Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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.
Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon
181–190 of 227 posts
Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon
#182San Francisco-ization it seems. Liberals going against their own interests. Reminds me of an apartment complex under construction in SF that was forced to include a larger amount of low-income units. The builders found it would no longer be profitable, and ceased building. So lose-lose, prisoner's dilemma, vocal social media forces "won," lacking the cooperative biases that humans normally have. They all end up with…
Should shelter, a basic human need, be for-profit? If so, why?
Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its very common in NY for high profile issues. When fracking was the cause de jure, hundreds of people were being bussed to Albany weekly to protest. I’m not sure if it’s good or bad, but it’s a thing.
We do have some experience with it out here in the middle. I have a relative (by marriage) who did a pipeline protest then went to "protest a volcano in Hawaii". Apparently, it was a good gig. I'm just surprised that the NY government put it in a press release. It really seems odd, but maybe that union has really separated itself from the herd, politically.
I live in Seattle now, and I remember talking to a petition signature gatherer for the recently passed gun control measure (petitions get them on the ballot). He was paid per-signature by a non-profit funded by the Open Society foundation. He said he was doing it Arizona before Seattle, and will keep going around to areas they pay for.
Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
We do have some experience with it out here in the middle. I have a relative (by marriage) who did a pipeline protest then went to "protest a volcano in Hawaii". Apparently, it was a good gig. I'm just surprised that the NY government put it in a press release. It really seems odd, but maybe that union has really separated itself from the herd, politically.
Yes, there were people paid to blockade and prevent the construction of a new state-of-the-art science telescope on Mauna Kea. They were successful in pressuring the state to renege on the contract and block construction. I live in Seattle now, and I remember talking to a petition signature gatherer for the recently passed gun control measure (petitions get them on the ballot). He was paid per-signature by a non-prof…
Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon
#185I 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…
And even that seems high. From the proposal, “Amazon will have an annual payroll of $3.75 billion. …There’s been nothing like it in history,”
Payroll tax for amazon is about ten percent: https://www.payroll-taxes.com/state-tax/new-york
So, wouldn’t that mean the revenue loss is just 300M a year. And given they are forgiving 3B of that, the revenue over 25 years ends up being 4.5B over 25 years, which is even less.
Here are the assumptions built into that $27B number, which was generated by proponents of the deal: https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/politics/alb...
Finally, there are 20M people in New York. So 1.2B of amazon revenue per year (high end) equates to $60 a person at the end of the day.
Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon
#186If we have ACTUALLY learned anything from the past century of corporate relationships with muncipalities, it’s that you really do NOT want to encourage corporate monocultures within your cities. It distorts the local economy, creates its own social subculture that often overtakes the town’s existing culture, and presents a giant economic and existential crisis should the corporate giant need to downsize or exit the city (which they seem to always do, and always for someplace that has far more diversity, or a new host for their parasitism).
New York State is, if anything, Exhibit A for all of this. The story of Kodak and Rochester, and the years of decline in Kodak’s absence (and before anyone mentions it, yes, I know there’s been a very recent Renaissance) is a story known to pretty much every urban planner who’s been educated in the past 25 years. Yes, you get a really easy bump in total jobs that is hard to replicate through more organic means; but you know, if you want to live in an interesting, dynamic society, you’re going to choose to go about it the hard way.
Maybe the evil labor unions ruined the deal. Maybe the politicians flip-flopped. Maybe the tax credits pencil out. It doesn’t matter. There are large numbers of people who didn’t want Long Island City to turn into another Rochester. Or, to put it in a context that might be more understandable to the crowd here, they didn’t want to see Amazon do to their neighborhood what Snapchat and Google did to Venice Beach over the past 10 years. I’m sure the tax receipts are way, way up in 90291; at the same time, it’s not really Venice anymore, and those revenues have allowed the tech firms to hold the community hostage for whatever they want (for example, Google had an arbitrarily placed stop sign and crosswalk put in for their use, and managed to get the LAPD to cart off longtime homeless residents in the process (who, by virtue of the law of unintended consequences, have been replaced by far more aggressive and transient homeless people)).
I’d love to see some of these politicians run on the “I stood firm on welcoming Amazon” platform for their next election. I don’t think the ones who flip-flopped into the negative are idiots; rather, they’re smart enough to see the writing on the wall. The tide is shifting, and fast.
Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I was not trying to make a moral argument, but an observation that many seem ready to believe any statement by the powerful no matter how dodgy, while the powerless are assiduously made invisible.
I also question if the people fighting for this outcome are the same low income residents affected, because I have a hard time believing actual low income residents in line for the units would prefer an outcome where no units gets build in order to make a moral point.
Why is it morally good to make an idealistic stand that cause no units to be build? To me that seems factually wrong.
Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Okay fine whatever, every other big employer will be lining up for the same deal or threatening to leave.
The deal has positives and negatives for Amazon due to its location, and lack of an ecosystem. After Amazon moved 25k jobs there there it would have been hard for them to leave.
Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are addressing the quote: > 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. I think you are here making a moral argument of sorts. Why is it morally better to get 100% of nothing than to participate in a project with incentives that give you 9 times return plus create 24-40k jobs? I simply don't see a viable argument that this was morally right, a…
> and a tax base necessary to invest in Queens that has received very little investment in decades. In what alternate universe is this? Queens is hardly Camden or Detroit. The neighborhood in question has 40+ story office and residential towers sprouting up like weeds. Queens is at a record low employment rate ever since this started getting tracked at the county level: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NYQUEE1URN .…
From what I understand developers started building in anticipation of Amazon coming there, and that investment is now in question.
Re: Open Letter from New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica Regarding Amazon
#190San Francisco-ization it seems. Liberals going against their own interests. Reminds me of an apartment complex under construction in SF that was forced to include a larger amount of low-income units. The builders found it would no longer be profitable, and ceased building. So lose-lose, prisoner's dilemma, vocal social media forces "won," lacking the cooperative biases that humans normally have. They all end up with…
Should shelter, a basic human need, be for-profit? If so, why?