3 ms·
I don't want cities to be able to negotiate "under the table" or without public oversight at all. Encouraging this sort of antics is corruption of the system an
by Shivetya 8y ago
I don't want cities to be able to negotiate "under the table" or without public oversight at all. Encouraging this sort of antics is corruption of the system and many large cities already have that in abundance.
Apple's system is only smarter if you think defrauding the public is good business.
- briandear 8y agoDefrauding? That’s ridiculous.
- Silfen 8y agoI wouldn't use the word "defrauding," but there is a serious principal-agent problem. The localities that attract an Amazon or an Apple are likely to have winner's curse. That is, the highest bid (in terms of tax breaks and other concessions) for the new headquarters is likely to be from a place that incidentally overvalued the new HQ. The politicians usually know this, but don't care. They get a flashy, public "victory" to campaign on, even if the real value to the local economy is questionable.
- selectodude 8y agoI don't think any of these cities are actively handing Amazon money, just not taxing them. None of the cities on the list absolutely NEED amazon to survive, so they're not going to completely overextend themselves.
- s2g 8y agoChicago promised to give the taxes paid by employees back to Amazon. It's disgusting.