3 ms·

So you think the number of jobs in NYC is a fixed constant? That every extra job created by amazon is one less job elsewhere? That’s the literal opposite of dyn

So you think the number of jobs in NYC is a fixed constant? That every extra job created by amazon is one less job elsewhere? That’s the literal opposite of dynamism.

sdenton4 8y ago
That's basically what full employment means, and we pretty much there. So a pile of 'something else' jobs would be replaced with shotty Amazon jobs - and the stories from their corporate offices and from their warehouses have been harrowing.
- nerfhammer 8y ago
  This is the opposite of what full employment means. Full employment means a fixed number of workers who mostly all have jobs already, not a fixed number of job opportunities. Adding more competition for labor during full employment means employers will be forced to make workers better offers, not worse offers. It does not mean every job can only be replaced by a worse job, it means the opposite of that.
CPLX 8y ago
The amount of jobs in global leading cities is usually constrained by housing, rather than the other way around. It’s an important point to note.
geofft 8y ago
If we're not able to significantly increase infrastructure for getting to work, whether roads, subways, ferries, or whatever, yes, the number of jobs in NYC is going to hit a cap pretty soon. The usual way of solving this problem and continuing to scale a city is that you use tax revenue from new jobs to build additional public infrastructure. But the HQ2 deal made a point of giving up that tax revenue....
- smokeyj 8y ago
  > But the HQ2 deal made a point of giving up that tax revenue.... But the subsidies will largely still be available to the next people to move in right? Meaning, you’ve effectively accomplished nothing, right?
  - geofft 8y ago
    If that's true, then yes, I agree that nothing was accomplished. Is it? I don't know the details of the deal and I'd be pretty unhappy if it's true.... (If you just mean "Amazon proved it's negotiable," I think Amazon pulling out equally proves that it's a political quagmire to try to negotiate it.)

So you think the number of jobs in NYC is a fixed constant? That every extra job created by amazon is one less job elsewhere? That’s the literal opposite of dynamism.

sdenton4 8y ago

That's basically what full employment means, and we pretty much there. So a pile of 'something else' jobs would be replaced with shotty Amazon jobs - and the stories from their corporate offices and from their warehouses have been harrowing.

nerfhammer 8y ago
This is the opposite of what full employment means. Full employment means a fixed number of workers who mostly all have jobs already, not a fixed number of job opportunities. Adding more competition for labor during full employment means employers will be forced to make workers better offers, not worse offers. It does not mean every job can only be replaced by a worse job, it means the opposite of that.

CPLX 8y ago

The amount of jobs in global leading cities is usually constrained by housing, rather than the other way around. It’s an important point to note.

geofft 8y ago

If we're not able to significantly increase infrastructure for getting to work, whether roads, subways, ferries, or whatever, yes, the number of jobs in NYC is going to hit a cap pretty soon. The usual way of solving this problem and continuing to scale a city is that you use tax revenue from new jobs to build additional public infrastructure. But the HQ2 deal made a point of giving up that tax revenue....

smokeyj 8y ago
> But the HQ2 deal made a point of giving up that tax revenue.... But the subsidies will largely still be available to the next people to move in right? Meaning, you’ve effectively accomplished nothing, right?
- geofft 8y ago
  If that's true, then yes, I agree that nothing was accomplished. Is it? I don't know the details of the deal and I'd be pretty unhappy if it's true.... (If you just mean "Amazon proved it's negotiable," I think Amazon pulling out equally proves that it's a political quagmire to try to negotiate it.)