5 ms·

This assumes the higher-paying jobs would have gone to the district's representatives, instead of to out-of-town yuppies. I am open to being contracted on this,

This assumes the higher-paying jobs would have gone to the district's representatives, instead of to out-of-town yuppies. I am open to being contracted on this, but my assumption is that Amazon's HQ2 would not have primarily created jobs for underserved Queens residents. My own experience in NYC's tech scene is that a plurality of tech workers come from outside the city, and I am skeptical that their presence nevertheless "lifts all boats" via Seamless orders and bar tabs.

TuringNYC 8y ago
I'm pretty surprised to hear about the district-level focus here. I was born and raised in NYC and have always heard of the city as a single entity. NYC has a massive number of people who come from every district into Manhattan for jobs and leave at the end of the day. Having a district-level focus seems like a poor resolution -- should queens residents then conversely be restricted from working in Manhattan? It seems pretty regressive since poorer districts would get poorer.
- fjp 8y ago
  It's about people getting priced out of their homes, their neighborhoods. Just from the news of Amazon, people in adjacent neighborhoods were told by landlords their rents would be increased significantly upon lease renewal. People grow up in their neighborhoods and are connected to them and proud of them. Their are ways to bring up a neighborhood without pricing its residents out of living there. The main issue that progressives took with all of this is that Amazon pays $0 in federal tax, demanded $3 billion in local tax breaks, and offered very little enforceable things in return. We can't just let huge companies run around asking major cities to bend over for them and offer up their money and their souls for almost nothing in return.
  - vonmoltke 8y ago
    > Amazon pays $0 in federal tax Citation to actual financial statements needed. Their most recent 10-K indicates they paid $1.2B in total taxes. > demanded $3 billion in local tax breaks No, they didn't. At least $2.5B of that is on the table for any company that wants to build and office for 25,000 people in LIC. > offered very little enforceable things in return Not sure what you mean here. The majority of the tax breaks are directly tied to headcount or construction. No hiring/construction == no credits.
    - jakelazaroff 8y ago
      Amazon paying $0 in 2018 federal taxes was widely reported. Here's one citation: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/feb/15/amazon-tax-bill-2018-no-taxes-despite-billions-profit https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/feb/15/amazon-ta...
      - vonmoltke 8y ago
        That article is citing the same ITEP report that was posted here, a report which does not cite its sources. I'm not trusting ITEP to be any more unbiased than the Tax Foundation.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
    - CPLX 8y ago
      > At least $2.5B of that is on the table for any company that wants to build and office for 25,000 people in LIC. Right. Leaving $500MM in cold hard taxpayer dollars to build a building for the richest guy in the world so he could promptly compete with local businesses. Which, to be clear, was not something a lot of those taxpayers were happy about.
      - vonmoltke 8y ago
        $500MM is not $3B, and you don't get to lie about the amount just because you think its still a big number.
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
- rhcom2 8y ago
  An official is elected to represent her district, hence they there was a district-level focus. No one is suggesting restricting anyone's ability to work but you can't be surprised when people elected to represent a district act with only that district in mind.
nerfhammer 8y ago
NYers are opposed to commuters now? The city with 1 to 2 million current daily commuters?

TuringNYC 8y ago

I'm pretty surprised to hear about the district-level focus here. I was born and raised in NYC and have always heard of the city as a single entity. NYC has a massive number of people who come from every district into Manhattan for jobs and leave at the end of the day. Having a district-level focus seems like a poor resolution -- should queens residents then conversely be restricted from working in Manhattan? It seems pretty regressive since poorer districts would get poorer.

fjp 8y ago
It's about people getting priced out of their homes, their neighborhoods. Just from the news of Amazon, people in adjacent neighborhoods were told by landlords their rents would be increased significantly upon lease renewal. People grow up in their neighborhoods and are connected to them and proud of them. Their are ways to bring up a neighborhood without pricing its residents out of living there. The main issue that progressives took with all of this is that Amazon pays $0 in federal tax, demanded $3 billion in local tax breaks, and offered very little enforceable things in return. We can't just let huge companies run around asking major cities to bend over for them and offer up their money and their souls for almost nothing in return.
- vonmoltke 8y ago
  > Amazon pays $0 in federal tax Citation to actual financial statements needed. Their most recent 10-K indicates they paid $1.2B in total taxes. > demanded $3 billion in local tax breaks No, they didn't. At least $2.5B of that is on the table for any company that wants to build and office for 25,000 people in LIC. > offered very little enforceable things in return Not sure what you mean here. The majority of the tax breaks are directly tied to headcount or construction. No hiring/construction == no credits.
  - jakelazaroff 8y ago
    Amazon paying $0 in 2018 federal taxes was widely reported. Here's one citation: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/feb/15/amazon-tax-bill-2018-no-taxes-despite-billions-profit https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/feb/15/amazon-ta...
    - vonmoltke 8y ago
      That article is citing the same ITEP report that was posted here, a report which does not cite its sources. I'm not trusting ITEP to be any more unbiased than the Tax Foundation.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - CPLX 8y ago
    > At least $2.5B of that is on the table for any company that wants to build and office for 25,000 people in LIC. Right. Leaving $500MM in cold hard taxpayer dollars to build a building for the richest guy in the world so he could promptly compete with local businesses. Which, to be clear, was not something a lot of those taxpayers were happy about.
    - vonmoltke 8y ago
      $500MM is not $3B, and you don't get to lie about the amount just because you think its still a big number.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
rhcom2 8y ago
An official is elected to represent her district, hence they there was a district-level focus. No one is suggesting restricting anyone's ability to work but you can't be surprised when people elected to represent a district act with only that district in mind.

nerfhammer 8y ago

NYers are opposed to commuters now? The city with 1 to 2 million current daily commuters?