4 ms·

I worry it may end up like the ‘70s when poor policy started to device large companies to seek greener pastures for their HQ and operations elsewhere. Sometime

by mc32 7mo ago

I worry it may end up like the ‘70s when poor policy started to device large companies to seek greener pastures for their HQ and operations elsewhere. Sometimes politicians think they have them by their noses and can turn up reaction to fix ineptitude, corruption or both but sadly for the politicians people and businesses can vote with their feet.

collabs 7mo ago
This only works if we the people let them. For example, I hear about the example of Kansas City — kcmo vs kcks — and I can't help but wonder, why do we allow companies to do this? It should be trivial for the people of Kansas and Missouri to come together and say we won't allow a race to the bottom.
- wat10000 7mo ago
  John Nash won a Nobel Prize for exploring that sort of question. It’s hard.
- KK7NIL 7mo ago
  > why do we allow companies to do this? It should be trivial for the people of Kansas and Missouri to come together and say we won't allow a race to the bottom. This is prisoner's dilemma 101. Or, less cynically, cities compete in a free market where they try to compete for a limited amount of capital investment; there's nothing wrong with a city offering more attractive terms to be more business friendly, if they so wish.
  - mc32 7mo ago
    Some cities can offer perks like an educated workforce, educational institutions of renown, nice weather, etc. to compensate for a heavier tax burden but everyone and every company has a breaking point after which they decide to pull up stakes.
dangus 7mo ago
I love how this thread is talking about bad policy without even discussing any aspect of the policy that is bad. Perhaps we should pull our heads out of the Fox News punch bowl to take a breath. Y’all act like democratic socialist policy can’t work even though we’ve spent the last entire history of our country trying the exact opposite strategy only to have it not work out at all. The current status quo which is obviously not satisfactory didn’t come from socialists or leftists running the country. Cue the “This is the world under communism” memes that are literally pictures of the current world under unfettered under-regulated capitalism. The boogeyman of “the businesses will move out of NYC” is hilariously out of touch. Where will all these companies get the employees they depend on if they move operations to Kansas? NYC contains nearly the entire population of Ohio within its boroughs. Where do you propose these companies find employees if they all leave NYC? You’re making the classic business bootlicking mistake of flipping the needs pyramid upside down. We don’t need to beg for businesses to stick around, businesses literally depend on regular working class people to survive. They are worthless without our labor and our dollars as customers.
- mc32 7mo ago
  People did move out of NYC and companies did move HQs out to NJ and elsewhere. NYC lost pop during the eighties and didn’t recover its population till 2000. It was an 10% decline in pop[1]. They went from 125 F500 cos based in NYC down to 61 by 1986. Maybe that’s okay with you if it were to repeat but that’s a lot of a tax base leaving for better pastures. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_York_City https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_York_City
  - dangus 7mo ago
    It's important to discuss the reasons for the population dropping in the 1980s and subsequently recovering. It didn't experience population drops because NYC scared away the businesses and billionaires/millionaires with left-leaning policy. That population loss happened because of macroeconomic trends that were already in motion, as well as local factors that really had very little to do with who was mayor at the time. Detroit didn't have a population collapse because of who was mayor or what the tax rate on the local businesses was.

by mc32 7mo ago

collabs 7mo ago

This only works if we the people let them. For example, I hear about the example of Kansas City — kcmo vs kcks — and I can't help but wonder, why do we allow companies to do this? It should be trivial for the people of Kansas and Missouri to come together and say we won't allow a race to the bottom.

wat10000 7mo ago
John Nash won a Nobel Prize for exploring that sort of question. It’s hard.
KK7NIL 7mo ago
> why do we allow companies to do this? It should be trivial for the people of Kansas and Missouri to come together and say we won't allow a race to the bottom. This is prisoner's dilemma 101. Or, less cynically, cities compete in a free market where they try to compete for a limited amount of capital investment; there's nothing wrong with a city offering more attractive terms to be more business friendly, if they so wish.
- mc32 7mo ago
  Some cities can offer perks like an educated workforce, educational institutions of renown, nice weather, etc. to compensate for a heavier tax burden but everyone and every company has a breaking point after which they decide to pull up stakes.

dangus 7mo ago

I love how this thread is talking about bad policy without even discussing any aspect of the policy that is bad. Perhaps we should pull our heads out of the Fox News punch bowl to take a breath. Y’all act like democratic socialist policy can’t work even though we’ve spent the last entire history of our country trying the exact opposite strategy only to have it not work out at all. The current status quo which is obviously not satisfactory didn’t come from socialists or leftists running the country. Cue the “This is the world under communism” memes that are literally pictures of the current world under unfettered under-regulated capitalism. The boogeyman of “the businesses will move out of NYC” is hilariously out of touch. Where will all these companies get the employees they depend on if they move operations to Kansas? NYC contains nearly the entire population of Ohio within its boroughs. Where do you propose these companies find employees if they all leave NYC? You’re making the classic business bootlicking mistake of flipping the needs pyramid upside down. We don’t need to beg for businesses to stick around, businesses literally depend on regular working class people to survive. They are worthless without our labor and our dollars as customers.

mc32 7mo ago
People did move out of NYC and companies did move HQs out to NJ and elsewhere. NYC lost pop during the eighties and didn’t recover its population till 2000. It was an 10% decline in pop[1]. They went from 125 F500 cos based in NYC down to 61 by 1986. Maybe that’s okay with you if it were to repeat but that’s a lot of a tax base leaving for better pastures. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_York_City https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_York_City
- dangus 7mo ago
  It's important to discuss the reasons for the population dropping in the 1980s and subsequently recovering. It didn't experience population drops because NYC scared away the businesses and billionaires/millionaires with left-leaning policy. That population loss happened because of macroeconomic trends that were already in motion, as well as local factors that really had very little to do with who was mayor at the time. Detroit didn't have a population collapse because of who was mayor or what the tax rate on the local businesses was.