We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Thursday, February 14. 2019
If this is winning, what would losing look like?
Ingrates. Most sensible places would welcome 125,000 good jobs for their people. For the good of my city, I am deeply disappointed by the political idiots. No giganto biz wants to put up with that sort of BS when everybody else wants them.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
I don't see it that way at all. The reason why NY had to bend over backwards is that the NY tax code is royally f-ed up; the right way to lure businesses to your area should be to improve the business climate across the board so you don't have to offer "incentives". Amazon wanted special treatment, and didn't get it to their satisfaction. So they walk. Good for them, they'll be better off elsewhere anyways.
Do you think NY will learn their lesson from this (together with Cuomo's newfound realization that soaking the rich is not going to work either) and fix their tax code so that businesses actually want to come to NY? Me neither.
NY is circling the drain, and it's accelerating.
I agree with you that the proper way to attract businesses is to engender a good business environment, not to offer a lot of tax breaks and concessions. Unfortunately, that is the way the game is played and NYC is not the only city or state to play that game. In fact, if they didn't play it, they would probably be the only municipality not to play it.
I obviously don't know all the details about why the deal went sideways, but it looks like NYC offered a ridiculous amount of money and concessions and Amazon took advantage of them. Then, where there was blowback, they killed the deal. That being the case, NYC should have negotiated smarter., but then look who Amazon was dealing with.
I don't like DeBlasio or the Occasional Cortex at all and if I'm looking for an alternative to Amazon so I don't have a dog in this fight. I have no idea why anybody would locate a business in NY and I've been baffled why banks and stock exchanges are still there. NY and NYC have made it abundantly clear they hate them and only want their money, but that's just me.
mudbug: I have no idea why anybody would locate a business in NY and I've been baffled why banks and stock exchanges are still there.
You have to think about why cities exist at all. Cities represent a highly integrated concentration of wealth and talent. New York City is often named one of the greatest cities in the world, for business and for culture. Here is Business Insiders list, based on economic activity, political power, influence, and quality of life:
1. New York City
5. Los Angeles
Forbes' ranking by influence also puts New York City first, with London second.
So... The fact that there is economic activity in a city, does not necessarily mean that the environment is all that great for business. Banks and exchanges may feel it's worth waiting out the idiots for someone reasonable, they may feel having the cachet of a NYC is worth the financial abuse, or it could be that there are political reasons.
It's like saying, "Hey, I have a pulse, I must be the picture of health."
midbug: The fact that there is economic activity in a city, does not necessarily mean that the environment is all that great for business.
Think about it. Sure, there are lots of regulations, with millions of people packed into a small area, the cost of living is high, traffic, noise, pollution, crime; yet New York and many other great cities have been engines of economic growth and innovation for generations. That's because the economic environment is attractive to businesses. Cities offer the concentration and integration of many types of talents, money, and infrastructure that are hard to reproduce.
This is a case where your "bafflement" should cause you to question your preconceptions, as the facts contradict what your preconceptions would imply.
You're correct. In fact, as I was typing my previous post, I was coming to the conclusion that there are other reasons than immediate financial reasons for those banks and exchanges to locate in NYC. If they chose a place for their headquarters based on financial considerations, they would have left long ago. There is nothing in the air or water in NYC that makes it reasonable to locate the headquarters of a bank.
But then we see that people, many of whom are rich, actually are starting to leave the state, and those who are rich are very likely leaving NYC. This exodus hasn't spread to any large financial institutions and it may not, but that would just encourage my realization that those businesses stay in NYC for reasons other than immediate financial reasons.
"Nobody goes there any more. It's too crowded." — Yogi Berra
While I don't ever agree with DeBlasio or Ocasio IMHO cities and states should not be allowed to give away tax money to special interests. Everyone should be treated the same. Amazon shouldn't have gotte3n tax breaks and other free stuff. The rest of the tax payers have to make that loss up. Also, can you imagine how all the businesses who are already doing business there who will not get those tax breaks feel? Some of those businesses will be competing with Amazon. How is it fair to them.
All cities offer tax deals to large scale employers. It's a net gain for the government, rightly or wrongly. And employed citizens are better than the other kind.
This assumes that no company would move there without tax breaks. If no city or state offered tax breaks then this point would be moot. It may seem like a big company moving in would improve the employment picture. But more likely the effect will be short and the company will hire from the outside and other people will move in to the city and over time the net result will simply be more people with about the same percentage of unemployed.
But regardless of those issues no politicians should be allowed to give special preference, tax breaks or regulations to benefit one group and harm another.
Politicians love to claim they brought the "big deal" with lots of jobs. But if they have to use all these give-aways to get them - that means two things. Their business climate is not good to start with, and for everyone else its about to get worse since they need to make up the losses for the giveaways.
A healthy climate that grows 100 companies by 10 employees is just as good for the local economy as one new 1000 employee addition - better even in that you aren't so dependent on the one big company that can leave, or hold you hostage.
Make America Lose Again.
Let's see.... what does MALA mean in Ms. Cortez's ancestral tongue?
So "North Virginia", aka Washington DC metro, had the next best deal and the second-best appeal. Isn't that wonderful?
It is robustly documented that Amazon workplaces are hellholes.
Not that this should stop anyone from sneering at the awful woman, mind you.
I agree that cities/states should create business friendly environments and not give these huge tax-payer funded payments. Evidently Amazon pays NO federal taxes for the second year.
Nashville government is bankrupt and still paying Dell Computer and The Titans millions for coming here. And now Titans want $100 million more to upgrade its stadium, even as roads and infrastructure deteriorate more. It's shameful.
First there is a HUGE difference between bringing a sports team (which usually demands a stadium at public expense) and a functioning productive company.
It's easy to be simplisticly glib about 'special privileges', but in truth an established company actually can bring a lot to the table which (unlike the sports franchise) can be very plainly calculated. It's not really costing the city tax money, because that full rate tax would not be coming in anyhow. Putting money in citizens' pockets benefits everyone.
[Amazon has many thousands of employees and no slaves. No one is forced to work there but they still manage to employ lots of people (in my area the Whole Foods store is considered one of the best retail jobs in the area)]
There is nothing "glib" about the special privileges.
First it is a misuse of tax money and puts unnecessary strain on the rest of the taxpayers. Second, it defies our basic belief in equal treatment of people under the law.
IF giving companies special privilege is SO GOOD than give it to all companies especially the ones that have been in the community the longest.
I suspect AOC is finished. She pissed off Pelosi, defende anti-Semitic speech in the house, ran ahead with that crazy green agenda, and now has trashed a pet project of one of the most powerful governors in her OWN party and state.
This will give the 'mainstream' Democrats the chance to break ranks with the runaway socialist movement, and I suspect some will take the opportunity.
It is a dark day when small retailers in NYC are denied the opportunity to pay the expenses of their largest competitor.
I stole that from Philip Greenspun.