5 ms·

As a generalization, the people who want to work for Amazon tend to be more on the progressive wing, and an HQ in a heavily conservative region would make it ha

by fooey 9y ago

As a generalization, the people who want to work for Amazon tend to be more on the progressive wing, and an HQ in a heavily conservative region would make it harder to hire talent. I would guess places like Denver/Boulder (where Google has a site coming), Boston, Portland, or Las Vegas are much more likely than Austin, Charlotte, or Salt Lake City

coredog64 9y ago
Although Austin is in Texas, it is famous for being independent. It's also fairly progressive.
sremani 9y ago
Anybody who says People's Republic of Austin (ref: Bernie movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JREkqCvLzSo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JREkqCvLzSo) is not on progressive wing is kidding. Also, Whole Foods is head-quartered in Austin, so there could be "synergy" there.
- fooey 9y ago
  Progressive islands in conservative states are almost worse They just get diced up and have no voice in state or federal government, and you end up with things like the NC and Texas bathroom bills. Why would a company like Amazon move to a state who's already so wrong on human rights issues? That's just asking for boycotts and mass resignations. I'd wager it's vastly more likely Whole Foods will move away than Amazon moves in. I wouldn't be surprised if one of the main motivations for HQ2 was to move Whole Foods, and anyone else they acquire, into Amazon proper.
  - reaperducer 9y ago
    > Progressive islands in conservative states are almost worse Progressive islands in conservative states is pretty much all there is, with the exception of California and New England. Chicago is the progressive island that turns conservative Illinois blue on the map. Seattle is the progressive island that turns conservative Washington blue on the map. New York, Rochester, Syracuse, Albany, and a few others are the progressive islands that turn conservative upstate New York blue on the map. Houston, Austin, Dallas as the progressive islands that have not yet turned Texas blue on the map. etc... etc...
    - santaclaus 9y ago
      > Progressive islands in conservative states is pretty much all there is, with the exception of California and New England. California is hella conservative the second you get out of the major cities...
  - unexpected 9y ago
    I agree with you, but I would argue the opposite. If you wanted to tip over Texas (and make it blue), moving 50,000 progressive jobs is a great way to do it. I'm in Dallas, and we're a lot closer to doing this than you would expect. Dallas, Houston, Austin are already blue. If you can turn Texas blue, it's game over.
  - pc86 9y ago
    > Progressive islands in conservative states are almost worse. They just get diced up and have no voice in state or federal government Not always. If it's a small area, sure it may get split apart, except packing is a thing as well and just as big of a deal. But Austin proper has nearly a million people. The metro area is more than two million. You'd need to split it into 6-8 districts even to have a shot at creating solid Republican representation for Austin. There are 4 districts covering the city, and you'd need at least 2 for equal representation. I'm not saying gerrymandering isn't an issue, I'm just saying that any implication the people of a city like Austin have no voice at the state or federal level is flatly wrong.
    - smcdow 9y ago
      Gerrymandering is an issue. Please see https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/map https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/map, and zoom in on Austin. Austin is a part of the following Congressional districts: TX-21, TX-25, TX-31, TX-17, TX-10, & TX-35. Of these districts, only one (TX-35) is Democratic. On the other hand, Lamar Smith (TX-21) is one of the Representatives for the Bluest city in the state.
      - pc86 9y ago
        > > I'm not saying that gerrymandering isn't an issue At least two of the districts you mention represent suburbs and not the city proper, which is what I was talking about.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - unethical_ban 9y ago
    Human rights are things like voting, eating, drinking, and rule of law. The bathroom bill is an embarrassment, it's discrimination, and it needs repealed. However, it's impact is not on the same level as those other things, or even on the same level as a broad denial of service ala "Whites Only" - in part because it's completely unenforceable. Furthermore, even under your definition of human rights, what other rights are denied uniquely in the state?
  - krapp 9y ago
    >Why would a company like Amazon move to a state who's already so wrong on human rights issues? That's just asking for boycotts and mass resignations. Amazon is more concerned with regulatory and tax burdens, labor costs and what kind of deal they can strike with a local government than with "human rights issues." Their labor practices are already infamous, and they have warehouses in Texas already, and no one cares enough about any of it to boycott them. To this end, Texas is attractive because culturally it's pro-business, anti-regulation and anti-labor (and very much pro-kickback.)
plandis 9y ago
Why do you think that Ohio (Cincinnati) is a conservative stronghold? They are typically considered a swing state.

by fooey 9y ago

coredog64 9y ago

Although Austin is in Texas, it is famous for being independent. It's also fairly progressive.

sremani 9y ago

Anybody who says People's Republic of Austin (ref: Bernie movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JREkqCvLzSo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JREkqCvLzSo) is not on progressive wing is kidding. Also, Whole Foods is head-quartered in Austin, so there could be "synergy" there.

fooey 9y ago
Progressive islands in conservative states are almost worse They just get diced up and have no voice in state or federal government, and you end up with things like the NC and Texas bathroom bills. Why would a company like Amazon move to a state who's already so wrong on human rights issues? That's just asking for boycotts and mass resignations. I'd wager it's vastly more likely Whole Foods will move away than Amazon moves in. I wouldn't be surprised if one of the main motivations for HQ2 was to move Whole Foods, and anyone else they acquire, into Amazon proper.
- reaperducer 9y ago
  > Progressive islands in conservative states are almost worse Progressive islands in conservative states is pretty much all there is, with the exception of California and New England. Chicago is the progressive island that turns conservative Illinois blue on the map. Seattle is the progressive island that turns conservative Washington blue on the map. New York, Rochester, Syracuse, Albany, and a few others are the progressive islands that turn conservative upstate New York blue on the map. Houston, Austin, Dallas as the progressive islands that have not yet turned Texas blue on the map. etc... etc...
  - santaclaus 9y ago
    > Progressive islands in conservative states is pretty much all there is, with the exception of California and New England. California is hella conservative the second you get out of the major cities...
- unexpected 9y ago
  I agree with you, but I would argue the opposite. If you wanted to tip over Texas (and make it blue), moving 50,000 progressive jobs is a great way to do it. I'm in Dallas, and we're a lot closer to doing this than you would expect. Dallas, Houston, Austin are already blue. If you can turn Texas blue, it's game over.
- pc86 9y ago
  > Progressive islands in conservative states are almost worse. They just get diced up and have no voice in state or federal government Not always. If it's a small area, sure it may get split apart, except packing is a thing as well and just as big of a deal. But Austin proper has nearly a million people. The metro area is more than two million. You'd need to split it into 6-8 districts even to have a shot at creating solid Republican representation for Austin. There are 4 districts covering the city, and you'd need at least 2 for equal representation. I'm not saying gerrymandering isn't an issue, I'm just saying that any implication the people of a city like Austin have no voice at the state or federal level is flatly wrong.
  - smcdow 9y ago
    Gerrymandering is an issue. Please see https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/map https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/map, and zoom in on Austin. Austin is a part of the following Congressional districts: TX-21, TX-25, TX-31, TX-17, TX-10, & TX-35. Of these districts, only one (TX-35) is Democratic. On the other hand, Lamar Smith (TX-21) is one of the Representatives for the Bluest city in the state.
    - pc86 9y ago
      > > I'm not saying that gerrymandering isn't an issue At least two of the districts you mention represent suburbs and not the city proper, which is what I was talking about.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- unethical_ban 9y ago
  Human rights are things like voting, eating, drinking, and rule of law. The bathroom bill is an embarrassment, it's discrimination, and it needs repealed. However, it's impact is not on the same level as those other things, or even on the same level as a broad denial of service ala "Whites Only" - in part because it's completely unenforceable. Furthermore, even under your definition of human rights, what other rights are denied uniquely in the state?
- krapp 9y ago
  >Why would a company like Amazon move to a state who's already so wrong on human rights issues? That's just asking for boycotts and mass resignations. Amazon is more concerned with regulatory and tax burdens, labor costs and what kind of deal they can strike with a local government than with "human rights issues." Their labor practices are already infamous, and they have warehouses in Texas already, and no one cares enough about any of it to boycott them. To this end, Texas is attractive because culturally it's pro-business, anti-regulation and anti-labor (and very much pro-kickback.)

plandis 9y ago

Why do you think that Ohio (Cincinnati) is a conservative stronghold? They are typically considered a swing state.