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

Amazon Plans to Split HQ2 Evenly Between Two Cities

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 254 posts

Re: Amazon Plans to Split HQ2 Evenly Between Two Cities

#191

Post by xienze »

esf wrote: post #177
didgeoridoo wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except the net migration flow in recent decades has been from "blue" to "red" states, not the other way around... do you have any source for the claim that those moving are disproportionately not "educated" people? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2017/04/24/the_po...

California migration is disproportionate this way. In-migration to CA is high income and high educated vs out-migration is middle to low income and less educated. I believe I've seen these trend analyzed in other states as well (low and middle income earners have the most to gain by moving to lower cost of living states, so it's a common pattern). https://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/article13647809... https:…

> In-migration to CA is high income and high educated vs out-migration is middle to low income and less educated.

Perhaps you should clarify that this is true of legal in-migration. Wanna take any guesses as to how wealthy and educated the folks crossing over the border on a continual basis are?

Re: Amazon Plans to Split HQ2 Evenly Between Two Cities

#192

Post by hnmonkey »

dunpeal wrote: post #145
rmason wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So are the two cities going to cut their economic package in half considering they're getting half the jobs? Bet you they're not. This is unfair to cities not making the list like Detroit. If Detroit was judged on only having to provide half the jobs would it not have been disqualified? Amazon changes the rules mid-stream.

This is an internal Amazon decision that is not regulated in any way. They are not obliged to any notion of "fairness". Amazon just put some cities on a list and negotiated with them. Any city not on the list is not there because Amazon didn't want it there. I also doubt that existing talent pool size was such a major consideration. Crystal City VA doesn't strike me as an obvious tech hub, nor does Newark. Amazon is…

Crystal City and Newark are next door to massive tech areas. In VA there are tons of DoD/Military tech organizations and NYC is right next door to Newark. It's probably cheaper to plant themselves next to those hubs than inside of them.

* Added: Especially if you factor in all the people that would normally commute into NYC or DC/Arlington from the surrounding areas now commuting to a potentially closer office location. Could be really big for lots of people (and of course Amazon).

Re: Amazon Plans to Split HQ2 Evenly Between Two Cities

#193

Post by kodablah »

hnmonkey wrote: post #189
kodablah wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I admit not being very upset about it. How are they strongarming governments? A government says no and everyone moves on. Or are you saying communities can't get businesses without this strongarming? I don't believe that. I recognize the art of both sides shopping for the best deal for themselves, and with how many of these governments operate against their companies, it's definitely bidirectional. The leverage does…

Do you have any examples of "many of these governments operate against their companies?" I'm intrigued by this because this isn't how government generally works at all at a local level. They usually work with these companies and give them sweetheart deals knowing that the money will not really come back to the city and the effect will happen years down the road. All the positives for them of working with the company…

You can see it in auto sales rules against Tesla, alcohol and zoning restrictions that aren't subject to votes, grandfathering old businesses on all sorts of things like parking lot regulations to denials of permits based reasons like too many restaurants in the area, etc. Some may seem reasonable, some may not. The point is in a transaction, neither side has to accept concessions they are uncomfortable with. Quite often cities make laws that harm or destroy business. Even in cases that are subject to citizen vote, the tyranny of the majority can occur. That's what makes bargaining on both sides of the compromise entirely reasonable.

Re: Amazon Plans to Split HQ2 Evenly Between Two Cities

#194

Post by hnmonkey »

mcphage wrote: post #25
RubenSandwich wrote: post #6

Ruth Graham, a writer for Slate, commented on this this morning[0]: " A sword was brought & Bezos said “Cut HQ2 in half. Each of you can have part of it.” “Please don’t split HQ2,” the true host city screamed. “Go ahead, cut it in half," the other city said. Bezos pointed to the first city. “This is the real host. Put the headquarters here.” " It makes me wonder if this is another negotiation tatic by Amazon to get t…

> It makes me wonder if this is another negotiation tatic by Amazon to get the final city to shell out more incentives. Alternately, Amazon has liked pitting cities against each other so much, that they decided to keep doing it forever. "City A, we're looking to start a major new project up. City B is willing to offer X, Y, and Z if we launch it in the City B office, are you willing to beat that for us to open it in…

Agreed. It certainly seems like this is the case and the end result would be both cities lurching towards becoming massively under Amazon's powerful thumb and dependent on it in the long run (think the Walmart method of dealing with businesses but... slightly bigger).

Re: Amazon Plans to Split HQ2 Evenly Between Two Cities

#195

Post by bobthepanda »

yourbandsucks wrote: post #173
untog wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, just the definition of "pro-business" is changing. It used to be that all you needed to do was slash a few taxes and you were a pro-business state. These days businesses are looking to be located in areas where their employees will feel safe and welcomed, which excludes states that fight against gay marriage, for example. I don't really see the argument that businesses choosing location based on taxes is…

Choosing based on culture wars is buying into the bullshit. Gay marriage, for example, is federally protected. We need to fix the culture divide in this country. Let's work from places where we agree rather than searching for disagreement. Lots of states are near the tipping point if we could only speak to each other honestly.

Homophobia didn't end with gay marriage. Sexuality is not a federally protected class in housing, employment, services, etc. What good is the fancy new headquarters and the six figure job if you can just get evicted on a moment's notice because of your sexuality, or if you can just get your face bashed in at the bar on a night out with your friends? http://www.keranews.org/post/how-texas-does-or-doesnt-deal-l...

If you're an employer, a great way to pre-emptively shoot yourself in the foot is to make yourself unattractive to employees and shrink your hiring pool in such a tight labor market.

Re: Amazon Plans to Split HQ2 Evenly Between Two Cities

#196

Post by SOLAR_FIELDS »

kodablah wrote: post #168
hcg wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but just because this happens doesn't mean we shouldn't be upset about it. This is companies strongarming governments into giving them tax breaks. It's robbing society to enrich a few people at the top. Amazon is following the Boeing example. I fully expect Washington state to give away massive amounts of money the same way they did before.

I admit not being very upset about it. How are they strongarming governments? A government says no and everyone moves on. Or are you saying communities can't get businesses without this strongarming? I don't believe that. I recognize the art of both sides shopping for the best deal for themselves, and with how many of these governments operate against their companies, it's definitely bidirectional. The leverage does…

The problem seems to be less that the governments are being “strong armed” and more that the people running the government are incentivized to satisfy their own interests when dealing with the corporations, and those interests do not necessarily align with the constituents that they supposedly represent.

Re: Amazon Plans to Split HQ2 Evenly Between Two Cities

#197

Post by yourbandsucks »

bobthepanda wrote: post #195
yourbandsucks wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Choosing based on culture wars is buying into the bullshit. Gay marriage, for example, is federally protected. We need to fix the culture divide in this country. Let's work from places where we agree rather than searching for disagreement. Lots of states are near the tipping point if we could only speak to each other honestly.

Homophobia didn't end with gay marriage. Sexuality is not a federally protected class in housing, employment, services, etc. What good is the fancy new headquarters and the six figure job if you can just get evicted on a moment's notice because of your sexuality, or if you can just get your face bashed in at the bar on a night out with your friends? http://www.keranews.org/post/how-texas-does-or-doesnt-deal-l... If y…

Homophobia went from the mainstream view to a tiny fringe in 20 years. Even Trump isn't homophobic. And even California is home to a fringe.

What's the end game for "I refuse to deal with those people"? Permanent 60 R senators?

If you wouldn't live there, who should?

Re: Amazon Plans to Split HQ2 Evenly Between Two Cities

#200

Post by mikeash »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #183
mikeash wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s like saying GE can’t atteact skilled staff because people only know them for their light bulbs. The sort of people that TI needs to attract will know that they are far more than just old-fashioned calculators.

I'm saying "ever heard of Texas Instruments?" isn't a good argument, because while everyone has heard of it, they know it only for making useless products that don't need or want additional design. The fact that you've heard of it is entirely unrelated to the number of people it employs and in what capacity it employs them.

This is a place where you’d expect people to know what TI actually does, not just the calculators.

“Ever heard of X?” is an idiom that means something like “here’s an obvious example you should already know about.” It doesn’t imply that knowing about it proves something. It’s a perfectly fine argument that just says, “TI exists and attracts educated employees.”

Post reply on HN