Economy AOC and co. vindicated: Amazon expanding in NY without massive giveaway from gov.

Phisher

Steel Belt
@Steel
Joined
Oct 29, 2006
Messages
27,499
Reaction score
30,095








It was obvious that the entire contest that they staged between cities in the US was horseshit when they didn't go anywhere near the high bidders. They'd pre-selected NYC and were just trying to see what they could extract from the government for moving there.

Bezos also got a bunch of cities to give his company free info about local demographics, infrastructure etc. that they normally would have had to pay to research themselves.
 
Last edited:
But AOC is so dumb omg I hate her so much.

*masturbates furiously*
 
I'm sure it will be 100% just like the deal previously agreed upon minus the tax incentives /s
 
I'm sure it will be 100% just like the deal previously agreed upon minus the tax incentives


Right, there'll only be 5% as many jobs because the city isn't paying for Bezos's private helipad.

Fuck outta here.
 
Wrong thread.
 
Last edited:
Big deal. They are buying up a bunch of dead old malls too.
 
What????

But Sherdoggers told me you have to suck corporate cack or else they will move overseas to Somalia!!!

This cant be!!!
 
But AOC is so dumb omg I hate her so much.

*masturbates furiously*
Well, saying that Amazon doesn't deserves tax breaks to set up shop in any city isn't exactly groundbreaking. Most people in the cities that they were vying for complained about the incentives. Including people in Chicago, where people are already getting bled to death by taxes. Anyone with half a brain was offended by Rahm's attempt to swallow Bezos' load to get them to set up shop.
 
Those are major companies. Of course they will "expand" in NYC regardless as they will any major city. Any proof this is anything near the deal they lost prior though?

Nailed it.

Be prepared for a whole bunch of misleading bullshit.
 





It was obvious that the entire contest that they staged between cities in the US was horseshit when they didn't go anywhere near the high bidders. They'd pre-selected NYC and were just trying to see what they could extract from the government for moving there.

Bezos also got a bunch of cities to give his company free info about local demographics, infrastructure etc. that they normally would have had to pay to research themselves.


....nothing to do with she guevara or her district, companies are still getting incentives without the 25k jobs promise

I’ll be back to laugh at this as another goof troop member gets btfo
 





It was obvious that the entire contest that they staged between cities in the US was horseshit when they didn't go anywhere near the high bidders. They'd pre-selected NYC and were just trying to see what they could extract from the government for moving there.

Bezos also got a bunch of cities to give his company free info about local demographics, infrastructure etc. that they normally would have had to pay to research themselves.



Hope it's not LIC. Issue with LIC wasn't just the tax incentives(was stupid given the area's basically a sims construction site) it's that the area is a fucking congested hellhole that doesn't need thousands OOS people accelerating the problem.
 
Amazon is expanding everywhere, so there will need to be more proof of 25,000 new jobs to vindicate the dummy. I have seen no evidence of it.

Also, let's not pretend she knew what the fuck she was doing. The idiot believed by stopping the deal that NY would have $3 Billion extra to spend, when in reality that was the tax break of the $30 Billion Amazon was going to realize. They would have still had to pay $27 Billion, and instead got nothing. She was actually talking about how to spend the $3 Billion now that they stopped Amazon. She's stupid.
 
It's not the HQ that they wanted and went to Virginia instead. It's expansion on the presence they already had.
 
Those are major companies. Of course they will "expand" in NYC regardless as they will any major city. Any proof this is anything near the deal they lost prior though?
I don't think it matters in the context of the point they're making.

So long as Amazon is going to be expanding into NYC then NYC is going to get more jobs and more tax revenue than before. If they're accomplishing this without giving up anything then it's probably going to be a net positive in the long run.

It's like a chick who says if you take her to dinner, she'll sleep with you. You say "no" so she settles for giving you a bj anyway. Did you really lose in that scenario?
 
my issue with AOC over this was never the contention that without tax cuts Amazon or others would not come to NYC or other such big cities. I said that part of her point was always something that could be debated and I am not giving politicians the benefit of the doubt when it comes to throwing money at corporations.

My issue with AOC was the painfully stupid statement she made in celebration when it was announced Amazon was not going to NYC and AOC basically stated that she had saves NYC $3B of taxpayer money that now should be given to teachers.

She claims to be a economics major and yet has no comprehension that those tax Savings Amazon would get in that deal were a reduction of the billions they would generate and pay to the State but instead get to keep. So instead of paying say $50B in the first 10 years of taxes and fees generally owed Amazon would pay $47B and get to keep $3B if they put into approved areas such as more real estate, training of staff or other approved areas.

If Amazon is driven away the State never has that $3B or the remainder of the $47B they would have got had they gone in under the deal and achieved those savings.

So i'll give AOC points for being right in that NYC is not an area that needs to do that generally (i never disagreed) but hope she has now learned enough that if the same thing was being done somewhere like Detroit if companies would take over much of the still vacant Auto Industry plants and provide jobs, she would not fight it, even if they required massive subsidies to move into those areas.
 
it's probably going to be a net positive in the long run.
<YeahOKJen>

You know better than that. She cost NYC 25,000+ jobs and billions in tax revenues with her idiocy in this instance. Long run.
 
Finally someone in the government has the balls to not be a corporate cuck and stand up to capitalists and lo and behold the capitalists fall in line anyway.
 
I don't think it matters in the context of the point they're making.

So long as Amazon is going to be expanding into NYC then NYC is going to get more jobs and more tax revenue than before. If they're accomplishing this without giving up anything then it's probably going to be a net positive in the long run.

It's like a chick who says if you take her to dinner, she'll sleep with you. You say "no" so she settles for giving you a bj anyway. Did you really lose in that scenario?

Actually my sherdog lawyer id compare it to the girl from the movie teeth in which your dick is bitten off. Getting back 1/3 of what you asked for (if that) is not very good. I’m sure all my lawyers here would agree
 
<YeahOKJen>

You know better than that. She cost NYC 25,000+ jobs and billions in tax revenues with her idiocy in this instance. Long run.
Long run. Amazon sets up a foothold in the city at no cost to the city. Over time, Amazon will probably expand it's footprint because that's what companies do once they've settled into a location. So net positive in the long run.

She cost them those jobs in the short run but probably not in the long run. NYC is too desirable a location for any tech company to ignore. And if NYC had cut Amazon a deal, they'd probably have been pressured to give all the big players a deal. Right now, it looks like they're going to be able to attract all of those players and give up nothing at all to do it.
 
Actually my sherdog lawyer id compare it to the girl from the movie teeth in which your dick is bitten off. Getting back 1/3 of what you asked for (if that) is not very good. I’m sure all my lawyers here would agree
You have weird fantasies.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,102
Messages
55,467,731
Members
174,786
Latest member
plasterby
Back
Top