4 ms·
The article is very disingenuous about this being a "cost" to tax payers. It's a tax break, it's not extra money that's going to be added to NY's tax bill, it's
by jdoliner 8y ago
The article is very disingenuous about this being a "cost" to tax payers. It's a tax break, it's not extra money that's going to be added to NY's tax bill, it's taxes that Amazon theoretically would have had to pay if they decided to build their offices there and didn't have the tax break. There are some other real costs to tax payers in the form of subsidies, but they're much smaller than the 1.5 billion figure quoted here. If you consider the fact that Amazon is going to probably pay much more in taxes over the lifetime of their offices in NY then it seems like a reasonable deal for their government to make.
- dang 8y agoOk, we replaced "taxpayers to pay" with "state tax break" above.
- iplusplus 8y agoIf you're going to ban me permanently, I believe it would be fair to vouch my replies: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18454702 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18454702 I'm sorry things have deteriorated between us to this point, but you have been acting strangely and using your position in ways that do not fit the whole point of HN, which is pursuit of intellectual gratification. Someone had to call you on it. And predictably, you are now trying to frame me as if I have harassed you, when I merely mocked you.
- shawn 8y agoMy replies countering your arguments still are not vouched. Do you consider your position so weak that it can’t withstand a debate? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18454702 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18454702 (I would ask the community to please vouch them, but you’ve made it clear that you will vouch “the good ones,” not the community.)
- oculusthrift 8y agoin economics it’s considered the same thing. either way it adds to less net income for then govt.