3 ms·

> 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 qual

> 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 2y 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 2y 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.

listenallyall 2y 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 2y 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.