
New Yorkers Protest Amazon HQ2: 'We Should Be Investing in Housing ... Not in Helicopters' (geekwire.com)
199
An anonymous reader shares a report: Shawn Dixon's life changed overnight. On Tuesday he was surprised to learn that Amazon plans to build a giant campus with room for thousands of high-paid workers on the same block as the small business he owns, Otis & Finn Barbershop. "We woke up yesterday with our whole world upside down," Dixon said. The announcement that one half of Amazon HQ2 is moving into his neighborhood -- Long Island City in Queens, New York -- motivated Dixon to attend a protest of Amazon's future campus Wednesday. He was
joined by elected officials, labor leaders, and activists who gathered to speak out against the tax incentives, government subsidies and other perks -- including a helipad -- that New York is offering Amazon in exchange for the thousands of jobs the company promises to bring.
"We're worried about our ability to stay in the neighborhood," Dixon said. "I'm not against growth and I'm not against Amazon but what I'm against is giving away all this money to one of the richest companies in the world when our schools are underfunded, we don't have schools in this neighborhood, the trains don't run here, and small business owners have no protections." The rally was organized by New York State Sen. Michael Gianaris, who represents the Queens neighborhood Amazon is moving into. "By the way, Amazon was coming here without all this money anyway," Gianaris said when he took the podium.
"We're worried about our ability to stay in the neighborhood," Dixon said. "I'm not against growth and I'm not against Amazon but what I'm against is giving away all this money to one of the richest companies in the world when our schools are underfunded, we don't have schools in this neighborhood, the trains don't run here, and small business owners have no protections." The rally was organized by New York State Sen. Michael Gianaris, who represents the Queens neighborhood Amazon is moving into. "By the way, Amazon was coming here without all this money anyway," Gianaris said when he took the podium.
Buy your condo or house (Score:5, Insightful)
Look, resistance is futile.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'll go sell the house I bought just a few years ago for five times what I paid for it.
That said, you do have elections. But, as you can see with Seattle, those don't matter either.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with rising property prices is that, sure you can sell your house for 5 times what you paid for it, but unless you're moving out of the areas, you're probably overpaying for your next house.
Which a lot of people are doing. Looking around, your primary residence should be about 20-40% of your net worth. That being ideal, most people are probably worse, say 50% if they own a house. If you can get five times that, you possibly have a nest egg large enough to move away, get a cheaper house and even a different job. Friends in Seattle are looking at this scenario right now. They got a good house at a good price years ago. It's now valued at almost three times what they paid for it. If it should rea
Re: Buy your condo or house (Score:2)
Yeah, but 2008-2010 you didn't get many commissiobs.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, bike lanes do make it a little *MORE* livable at least. If they're not blocked by homeless tents/boxes. =/
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Buy your condo or house (Score:5, Informative)
Living under rightist cronies in Utah, they are no better and not really any worse either. The false dichotomy of D/R, red/blue is the problem. Neither group really wants to limit government, they differ in what areas they prefer more government, but the net result is always more and always helps out those with the most gold.
Re: Buy your condo or house (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As much as people in the U.S don't want to talk about class struggles, the reality is that much of U.S politics is pretty much exactly that. The main thing tha
Re: Buy your condo or house (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Buy your condo or house (Score:2)
Re:Buy your condo or house (Score:5, Informative)
NYC and Albany keeps electing Blue
For 19 years, from 1994 to 2013, NYC had a Republican mayor.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Buy your condo or house (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
TIL 1994 is after 2001.
Re: (Score:2)
TIL 1994 is after 2001.
Are you implying that Bloomberg was mayor in 1994, because if that's the case I got another thing you can learn today.
Re:Buy your condo or house (Score:5, Insightful)
...they keep supporting and electing the SAME leftist cronies.
How do you account for the massive subsidies paid by Wisconsin to Foxconn to build a factory, (which they're not really even going to honour anyway), or are you suggesting Scott Walker is a "leftist"?
The reality is that your system of government in the US is open to the highest bidder, and if this Mr. Dixon has a problem with New York providing Amazon with subsidies, but not his business, then he should do what Amazon has done, and buy some politicians.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with NYC and Seattle is that they keep supporting and electing the SAME leftist cronies.
No, the problem with NYC and Seattle (and San Francisco, and LA, and....) is zoning.
The vast majority of housing in both cities is 4 stories or less with a huge portion of it being single-family residences. Getting a variance from the relevant zoning to build denser housing is really damn hard and expensive. Which means what little denser housing you do build is going to be targeted at wealthier buyers.
Why is zoning a problem? Because most of the people who currently live in these cities own property in
Re: (Score:2)
Same thing in California. In the primary, Feinstein lost to another Democrat, but in the general, bizarrely, the traditionally Republican areas of the state all leaned towards for the progressive candidate, and the Democrat areas of the state voted to keep the relatively conservative, Feinstein.
I don't even know what to make of that.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't even know what to make of that.
The likely calculation - at this moment in history it is better for Californians to have a seasoned hand experienced at dealing with Senate shenanigans, and positioned to take a powerful position (as the second most senior Democrat in the Senate) when the Democrats take the Senate in 2020.
Both parties made that calculation and so Democrats voted in re-elect her, and Republicans voted for the new guy.
Re: (Score:2)
What makes no sense is that California has an open primary for Senators, which means that there's a single ballot with all the people from every party on it. So either a fairly large percentage of Democrats flipped or everybody who didn't vote for Feinstein the first time, including all the Republicans, preferred to keep a strong Democrat in power, rather than someone progressive who would have had no seniority. It seems counterproductive to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Go fuck yourself, libertarian prick.
The majority of people who buy a house are buying a HOME, NOT and "investment property". They want to stay there, in that neighborhood, not go somewhere else.
I strongly supported candidates here in Montgomery Co, MD, that were against Amazon's locating here, and they won.
You don't care about bad traffic becoming worse, you don't care that they avoid paying taxes, you don't care that WE, the taxpayers, have to pay for what they don't, and as far as I know, the tax breaks g
Re: (Score:2)
I'm definitely not a Liebartarian, I'm pro-transit, pro-bike, and pro-walking, and I live in Seattle.
Not disagreeing that tax giveaways are bad.
My advice still stands.
Re: Buy your condo or house (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Buy your condo or house (Score:4, Insightful)
Ideologically, I am about as far as you can get from Ms Ocasio-Cortez, but attacking her because she isn't rich enough to afford two homes is really taking the low road.
She has spoken out about against the Amazon tax subsidy [cnbc.com], so at least I agree with her about that.
Re:Buy your condo or house (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This is why you need to stop this silliness and run elections the way we do up north. Government is dissolved, we have an election 40 to 80 days later, new government is sworn in within a week of being elected. Easy peasy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Direct quote from her "I don't know how I'm going to afford rent in DC"... That's ignorance, surprise, and a failure to plan.
Yes, I understand. Only the wealthy should run for Congress.
Implying she believes the electoral system is responsible for ensuring she can afford rent or has a place to live
Ah, yes, Time for more mind-reading instead of the sentences surrounding that statement.
And no one is saying that only the wealthy can govern... I have friends who went from modest incomes to serve in office and spent those first months on cots in their offices or on friend's sofas living like poor college kids.
Yes, she should sleep in her office that she doesn't get until January.......oh wait, that won't work. Ok, she should leverage her business and government connections to get a room/couch....but it's totally true that anyone with no money and connections can do this!!
they weren't crying about it when it came
Stating a problem is exactly the same as sobbing in a corner, totally distraught and unable to
Re: (Score:2)
And I love the way you think she owned the clothes in that photo shoot.
Re: (Score:2)
Funny that you think I was talking about a photo shoot
Oh, it's that other time when it happened that you can't quite remember the details about. But it totally happened.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Prepare to be gentrified, Seattle Style (Score:1)
How much do you want to stay in the neighborhood? (Score:5, Insightful)
Then maybe you should allow more density [gothamgazette.com]. Restricting supply is a great way to make things unaffordable!
Re: How much do you want to stay in the neighborho (Score:2)
I'm no fan of cities in general, much less New York, but one of "The Rotten Apple's" biggest attractions is all the open space (relatively speaking).
Re: (Score:2)
There's no need to convert parks to condo towers in order to achieve Barcelona's level of density (about 2x Queens').
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Chicago once put up high density housing for low income people. It was called the projects and resulted in places like Cabrini Green. It resulted in places plagued by crime, gang violence and generally deplorable living conditions. This is what you get when you make high density low income housing.
The problem is that, as K said, individuals are smart, people are stupid. When you get groups of people in these kinds of environments you end up with the tragedy of the common.
Conversely when people pony up a goo
Re: (Score:2)
Then maybe you should allow more density [gothamgazette.com]. Restricting supply is a great way to make things unaffordable!
There's a reason that places like California have laws to encourage development of affordable housing, and that reason is that developers on their own will not build affordable housing unless they happen to be philanthropists. Simply building housing in non-affordable areas with no other constraints on that development often results in more units of unaffordable housing. While it's true that restricting supply often raises prices in a free, fluid market, increasing supply in constricted markets with other
How terrible (Score:1)
Their property values will sky rocket and thousands of new people will be in walking distance to their businesses.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't help if you're renting
Re: (Score:2)
Re: FTFY (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Their property taxes will skyrocket and thousands of new people will be in walking distance to the starbucks, mcdonalds or other chains that take their place.
What chains, exactly, is the guy in the article worried about? Do you think managerial level people are going to pass his boutique barbershop to go look for a SuperCuts?
Absolutely. Same goes for olympics, stadiums, etc (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyone who thinks these giveaways to big corporations for supposed reward (jobs, media exposure, etc.) needs to listen to the Citations Needed [libsyn.com] Podcast, particularly Episode 20, "How Sports Are Used to Fleece Public Trusts [libsyn.com]".
There's a good reason Amazon's HQ search was often called [counterpunch.org] Bezos' "quest to find America's Dumbest Mayor". Looks like he found more than one.
My heart goes out to the people. Maybe it's not too late to replace your representatives and undo this.. :(
Re:Absolutely. Same goes for olympics, stadiums, e (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is that it is a tragedy of the commons situation. If New York doesn't give an incentive, then maybe Raleigh, NC will. Then, as in all markets, it comes down to what will the market bear. I think there needs to be a few court cases of unfair taxation that go up to the Supreme Court. The other answer is that people fight to reduce the role of government everywhere, but then they'd have to give up their rent-controlled apartments and cheap subway tickets.
Re: Absolutely. Same goes for olympics, stadiums, (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I think there needs to be a few court cases of unfair taxation that go up to the Supreme Court.
Would that apply to "enterprise zones" tax breaks designed to boost poor areas too?
Or does it just apply to incentives for disliked tech companies?
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon doesn't need these subsidies, but its a classic supply and demand situation. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands of places that Amazon can put its HQ. Any place they do will see some level of influx of higher wage workers and jobs. If you want them then they're damading that you, as the locale, pay by giving them tax breaks. You, as the locale, can refuse to pay, but somewhere else will, and Amazon will go there.
People also overlook the obvious. Local politicians almost always come from th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Where I live, the fuel taxes cover the cost of road building and maintenance. It's even enough to fund some bus systems that are mostly empty every time I see them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, the city has to do a bunch of stuff not to make the whole situation a giant clusterfuck - road expansions, mass transit lines, new traffic signals, changing of traffic patterns to match the estimated traffic increases, all the water works / sewer work to be able to service all this new stuff, build fire stations, police stations, schools for the new housing, parks, waste disposal services, etc.
You know that Amazon won't be footing the bill for any of that. The current citizens will be, and there won'
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The whole point is that there will thousands and thousands of new, well compensated professionals with incomes to tax and a giant surge of personal spending in the entire area surrounding the activity
That's the theory.
It doesn't always work out that way in practice. MA got screwed by some pharmaceutical giants who didn't quite expand as they said they would. And Foxconn is currently fucking over Wisconsin, with $60k/year jobs costing the state $250k/year each in incentives.
As for that barber shop, his landlord is going to jack his rent through the roof, forcing him to close and/or move. A new Starbucks will pay more rent, but it'll be bad for that barber.....and a huge portion of the restaurants for
Re: (Score:2)
This is also neglect
Re: (Score:2)
This is nothing like the Olympics. The issue there is that you build a bunch of expensive stadiums and other crap that nobody ever uses again but it requires a lot of expensive maintenance so it either continues to drain money or just decays into a wasteland.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently Long Island City's mayor is extra dumb, because Amazon is getting about double the incentives to build there, that they are in Alexandria, VA.
Is anyone really surprised that they chose New York and DC? Talk about the most obvious choice they could have made...
New York and Virginia paying $5.5B for ~5k jobs? (Score:2)
Richard Wolff did a good job of concisely making the points on just how bad a deal this is for New York and Virginia [youtube.com] (which are together funding over half of the costs of this project -- $5.5B versus Amazon's $5B according to the New York Times)—and all for an estimated 2,500 jobs in New York (I don't know how many jobs are projected for the Virginia site but I'm guessing it's comparable totaling around 5,000 jobs). Here's some of what he said:
Amazons need haircuts, too (Score:5, Interesting)
He is going to have a business with a large number of well paid workers right next door. Why would he be upset? Instead of protesting, he should clean his shop and get ready for the influx of new business.
Re: Amazons need haircuts, too (Score:2)
He's probably renting (Score:4, Insightful)
If he doesn't actually own the space he's in then with Amazon setting up shop, the lease payments are going to go up substantially to capture some of that sweet rich people money. He's going to have to decide whether his business can support the higher rent. If he decides he can't take the risk, the person who owns the building will find plenty of businesses that are willing to take the risk.
Because Amazon would have come anyway (Score:2)
Invest in your workers (demand side) and the businesses will follow. They'll have to, because otherwise they won't get workers. America is where business wants to be because our military protects their ass(et)s. We're an incredibly safe and secure place to live.
And as always, if they want to leave, fine. Go. Get out. Don't let the door
Re: (Score:3)
He is going to have a business with a large number of well paid workers right next door. Why would he be upset? Instead of protesting, he should clean his shop and get ready for the influx of new business.
It's more likely that Amazon will offer free haircuts as a perk, or most of those people will commute to work meaning they get haircuts near their house. Either way, his rent goes up but his clientele doesn't.
Re:Amazons need haircuts, too (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm noticing a lack of numbers in your claim. How many people experienced this?
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much anyone who bought a house in the 70's, 80's or 90's. My grandfather bought his in the early 70's for 75k. It is now worth 12 times that. He could easily sell it, pay the sales taxes and what not, and be left with 400-500k. In most states, you can just buy a damm near mansion with acreage outright with cash, for that amount.
Multiple states bitch about Californians doing this, cashing out of California and setting themselves up for retirement as virtual kings (Oregon, Washington, Colorado, parts o
Love it (Score:2)
What are you investing? (Score:2)
Where does this wealth come from that you are investing? The areas Amazon is moving into are actually zoned as economically distressed and needing re-investment incentives. So you can't just Invest if you are also not making money too.
On the otherhand, I think Ocasio-hyphen got it right when she said Displacement is not urban renewal.
That'a totally correct. But it'a the model that Seattle, and San Francisco and other areas use. You gentrify the ghetto. As the Bus Boy's famous song said "Oh Boy, There
Re: What are you investing? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
More like hipster/yupster paradise
The hipsters are mainly renters. So they won't be profiting from the increase in property values. In fact, they will be moving out.
It's an upscale version of what light rail did in Seattle. Colored folks got pushed out by hipsters. But the hipsters think they define the culture of a place. And if they get pushed out, there will be hell to pay.
Jobs Not More Quality Of Life (Score:1)
It's very telling that Amerikuk politicians are all JOBS JOBS JOBS but never talk about your quality of life, time off work, and how little American workers get compared to even Canadians (nevermind a real people like Germany who universally get atleast THREE WEEKS PAID VACATION because theyre better than Americans.. lol!)
Re: (Score:2)
As a Canadian who has lived and worked in both the US and Canada for many years, your statement about "even Canadians" is confusing.
The only real substantial difference between the US vs CA that i was aware of was the shockingly low MAT leave, but otherwise things seem to be on par.
rant (Score:3)
I don't know about the rest of the rant but
"By the way, Amazon was coming here without all this money anyway"
this part is true, other places offered more incentives but amazon moved there because of talent, so yeah they didn't need to throw the money.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
It's fine to say "we don't want to entice that company to setting up shop" or even "they would come without the incentives, so we shouldn't offer the incentive," but not "we shouldn't be giving away money."
I'm guessing you didn't read that article about 2 weeks ago that got some national attention about what a disaster Wisconsin's Foxxconn deal has been. Go read it. That pretty much qualifies as "giving away money". Best case estimates are that the Foxxconn plant, which as always with Foxxconn is already reduced in size and scope from what they originally promised to build, might be profitable by 2050. Maybe. There's some thought that Scott Walker lost his re-election bid as a direct result of the bad d
Yes, they are. You've fallen for Trickle Down (Score:2)
Instead of tax incentives we should be investi
Incentives make sense... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The argument is (Score:4, Insightful)
The argument is, I think, that the present value of Amazon and their employees' future investments, tax payments, and spending outweighs the incentive the city provides. So if they want more funding for schools and other stuff, well, that's how you get the money to do it. The calculations might be wrong, but I kind of doubt it, the HQ will be dumping a ton of money in to the local economy.
Re:The argument is (Score:4, Insightful)
The argument is, I think, that the present value of Amazon and their employees' future investments, tax payments, and spending outweighs the incentive the city provides.
Yes, that's the argument. My understanding is it often turns out to be incorrect. It's hard to say for certain. The poster child tends to be sports stadiums. They often get subsidized and virtually never live up to their promises.
I don't live in the Big Apple so I don't have a dog in this fight. What I object to is Amazon and other large developers getting special treatment. If the tax laws are good enough for normal businesses, then they should be appropriate for Amazon. I don't buy the argument that big deals are somehow special.
Pennies don't stop trains (Score:2)
New York state collects 76 billion in revenue every year.
The few million they're tossing Amazon to encourage development will be paid back far more with income taxes and all the other taxes the customers, employees, etc will be paying for the foreseeable future.
Crooked politicians always blame a penny for collapsed bridges while they squander dollars. The citizens should be smarter than to let them get away with such nonsense.
Re: (Score:2)
Uh....no. NYC is where the money is. It's subsidizing the rest of the state (though not very well). Utica isn't paying much in taxes.
They are correct... (Score:2)
The local government should be building out the underlying infrastructure and ensuring good schools and good housing opportunities. Residents and businesses would both flock to the area to take advantage of that instead of feeding the giant corporations tax breaks at the expense of residents, aka potential workers. Far too often the corporations move into an area collect the tax benefits then leave the area to move on and harvest more handouts. Developing economic opportunities should benefit the tax payers
Re: (Score:2)
I think that if you have good infrastructure, and schools, that housing, dining and general quality of life will follow.
That's pretty much it. (Score:2)
New Yorkers Protest Amazon HQ2: 'We Should Be Investing in Housing ... Not in Helicopters'
"Sorry, the libs you vote for already bent over for us."
"Why are businesses fleeing cities? It can't be business-unfriendly politicies!"
"Oh no, businesses are coming back. They should give lots more money for the honor of providing jobs and increasing the tax base!"
Who's "we"? (Score:2)
I suspect there's plenty of "investment in housing" going on in one of the hottest real estate markets in the world.
Ocassio-Cortez brown nosers incoming! (Score:2)
Yes. Because the JOBS such things bring in WON'T add money to the local economy and fuel investment in housing...
I swear to God. Some people are so fucking stupid I just want to nuke the planet and be done with it...
They took 'er... (Score:2)
They took 'er, wait, hold on, gave 'er jobs?
Mid-sized markets never had a chance, this is known. And Bezos already owns mansions in DC (the Obama's are neighbors) and New York (Manhattan).
https://www.cheatsheet.com/mon... [cheatsheet.com]
Re: In other words... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
... New Yorkers opposed to new jobs! Gee what a surprise.
Perhaps some people are mad about that, but many others are just mad about the tax subsidies.
Why should Amazon get a special sweetheart tax deal? In the eyes of the law, Amazon Inc. and Maggie's Pie Shop should be treated exactly the same. The government should not be favoring one over the other.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly, sweetheart deals are what got Apple into so much trouble in Ireland, the EU actually has rules against this kind of thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Cities make these deals because they bring in revenue. How much will Amazon and its employees generate for the city versus Maggie's?
Re: (Score:2)
Cities make these deals because they bring in revenue.
Why do you believe that Amazon will bring in more revenue than the businesses that are displaced?
How much will Amazon and its employees generate for the city versus Maggie's?
Stupid comparison. The only important metric is the revenue, PER EMPLOYEE, which would be roughly the same.
If it was my neighborhood, I would prefer the pie shop. Nevertheless, it should be left to the market, not to bureaucratic whim.
Re: (Score:2)
It's 2% of the taxes collected by the entire state benefiting one company. This is not small change.
Re: (Score:2)
This move of Amazon will create no jobs. They will move workers in from other areas, or hire college educated workers from other companies. they might pick up a few high GPA university students, who they would have hired anyway and who probably have a number of top flight Big Tech companies looking at them.
No unemployed New Yorker will get a job out of this. Even the janitors and cafeteria folks will be from contract companies who already have workers on the hook other places.