6 ms·

>> What's funny is she (and many other critics) specifically called out that all it would take is a single bad quarters for all those HQ jobs to evaporate and t

>> What's funny is she (and many other critics) specifically called out that all it would take is a single bad quarters for all those HQ jobs to evaporate and they were right. Could you elaborate on the argument here -- are you suggesting that if a job has a potential for future loss, it is just better to not create the job at all? If I was mayor, i'd be happy to take a high-paying job in my locality even if it isn't perpetual. The key would be to tie incentives to actual payroll. Subsidy disappears as soon as the job disappears. But guaranteeing perpetual jobs is something no organization can do, not even governments.

gotoeleven 3y ago
I think we should just be proud of her for acknowledging the existence of business cycles.
- mypalmike 3y ago
  Are you implying that someone who graduated cum laude with a degree in economics and international relations would not understand business cycles?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- pempem 3y ago
  I think we should openly admit 1. that organizations leverage and abuse these breaks 2. that its possible for layoffs to not impact the new teams and buildings pretty easily 3. that a single bad quarter shouldn't lead to layoffs esp from a company that literally is the poster child for not tanking share price when facing losses Its weird to have this subtext or joke that AOC wouldn't understand business cycles. She's not the first or last politician to try and spend money on lasting change.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- nemothekid 3y ago
  It's very easy to act righteous in hindsight, but she was skewered by the media for even acknowledging the existence of business cycles.
theturtletalks 3y ago
AOC was against the subsidies. No one is stopping Amazon from creating jobs and then then getting rid of them when they hit a downturn. The issue was the subsidies provided and if companies can be held accountable. Virginia paid $750M in subsidies for Amazon HQ2 to bring 2500 high paying jobs in 2023 and Amazon did not reach that goal. They'll probably miss the 2024 mark too. What recourse does Virginia have?
- cafard 3y ago
  Well, it could build a sports facility for Ted Leonsis, and hope that that brings in jobs and dollars. But that didn't make it through the legislature.
  - CalChris 3y ago
    He wanted VA to spend $2B to move the Wizards 8 miles.
- rkuodys 3y ago
  How does that make any sense? 750M / 2500 is 300k. It's just better to do helicopter money - literally just drop money from the skies and I would bet that more would be generated in return. Assuming that Gemini is right and Virginia keeps 5-6% of your taxable income, individuals should earn at least 5M just for break even. I don't understand this model - can someone help make sense?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - theturtletalks 3y ago
    300K is a one-time fee, but that high paying job will probably pay state taxes for years to come. Not to mention the extra taxes collected on that person renting, shopping, driving, etc. Amazon HQ2 might get other companies to make a HQ there too. There are benefits, but Amazon can't be held accountable for deals like these.
BoiledCabbage 3y ago
> Could you elaborate on the argument here It seems like you're trying to make this way more complex than it is. From the perspective of a city: Gaining quality high paying jobs without a large subsidy >> Gaining quality high paying jobs while paying a large subsidy. That's what was argued and is correct. She knew the city was in a strong negotiation position and it was absurd to provide a subsidy.
- listenallyall 3y ago
  AOC represents one district in Queens, not Manhattan or the entire city of New York. Her constituents do not benefit from Amazon relocating to Manhattan's West Side. Hudson Yards, where Amazon has rented space, received $6 billion in tax incentives, double the HQ2 package. Further, most of the incentive programs that comprised Amazon's HQ2 package were pre-existing programs available to anyone, led by $1.2 billion from Excelsior Jobs, $897 million from REAP, both of which are still active programs open to any company meeting their requirements. https://esd.ny.gov/excelsior-jobs-program https://esd.ny.gov/excelsior-jobs-program https://www.nyc.gov/site/finance/business/business-reap.page https://www.nyc.gov/site/finance/business/business-reap.page
- TuringNYC 3y ago
  >>> Could you elaborate on the argument here >It seems like you're trying to make this way more complex than it is. >From the perspective of a city: >Gaining quality high paying jobs without a large subsidy >> Gaining quality high paying jobs while paying a large subsidy. >That's what was argued and is correct. She knew the city was in a strong negotiation position and it was absurd to provide a subsidy. Here is the actual equation we ended up with: Gaining N high paying jobs without a large subsidy << Gaining 5N quality high paying jobs while paying a large subsidy paid if and only if 5N jobs created.
rsynnott 3y ago
If the company is soliciting significant bribes from the state to create the job, then, er, yeah, arguably the state should _never_ engage in that sort of thing, but if it does then it should absolutely be looking for assurances that it's getting value for money. I do think it's slightly surprising that the US doesn't really seem to have an equivalent to the EU's concept of "unlawful state aid", which shuts down a lot of this stuff before it starts.
- paxys 3y ago
  What's crazier still is that Amazon made all state and local governments sign NDAs which stated that the bidding process and any other specifics could not be shared with the public. Officials nationwide read this and went "yup, sounds good!" Quite literally legalized corruption.
eli_gottlieb 3y ago
Jobs are not a commodity that has to be "created" at all. A job is just a demand for labor. Either the demand is there at market rate, or it's not.
- TuringNYC 3y ago
  >> Jobs are not a commodity that has to be "created" at all. A job is just a demand for labor. Either the demand is there at market rate, or it's not. You are right, but missing the fact that the commodity can exist in location a vs location b. The argument for subsidies was to push to move the job to a specific location. As a tech worker in the NYC area, this would be awesome. It was an incredibly selfish decision by AoC and others to vanquish most of these jobs. Also remember all the secondary and tertiary jobs (nannies, restaurants, dog-walkers) which were all lost along with the high paying tech jobs.

gotoeleven 3y ago

I think we should just be proud of her for acknowledging the existence of business cycles.

mypalmike 3y ago
Are you implying that someone who graduated cum laude with a degree in economics and international relations would not understand business cycles?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
pempem 3y ago
I think we should openly admit 1. that organizations leverage and abuse these breaks 2. that its possible for layoffs to not impact the new teams and buildings pretty easily 3. that a single bad quarter shouldn't lead to layoffs esp from a company that literally is the poster child for not tanking share price when facing losses Its weird to have this subtext or joke that AOC wouldn't understand business cycles. She's not the first or last politician to try and spend money on lasting change.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
nemothekid 3y ago
It's very easy to act righteous in hindsight, but she was skewered by the media for even acknowledging the existence of business cycles.

theturtletalks 3y ago

AOC was against the subsidies. No one is stopping Amazon from creating jobs and then then getting rid of them when they hit a downturn. The issue was the subsidies provided and if companies can be held accountable. Virginia paid $750M in subsidies for Amazon HQ2 to bring 2500 high paying jobs in 2023 and Amazon did not reach that goal. They'll probably miss the 2024 mark too. What recourse does Virginia have?

cafard 3y ago
Well, it could build a sports facility for Ted Leonsis, and hope that that brings in jobs and dollars. But that didn't make it through the legislature.
- CalChris 3y ago
  He wanted VA to spend $2B to move the Wizards 8 miles.
rkuodys 3y ago
How does that make any sense? 750M / 2500 is 300k. It's just better to do helicopter money - literally just drop money from the skies and I would bet that more would be generated in return. Assuming that Gemini is right and Virginia keeps 5-6% of your taxable income, individuals should earn at least 5M just for break even. I don't understand this model - can someone help make sense?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- theturtletalks 3y ago
  300K is a one-time fee, but that high paying job will probably pay state taxes for years to come. Not to mention the extra taxes collected on that person renting, shopping, driving, etc. Amazon HQ2 might get other companies to make a HQ there too. There are benefits, but Amazon can't be held accountable for deals like these.

BoiledCabbage 3y ago

> Could you elaborate on the argument here It seems like you're trying to make this way more complex than it is. From the perspective of a city: Gaining quality high paying jobs without a large subsidy >> Gaining quality high paying jobs while paying a large subsidy. That's what was argued and is correct. She knew the city was in a strong negotiation position and it was absurd to provide a subsidy.

listenallyall 3y ago
AOC represents one district in Queens, not Manhattan or the entire city of New York. Her constituents do not benefit from Amazon relocating to Manhattan's West Side. Hudson Yards, where Amazon has rented space, received $6 billion in tax incentives, double the HQ2 package. Further, most of the incentive programs that comprised Amazon's HQ2 package were pre-existing programs available to anyone, led by $1.2 billion from Excelsior Jobs, $897 million from REAP, both of which are still active programs open to any company meeting their requirements. https://esd.ny.gov/excelsior-jobs-program https://esd.ny.gov/excelsior-jobs-program https://www.nyc.gov/site/finance/business/business-reap.page https://www.nyc.gov/site/finance/business/business-reap.page
TuringNYC 3y ago
>>> Could you elaborate on the argument here >It seems like you're trying to make this way more complex than it is. >From the perspective of a city: >Gaining quality high paying jobs without a large subsidy >> Gaining quality high paying jobs while paying a large subsidy. >That's what was argued and is correct. She knew the city was in a strong negotiation position and it was absurd to provide a subsidy. Here is the actual equation we ended up with: Gaining N high paying jobs without a large subsidy << Gaining 5N quality high paying jobs while paying a large subsidy paid if and only if 5N jobs created.

rsynnott 3y ago

If the company is soliciting significant bribes from the state to create the job, then, er, yeah, arguably the state should _never_ engage in that sort of thing, but if it does then it should absolutely be looking for assurances that it's getting value for money. I do think it's slightly surprising that the US doesn't really seem to have an equivalent to the EU's concept of "unlawful state aid", which shuts down a lot of this stuff before it starts.

paxys 3y ago
What's crazier still is that Amazon made all state and local governments sign NDAs which stated that the bidding process and any other specifics could not be shared with the public. Officials nationwide read this and went "yup, sounds good!" Quite literally legalized corruption.

eli_gottlieb 3y ago

Jobs are not a commodity that has to be "created" at all. A job is just a demand for labor. Either the demand is there at market rate, or it's not.

TuringNYC 3y ago
>> Jobs are not a commodity that has to be "created" at all. A job is just a demand for labor. Either the demand is there at market rate, or it's not. You are right, but missing the fact that the commodity can exist in location a vs location b. The argument for subsidies was to push to move the job to a specific location. As a tech worker in the NYC area, this would be awesome. It was an incredibly selfish decision by AoC and others to vanquish most of these jobs. Also remember all the secondary and tertiary jobs (nannies, restaurants, dog-walkers) which were all lost along with the high paying tech jobs.