4 ms·

They're not asking for concessions. They're asking to be paid for the project they're building. Whether the project is worth what they're asking is a separate

by tyre 8y ago

They're not asking for concessions. They're asking to be paid for the project they're building. Whether the project is worth what they're asking is a separate question. This is about a private company fronting the cost of infrastructure development and being paid back with revenues over time. That doesn't feel shady.

ocdtrekkie 8y ago
I would point out the Google Fiber rollout in Louisville as a better example of what they want to do: Create an experimental infrastructure for their own benefit, that may or may not provide long term value to residents. Google ripped up the roads in Louisville to install fiber with an experimental methodology, and then abandoned it after it became clear the experiment failed. Rather than fix it, they're just going to leave. Louisville spent a ton of money fighting to bring Google in, gave them tons of allowances to do things nobody else would've been allowed to do, and got left holding the bag. Since Google's fiber install was bad, Louisville can't even use the network after they leave. It's just trash. Especially given the Louisville example, Toronto residents should fight like heck to not end up paying for Google's experiments. https://www.wdrb.com/in-depth/google-fiber-ending-service-in-louisville/article_8e5320fc-2b04-11e9-8d53-2b2c0b116aaa.html https://www.wdrb.com/in-depth/google-fiber-ending-service-in...
- lawrenceyan 8y ago
  Do you live in Louisville? How would you say tech companies like Google permeate through daily life? Is there a decent job market there for tech?
- ehsankia 8y ago
  Which is exactly why being paid in tax revenue over time is a much better solution, because if they fail and leave, they won't make money. If you pay them in a flat cost, then they are not as invested at seeing it succeed long term.
  - ocdtrekkie 8y ago
    The mistake you are making is believing Google should be paid at all for their own project they initiated for their own benefit. This is something Google wants to do, not something Toronto wanted or needed. If Google wants to use cities as guinea pigs, the cities should not be paying the price at all. Arguably, Google should be paying Toronto for the opportunity. New York decided it didn't really need to pay for Amazon to come there. Wisconsin learned how well paying Foxconn to set up a factory there worked out. Governments need to stop selling out their citizens to big tech companies, and start using tax dollars to benefit their constituents. Companies with tens or hundreds of billions of dollars in reserve cash do not need handouts.
    - typeformer 8y ago
      best take
    - ehsankia 8y ago
      You are conflating completely unrelated events. Amazon getting $3B tax cuts to build their own office there is in noway comparable to Google building homes, transportation and factories for a city. It's not Google's "job" to build your house, and you calling it "their own project" doesn't mean they should do it for free. If you don't want their help, go ahead and say no, but to expect this to be done for free is ridiculous and naive, and also in no way comparable to the Amazon situation.
      - ocdtrekkie 8y ago
        Perhaps you're unaware, but a major part of the Waterfront Toronto project is, in fact, a Google office. A decent chunk of the higher class housing built there is also likely to be for Google employees. An article from 2017 suggests teams from unrelated branches of Google, such as Google Brain, may have personnel relocated there. So, yes, it's actually very comparable to the Amazon situation. And again, this isn't Toronto contracting out for infrastructure they want or need. This is Google, who set out to experiment with running cities, seeking a location to let them use as a testbed. The buildings and infrastructure assembled there will be for Google's benefit, not for Toronto's.
barkingcat 8y ago
Nobody bought anything from Google. This is like Apple coming to you saying "we're making you a laptop, pay up" and you saying "But I never ordered one from you"
munk-a 8y ago
Why should the public pay for this project? Is it a project the government set out to do and ended up hiring google as a contractor? No? It's something google wants to do and Toronto is allowing them to do? Why should the city pay for the privileged of letting google make money?
FireBeyond 8y ago
> They're not asking for concessions. They're asking to be paid for the project they're building. Who asked them to build that project?
rhizome 8y ago
It's a concession that the resources not go somewhere else. Regardless, it's ridiculous that every city these companies set upon aren't charging them full m-f'ing freight.

by tyre 8y ago

ocdtrekkie 8y ago

I would point out the Google Fiber rollout in Louisville as a better example of what they want to do: Create an experimental infrastructure for their own benefit, that may or may not provide long term value to residents. Google ripped up the roads in Louisville to install fiber with an experimental methodology, and then abandoned it after it became clear the experiment failed. Rather than fix it, they're just going to leave. Louisville spent a ton of money fighting to bring Google in, gave them tons of allowances to do things nobody else would've been allowed to do, and got left holding the bag. Since Google's fiber install was bad, Louisville can't even use the network after they leave. It's just trash. Especially given the Louisville example, Toronto residents should fight like heck to not end up paying for Google's experiments. https://www.wdrb.com/in-depth/google-fiber-ending-service-in-louisville/article_8e5320fc-2b04-11e9-8d53-2b2c0b116aaa.html https://www.wdrb.com/in-depth/google-fiber-ending-service-in...

lawrenceyan 8y ago
Do you live in Louisville? How would you say tech companies like Google permeate through daily life? Is there a decent job market there for tech?
ehsankia 8y ago
Which is exactly why being paid in tax revenue over time is a much better solution, because if they fail and leave, they won't make money. If you pay them in a flat cost, then they are not as invested at seeing it succeed long term.
- ocdtrekkie 8y ago
  The mistake you are making is believing Google should be paid at all for their own project they initiated for their own benefit. This is something Google wants to do, not something Toronto wanted or needed. If Google wants to use cities as guinea pigs, the cities should not be paying the price at all. Arguably, Google should be paying Toronto for the opportunity. New York decided it didn't really need to pay for Amazon to come there. Wisconsin learned how well paying Foxconn to set up a factory there worked out. Governments need to stop selling out their citizens to big tech companies, and start using tax dollars to benefit their constituents. Companies with tens or hundreds of billions of dollars in reserve cash do not need handouts.
  - typeformer 8y ago
    best take
  - ehsankia 8y ago
    You are conflating completely unrelated events. Amazon getting $3B tax cuts to build their own office there is in noway comparable to Google building homes, transportation and factories for a city. It's not Google's "job" to build your house, and you calling it "their own project" doesn't mean they should do it for free. If you don't want their help, go ahead and say no, but to expect this to be done for free is ridiculous and naive, and also in no way comparable to the Amazon situation.
    - ocdtrekkie 8y ago
      Perhaps you're unaware, but a major part of the Waterfront Toronto project is, in fact, a Google office. A decent chunk of the higher class housing built there is also likely to be for Google employees. An article from 2017 suggests teams from unrelated branches of Google, such as Google Brain, may have personnel relocated there. So, yes, it's actually very comparable to the Amazon situation. And again, this isn't Toronto contracting out for infrastructure they want or need. This is Google, who set out to experiment with running cities, seeking a location to let them use as a testbed. The buildings and infrastructure assembled there will be for Google's benefit, not for Toronto's.

barkingcat 8y ago

Nobody bought anything from Google. This is like Apple coming to you saying "we're making you a laptop, pay up" and you saying "But I never ordered one from you"

munk-a 8y ago

Why should the public pay for this project? Is it a project the government set out to do and ended up hiring google as a contractor? No? It's something google wants to do and Toronto is allowing them to do? Why should the city pay for the privileged of letting google make money?

FireBeyond 8y ago

> They're not asking for concessions. They're asking to be paid for the project they're building. Who asked them to build that project?

rhizome 8y ago

It's a concession that the resources not go somewhere else. Regardless, it's ridiculous that every city these companies set upon aren't charging them full m-f'ing freight.