Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thread (7 Viewers)
- Thread starter JohnnyU
- Start date
AAABatteries
Footballguy
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
I am a little unclear about how it will work since the state owns it and they will pay rent to the city. They will not pay property taxes but will instead pay half of what property taxes would be if it werent state owned property into a city fund and then half into a fund specific for infrastructure improvements around the proposed location.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Look what thread we are in...people that would normally oppose this are likely speaking up because it was her that oppossed it.
Trump is probably conflicted by his want to talk about socialism and his dislike for Bezos.
roadkill1292
Footballguy
Yes, the argument is easy to see. Amazon is huge and the possible payback for a community more of a sure thing than it would be with one or more of Amazon's competitors. I'm not sure that wooing Amazon is a particularly good thing in the long run. Let's help the guys who force Amazon to compete and innovate. We all benefit from that but I also understand that this is not the reality we live in. The reality we live in often sucks.
No, cities don't need to compete with each other on the basis of giving handouts to specific companies.
Suppose you and I are standing on a street corner and a fellow approaches and explains: "I have $50 that, for reasons I won't go into, I have to give to someone right now. Can I give it to you, Tim?"
And then I chime in, "Hey, if you give it to me, I'll give you $5 of it back." Then you offer $10, I offer $20, and we keep bidding against each other until one of us offers $50, or arbitrarily close to it.
You and I would both be better off in the long run if we agreed that anytime someone needs to throw some money at us, neither one of us will offer anything in return for it. When we bid against each other, we're hurting ourselves.
Cities should not be giving away the $50 to Amazon. Whichever city gets it should use it for the public good.
Some city should get it.
Last edited by a moderator:
supermike80
Footballguy
It doesn't have to be a street corner. We could be hanging out anywhere.supermike80 said:
Dickies
Footballguy
As @parasaurolophus pointed out, it then turns into paying $60 to prevent someone else from getting $50.Maurile Tremblay said:
timschochet
Footballguy
I’m just not buying into this analogy. Amazon isn’t offering $50; they’re offering to change your life. If they come into the city, the potential is unlimited. Not $50, not 3 billion dollars. Unlimited. So yeah I’m going to bid against you to get them, and if it gets high, so be it. It’s a once in a lifetime opportunity.Maurile Tremblay said:
timschochet
Footballguy
It's not unlimited, obviously. The economic activity that the Amazon headquarters would have generated is finite.
In any case, New York is crowded. Amazon's place will be taken by that of other companies. It may be a hundred other companies rather than just one, but that space isn't going to sit empty.
And now the economic activity that occurs will be taxed instead of untaxed, which is probably a win for the city overall
Last edited by a moderator:
Dickies
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
As long as it's not around me. I hate it when people are crying out loud near me.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Courtjester
The Town Drunk
There just is no way this can be spun as anything but a loss for NYC and ultimately for AOC. At the end of the day, Amazon will go somewhere else and continue to make billions and billions of dollars. There are 25k high-paying jobs not coming NYC's way and the resulting taxes, new restaurants, entertainment options that would have been a direct result of these 25k jobs are not coming back. Further, you have the fall out from all the peripheral real estate deals that are going to go away as well MSN was reporting on all the million dollar real estate deals that were set to be signed that now just disappeared.
So I get MT's point that this area will ultimately become occupied with other businesses, but how long will that take? The biggest misrepresentation is to presume that they just saved 3 billion dollars by not doing this deal like AOC seems to want people to believe. It wasn't like she was writing a 3 billion dollar check to Amazon. It was tax breaks--it was land deals. Yet she somehow wants her voters to believe that she will now be able to spend this money on things for them--which is a bold face lie. She can now answer to the couple living paycheck to paycheck or the single mother who could have really used one of these jobs and tell them, "Wow we showed them."
Worse yet, she has now crossed a pretty powerful Democrat in Cuomo and she has already earned the ire of Pelosi.
I like her enthusiasm. I am all for more government intervention in environmental projects. We need to start getting things done now. So I have nothing against her on those fronts. I have this sinking feeling that she is being allowed to run around and do this stuff because the established old guard likes to see how much she bugs Trump. Here is the problem, we are less than two years of Trump probably being gone and at that point she will have outlived her usefulness. Tim is right the GOP is going to use the progressive platform against the Dems, which is ultimately going to see more Dems go to the middle and that leaves her as the outlier within her own party.
So I get MT's point that this area will ultimately become occupied with other businesses, but how long will that take? The biggest misrepresentation is to presume that they just saved 3 billion dollars by not doing this deal like AOC seems to want people to believe. It wasn't like she was writing a 3 billion dollar check to Amazon. It was tax breaks--it was land deals. Yet she somehow wants her voters to believe that she will now be able to spend this money on things for them--which is a bold face lie. She can now answer to the couple living paycheck to paycheck or the single mother who could have really used one of these jobs and tell them, "Wow we showed them."
Worse yet, she has now crossed a pretty powerful Democrat in Cuomo and she has already earned the ire of Pelosi.
I like her enthusiasm. I am all for more government intervention in environmental projects. We need to start getting things done now. So I have nothing against her on those fronts. I have this sinking feeling that she is being allowed to run around and do this stuff because the established old guard likes to see how much she bugs Trump. Here is the problem, we are less than two years of Trump probably being gone and at that point she will have outlived her usefulness. Tim is right the GOP is going to use the progressive platform against the Dems, which is ultimately going to see more Dems go to the middle and that leaves her as the outlier within her own party.
Dedfin
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
Yes it is. This is Amazon. I don’t think you guys are getting it. NYC turned down the Oompa Loompas, the golden ticket, the Great Glass Elevator. They blew it.
timschochet
Footballguy
To paraphrase a certain favorite President of mine, I never left the Republican Party. They left me.
msommer
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
No doubt that New York will be fine. It’s New York.
But better off? A win? Oh hell no. This is a defeat. Joe DiMaggio just struck out.
Courtjester
The Town Drunk
Oh I know man. I think they will somehow be okay after this. I just find it funny all the articles trying to make it seem like they won this one and Amazon is the one who will regret this.
But I do think a bigger point is the demonization of rich people/companies that is kind of the calling card of the Progressives. I thought this was a brief, but interesting take on that. MSN article
Dedfin
Footballguy
Ohhh I guess I misread your post. Yeah, I agree. In fact, I thought the NYC/Amazon combination seemed the worst possible. NYC is the last city that needs Amazon and Amazon can push around any other city easier and probably would cultivate their new host instead of merely residing there. A far as Charlie Munger, he's going to have to make a better argument than "they keep your hospitals full" as to why we should not tax rich people. You are aware that people aren't driving out rich people in a mob, right? They just want them to pay taxes, you know.
timschochet
Footballguy
I was going to mention this. In the interview I heard with AOC, she referred to Bezos as “The richest man on Earth”. It was NOT meant as a compliment. In fact it was an attack, as if his wealth makes him guilty. That really bothered me.
Courtjester
The Town Drunk
They may not be physically driving them out--but the whole tax the rich mantra that AOC and her types support sure doesn't help matters;
Rich people fleeing NYC in droves
timschochet
Footballguy
There will always be plenty of rich people in NY. I read the same stuff about California all the time. But we’ll always have plenty too.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Dedfin
Footballguy
Ok, so don't tax the rich? Should we just shut down the whole tax idea altogether? I don't know what people expect anymore.
timschochet
Footballguy
I don’t even believe in unregulated capitalism. You need to read me a little more carefully.
urbanhack
Fight The Power!
Sand
Footballguy
I was specifically referring to methane. I'll admit I did leave out water vapor, so you've got that going for you, I guess.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I know I’m going to regret this, but are you suggesting methane and water vapor are the two greenhouse gasses?
Sand
Footballguy
You have to go back and read the context (Msommer didn't read things very well). The obvious answer is no, but certainly those two with CO2 are the big three. (In fact, methane and water are more potent than CO2).
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
All you're doing is just injecting some uncertainty into MT's model. Which arguably makes the situation even more dire, because it brings the winner's curse into play.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
Government subsidies and tax abatements for private firms are not unregulated capitalism or free markets. I need the little hand-clap emojis between each of those words.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
But I agree with you on this one. AOC comes across as the kind of person who thinks that Jeff Bezos being wealthy somehow makes everybody else poorer. That's insane when you say it out loud explicitly, but it's an inescapable part of her tone. (Elizabeth Warren too).
Franknbeans
Footballguy
I think her main issue with him is that as the richest man on earth, one would think it wouldn't be so hard to pay all of his workers a living wage.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
Did you read your link? High income people leave New York at a high rate, but high income people also come to New York at a high rate.
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
I just find it interesting the discussion here bears no resemblance to what the NYT is reporting about why the deal fell through.
AOC is pretty much a footnote to this story,
Reading this thread you'd think she was the chief negotiator.
sho nuff
Footballguy
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
Da Guru
Fair & Balanced
I agree..but they were looking towards the future. Why deal with a headache down the road when so many other communities want and would welcome them? Made no sense for Amazon to stay there. It is a win..win...I guess.
sho nuff
Footballguy
jonessed
Footballguy
Both de Blasio and Amazon singled her out as one of the reasons it fell through. Amazon specified her and Van Bramer as the primary reasons.
Similar threads
