people that think it is possible to be factually wrong while morally right. You can't be morally right while lying, and lack of interest/humility in search for…

> You don't need to be the State's Budget Director to know that a nine to one return on your investment is a winner.

Yes, after all, Amazon did clearly state that they'd gladly pay us Tuesday for a hamburger today.

Post reply on HN