Amazon To Not Build 2nd HQ in New York

[fskimospy]

Look at Seattle, look at SF/Silicon Valley, same thing would have happened in NYC. And it probably still will, because Amazon will continue hiring there, they can't afford to pass up the talent. But at least the local taxes won't be subsidizing it.

You realize that Silicon Valley's high housing prices are basically self-inflicted, right?

Funny you mention Seattle though. When confronted with huge rent increases they embarked on a massive homebuilding program. Now rents are falling.

https://seattle.curbed.com/2018/9/21/17889042/rental-cost-decrease-seattle-area

 

[fskimospy]

Your shtick is as dumb as it is tiresome.

Are you lashing out because you don't want to admit I'm right that we need lots more homes?

 

[Genx87]

I guess this is a win? I mean who wants high paying jobs and local investment anyways?

I'd love to know the position NY paying for NFL, NBA, and MLB stadiums of the people who vocally opposed Amazon.

 

[ivwshane]

I guess this is a win? I mean who wants high paying jobs and local investment anyways?

I'd love to know the position NY paying for NFL, NBA, and MLB stadiums of the people who vocally opposed Amazon.

Short term gains for long term problems, who wouldn't want that! That kind of short sighted thinking is right up your alley isn't it?

 

[theeedude]

How would they ever communicate?

Gee, I don't know, if only there was a high speed global communication network. Someone should come up with it, and call it the Inter-Net.

 

[fskimospy]

I guess this is a win? I mean who wants high paying jobs and local investment anyways?

I'd love to know the position NY paying for NFL, NBA, and MLB stadiums of the people who vocally opposed Amazon.

All we need to do is chase the rest of the high paying jobs out of NYC and then think how low the rents will be! FOOLPROOF.

 

[theeedude]

You realize that Silicon Valley's high housing prices are basically self-inflicted, right?

Funny you mention Seattle though. When confronted with huge rent increases they embarked on a massive homebuilding program. Now rents are falling.

https://seattle.curbed.com/2018/9/21/17889042/rental-cost-decrease-seattle-area

Yes, I know all about Nimby. But tech companies should grow organically based on local supply of labor and their needs, and pay their damn taxes. Not artificially cram 25,000 people into a "chosen" neighborhood in exchange for tax subsidies that other local businesses who pay taxes don't get.
If you are a renter in NYC anywhere near that area, you dodged a major bullet, no question about it.

 

[Jimzz]

Thing is amazon will not get the economic package from the state/city now. But Amazon has said they still plan to expand their teams there.
So short run NY loses, but seems long run they don't pay anything extra but still get more tax payers.

 

[fskimospy]

Yes, I know all about Nimby. But tech companies should grow organically based on local supply of labor and their needs, and pay their damn taxes. Not artificially cram 25,000 people into a "chosen" neighborhood in exchange for tax subsidies that other local businesses who pay taxes don't get.
If you are a renter in NYC anywhere near that area, you dodged a major bullet, no question about it.

While I agree with doing away with these subsidies we should be clear about a few things:

1) Amazon would not have been competing with local businesses any more than it already is by existing. It was administrative offices, etc, not some sort of shop.
2) I'm against subsidies of this sort on principle but it's not like these subsidies are anything new. The majority of what Amazon was getting was due to laws that have long been on the books and will continue to be on the books. Nobody complained before so why now?
3) If you are a renter in NYC you are already being screwed by insane housing policy. We should ALWAYS encourage more businesses to come to the city and the people in charge in New York are to blame for the housing shortage and no one else.

We shouldn't be saying 'let's keep businesses out of NYC because our housing policy sucks', we should just fix our housing policy. It's not like it's a mystery as to what needs to be done, it simply requires us to stop listening to rich, incumbent homeowners as to what policy should be.

 

[realibrad]

Your shtick is as dumb as it is tiresome.

What do you think he is wrong about though?

 

[theeedude]

While I agree with doing away with these subsidies we should be clear about a few things:

1) Amazon would not have been competing with local businesses any more than it already is by existing. It was administrative offices, etc, not some sort of shop.

They would compete for labor and real estate, at the very least.

2) I'm against subsidies of this sort on principle but it's not like these subsidies are anything new. The majority of what Amazon was getting was due to laws that have long been on the books and will continue to be on the books. Nobody complained before so why now?

People complained before too, just nobody listened.

3) If you are a renter in NYC you are already being screwed by insane housing policy. We should ALWAYS encourage more businesses to come to the city and the people in charge in New York are to blame for the housing shortage and no one else.

Why would a renter in NYC want to pay taxes to get screwed even more, just so Amazon can bring people from around the country and stuff them into some HQ, when they should just be setting up smaller satellite offices where those people already live?

We shouldn't be saying 'let's keep businesses out of NYC because our housing policy sucks', we should just fix our housing policy. It's not like it's a mystery as to what needs to be done, it simply requires us to stop listening to rich, incumbent homeowners as to what policy should be.

Well, fix the housing policy first and then bring in Amazon or whoever. Don't expect local residents to just suck it up in the meantime.
BTW, it's entirely possible that Amazon is just pulling a stunt to depress local real estate and buy it up cheaper for their existing plans. I wouldn't put it past them.

 

[theeedude]

Thing is amazon will not get the economic package from the state/city now. But Amazon has said they still plan to expand their teams there.
So short run NY loses, but seems long run they don't pay anything extra but still get more tax payers.

Tech is insanely competitive for talent now. If there is tech talent in NYC to be hired, Amazon will build offices and hire it anyways, because otherwise their competitors will. Why pay them a subsidy for something they were going to do anyways?

 

[fskimospy]

They would compete for labor and real estate, at the very least.

I suspect the average resident of NYC would be very happy if Amazon competed for their labor. Wages go up! As for real estate, getting businesses to go to LIC has been a problem, one Amazon would have solved.

People complained before too, just nobody listened.

As someone who has lived in NYC for the last nine years I don't recall these complaints in any significant quantity.

Why would a renter in NYC want to pay taxes to get screwed even more, just so Amazon can bring people from around the country and stuff them into some HQ, when they should just be setting up smaller satellite offices where those people already live?

You understand that the subsidies aren't tax money given to Amazon, right? They are basically the state foregoing taxes Amazon would otherwise be paying. I've seen a bunch of mentions on Twitter about how NYC now has $3 billion or whatever to spend on something else. No, we don't. Counting those as taxes 'lost' or whatever is predicated on the idea that you would get another entity that would pay a similar amount of taxes to occupy the space now left vacant by Amazon. That seems unlikely to me.

As far as Amazon goes don't you think they know their needs better than you do?

Well, fix the housing policy first and then bring in Amazon or whoever. Don't expect local residents to just suck it up in the meantime.
BTW, it's entirely possible that Amazon is just pulling a stunt to depress local real estate and buy it up cheaper for their existing plans. I wouldn't put it past them.

Local residents would be far, far better off using their time spent opposing Amazon to opposing bad housing policy. That's the actual problem, after all.

 

[Blackjack200]

Zero! In fact as a homeowner the fewer houses they build in NYC the more money I make.

The problem is that this lack of homebuilding is causing massive suffering for thousands or millions of people. I'm not that selfish.

NYC is already the most densely populated city in the country. The subways are bursting at the seams. You can't just add a lot of housing without significant upgrades to infrastructure, and how are you going to pay for the infrastructure when you're giving $3 billion to Amazon?

I don't believe that pouty press release for a second. I think Amazon needs access to the educated NYC workforce, and they will quietly grow their existing operations without the "HQ2" fanfare or 10 figure price tag.

 

[realibrad]

They would compete for labor and real estate, at the very least.

People complained before too, just nobody listened.

Why would a renter in NYC want to pay taxes to get screwed even more, just so Amazon can bring people from around the country and stuff them into some HQ, when they should just be setting up smaller satellite offices where those people already live?

Well, fix the housing policy first and then bring in Amazon or whoever. Don't expect local residents to just suck it up in the meantime.
BTW, it's entirely possible that Amazon is just pulling a stunt to depress local real estate and buy it up cheaper for their existing plans. I wouldn't put it past them.

How is that argument any different than letting in immigrants? I suspect you know the counter arguments against immigration, so, why would it not apply here?

 

[Vic]

What I never quite understood is why Amazon picked NYC to begin with. Low unemployment, high wages, high cost of living. NYC is not a place that needed another large employer.

 

[Blackjack200]

How is that argument any different than letting in immigrants? I suspect you know the counter arguments against immigration, so, why would it not apply here?

Because we're not giving billions of dollars in incentives to immigrants to come live here.

 

[fskimospy]

NYC is already the most densely populated city in the country. The subways are bursting at the seams. You can't just add a lot of housing without significant upgrades to infrastructure, and how are you going to pay for the infrastructure when you're giving $3 billion to Amazon?

I don't believe that pouty press release for a second. I think Amazon needs access to the educated NYC workforce, and they will quietly grow their existing operations without the "HQ2" fanfare or 10 figure price tag.

The city isn't 'giving' $3 billion to Amazon, they are giving them $3 billion in tax breaks. The only way the city is out money is if another business would be providing similar revenues in that location. This seems unlikely.

As for the subways, the great part about Amazon being in LIC (and why the city is trying to promote development over there generally) is that it would run counter to the general subway traffic flow during peak times as people wouldn't be going into Manhattan in the morning/out in the evening. This was something the city specifically thought about, so it would basically just be soaking up unused counter-cyclical subway capacity.

 

[Blackjack200]

What I never quite understood is why Amazon picked NYC to begin with. Low unemployment, high wages, high cost of living. NYC is not a place that needed another large employer.

The educated and experienced processional workforce. You have managers with enterprise experience, engineers, developers, etc. etc. etc.

That's unique to just a few places in the country.

 

[Indus]

I guess this is a win? I mean who wants high paying jobs and local investment anyways?

I'd love to know the position NY paying for NFL, NBA, and MLB stadiums of the people who vocally opposed Amazon.

People are very much against it.

It was put there by Rudy Giulliani in the 90's when the Yankees were winning 4 world series in 5 years and construction was completed in 2009. Now they can't even sell all the seats anymore.. you might notice on TV, the $800+ seats are mostly empty while the $10 seats are sold out.

The Jets tried getting their stadium in Manhattan on the West Side and it was vetoed.. they and the giants had to share a stadium in New Jersey.

Even NYCFC has to rent yankee stadium part time because they are not getting tax breaks.

They want to build it.. they have to do it themselves.

 

[Genx87]

Thing is amazon will not get the economic package from the state/city now. But Amazon has said they still plan to expand their teams there.
So short run NY loses, but seems long run they don't pay anything extra but still get more tax payers.

Really no idea what that even means. How many jobs, what is their avg wage? Adding on another 100 15 dollar an hour job at a warehouse in Brooklyn is not the same as the 150k\year jobs they were to add at this HQ2. To me it is pretty simple. Queens lost out short and long term.

 

[Moonbeam]

If you look at the breakdown of support/opposition to the amazon deal it was basically the poorer and browner people in Queens and the Bronx who wanted Amazon to come and the richer and whiter people in Brooklyn and Manhattan who opposed it.

So no, the people who wanted higher paying jobs did want it. The people who already had higher paying jobs didn't. This is just what I've always been trying to tell you.

This is exactly what I said. The people with higher paying jobs are the people who have those higher cost apartments and they don’t want more of them built because nothing is cheap without reason. The law of real estate is location location location which tells us location matters and that it is all about desirability and what people think of as desirable is room to breathe. A similar principle applies to why people put locks on their doors or farmers have cats in their barns.

 

[Genx87]

What I never quite understood is why Amazon picked NYC to begin with. Low unemployment, high wages, high cost of living. NYC is not a place that needed another large employer.

I would guess a large educated local population. And a govt that typically is willing to invest in infrastructure.

 

[realibrad]

Because we're not giving billions of dollars in incentives to immigrants to come live here.

Um... we are. How are we not? Immigrants when they first enter have not contributed through taxes anything in terms of social systems and safety nets. Iets avoid the radioactive topic of illegal immigration, and stick to only legal.

You have people that are coming in, and once they become a resident get access to a great deal of things that we pay for with taxes. If that person buys a house, they get access to municipal and federal things. Its expected that they will contribute in the long run, but, they for sure are getting incentives to subsidize their lives in the short run.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Yes, I know all about Nimby. But tech companies should grow organically based on local supply of labor and their needs, and pay their damn taxes. Not artificially cram 25,000 people into a "chosen" neighborhood in exchange for tax subsidies that other local businesses who pay taxes don't get.
If you are a renter in NYC anywhere near that area, you dodged a major bullet, no question about it.

I mentioned this at the beginning of the post - this isn't about tax advantages for individual corporations. That's an entirely separate discussion - and it's one that I agree needs to be outlawed to some degree.

You act like you guys won and that Amazon will have to go somewhere else and pay their taxes in full. They won't.