AOC Tweet on Amazon.

[Autumn]

Link to tweet

[Kurt V.]

1. right again. She's a natural.

[comradebillyboy]

2. Chasing away jobs is never a good look for a politician.

[John Fante]

4. "Amazon accelerates NYC expansions"

[Autumn]

5. Who Needs Amazon HQ2? Not New York Real Estate's Tech Boom

Facebook, Google, Uber and Amazon embrace Manhattan as an East Coast hub
https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-city-real-estate-savors-a-tech-boom-11562760760?shareToken=ste2a897e466444a5ea419de5ce3c6b9d6&reflink=share_mobilewebshare

Big technology companies are doubling down on New York City by adding millions of square feet in office space and creating thousands of new jobs, with few aftereffects from Amazon.com Inc.’s nixing of a Queens headquarters.

I will never believe that the American taxpayer should subsidize any companies expansion. My opinion

[Perseus]

6. "I will never believe that the American taxpayer should subsidize any companies expansion."

My opinion as well.

Least of all a company like NYC that makes so much money. Granted that it is good for jobs, but the money coming from those jobs as tax I don't know they compensate for what is given to the corporation.

[Autumn]

14. If a corporation can't afford to expand on their own dime they shouldn't expand.

[questionseverything]

35. forgive me, i am always the "both sides" thinker

if we ever get national healthcare we will have to subsidize rural hospitals/clinics


there are electric making systems that convert cow poop to electricity and get rid of most of the bad gases in the process....I think we could subsidize those to get them started

I am thinking of dairy farms that have hundreds of cows, think of all the greenhouses gases we could harness

somethings are too important for free enterprise

[Autumn]

45. If it benefits people, as hospitals do or if it's a grant for research to develop more

alternative energy that's not quite the same IMO as giving taxpayer incentives to the Bezos of the world to grow their personal empire. Jeff Bezos makes $4,475,885 per hour, according to Business Insider, around 157 times the median annual worker salary at Amazon of $28,466

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-staggering-money-that-kylie-jenner-jeff-bezos-and-mark-zuckerberg-make-in-a-single-hour-2018-08-27-1388329

[questionseverything]

48. we are in agreement

altho I think there are worse billionaires than bezos just because he supports the Washington post

[DENVERPOPS]

58. Way past

Look around, we are way past the point of no return on that one...........

Take your pick:

United Fascists of America

or

United Corporations of America

[infinite_wisdom]

7. She didn't, that's the point

Turns out Amazon didn't need all that public money, they brought jobs to NYC anyway.

It's never a good look for a politician to hand out billions in tax abatements and freebies to Corporations who rarely deliver on the jobs they promised. See the Foxconn debacle unfolding in Wisconsin.

I would like to see a federal law prohibiting any tax breaks or other public incentives to businesses. All businesses should pay the same local and state taxes as every other business.

As of now, it's a race to the bottom with the corporations playing 50 states against each other and holding all the cards in the negotiations.

[bucolic_frolic]

8. Using the government to create winners and losers

creates distortion in the marketplace.

[infinite_wisdom]

10. That has always been the conservative argument

...but somehow they don't care when it means corporations line their pockets and the public sector takes a hit.

The situation as it currently stands is very unfair to small businesses who have no leverage and can't legally bribe politicians with contributions.

[shanny]

29. the magic marketplace

is distorted on steroids

[Xipe Totec]

9. She called their bluff and they caved. nt

[Igel]

18. What's happening isn't what was planned.

Besides "Amazon's increasing jobs."

It's one thing to expand an office. It's another to add an auxiliary HQ.

Sort of the difference between an airline adding some routes to an airport and making the airport a hub. Both mean "more presence by this airline."

[Xipe Totec]

49. I missed your point. Please explain. nt

[TheBlackAdder]

11. Amazon was playing the jobs angle, when they plan to fully automate that facility in 2 years.

[LanternWaste]

59. Re-framing a premise into something false is never a good look for a poster.

[Celerity]

3. here is the tweet text for our non twitter users

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Verified account
@AOC

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Retweeted Michael Kink

Well, just as we said, Amazon quietly came to NYC without needing a dime of public money or special tax treatment.

The jobs came without the cost.

NYC is an attractive place to locate on its own (incl. public infra!), w/o billions of dollars in corporate giveaway “incentives.”Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez added,


Michael Kink
@mkink

Google, Facebook, Uber, and Amazon — yes, Amazon — accelerate NYC expansions, adding jobs with NO public subsidies or tax giveaways https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-city-real-estate-savors-a-tech-boom-11562760760?shareToken=ste2a897e466444a5ea419de5ce3c6b9d6&reflink=share_mobilewebshare …


6:02 PM - 11 Jul 2019
7,276 Retweets 30,939
1,596 replies 7,276 retweets 30,939 likes

[pangaia]

15. Where is Amazon locating? Just curious..

[Celerity]

17. Manhattan for part of it, is what I saw

[Lordquinton]

12. Lots of people owe her an apology

And should listen to her in the future.

[LiberalLovinLug]

60. +1000

[JoeOtterbein]

13. I don't care what anyone says about her; AOC is still smarter than 99% of the men in DC and...

...100% of the Republicans!

[SixString]

20. And a large number of posters

on on-line political forums.
A very large number.

[shanny]

31. Amen!

[CentralMass]

50. +1

[George II]

16. This is for new OFFICE space in Manhattan, and it's going to employ many thousands less...

...than the 25,000 projected for their headquarters in Queens. And they didn't "quietly" decide to do so, everyone knows about it.

Amazon already has several facilities in Manhattan.

This is comparing "apples to oranges".

[Igel]

19. But it's "more jobs."

25 or 25,000, both are "more jobs" so they're =.

Or are you saying "more jobs" doesn't mean "more jobs"? Silly, trying to be numerate and focus on meaning instead of the lovely sounds.

[George II]

22. This expanded office space in Manhattan was already in the works, this isn't something new....

...and the reason that there aren't tax incentives involved is because they'll be moving into existing building (actually maybe two).

The fact remains that the facility in Long Island City would have been a huge NEW development in a run-down area of Queens, which would have resulted in transit and infrastructure improvements ("infra" ).

I don't know what your last sentence means.

[infinite_wisdom]

23. That's fine

but why can't they do that without the tax incentives?

Amazon paid less than 0 in taxes last year. They received a federal income tax refund of $129 million. They were paying some federal taxes until Trump passed the We Love Plutocracy Tax Act of 2017, but even then it was a low rate.

And now with that money already in their pockets they want more abatements, more freebies?

You are OK with this?

If they want to move into Queens, that's great and they should try and make that happen. But they shouldn't expect tax payers to line their pockets on the way to doing it.

[George II]

24. I suggest you look into what the "deal" was for Amazon from both New York State and City....

They would NOT have gotten abatements or "freebies". I read the details of the deal and yes I was okay with what was proposed by NYS and NYC.

Finally, tax payers would not "line their pockets". Real the proposal.

[pangaia]

27. Do you mean that you feel Amazon should have been allowed to move into Queens?

[George II]

28. Yes.

[pangaia]

32. Thanks. It is difficult for me to follow everything, as you can imagine.

I DO like AOC, even with her 'faults.'

I try not to get sucked in to the latest opinions here on somebody or something, but it happens...

[George II]

34. Thanks appreciate that! Amazon establishing their HQ2 in Queens would have been a huge boon...

....to the economy of Queens, NYC, and NYS, with zero downside.

[infinite_wisdom]

37. Zero downside?

I think you are not being truthful.

[George II]

41. Okay, what was the "downside"?

[melman]

38. "zero downside"

Just like in Seattle.

[George II]

40. Look at the deal, please!!!

Nothing even close to Amazon in Seattle.

[melman]

43. Why do you think I haven't?

What, anyone who looks at it would have to agree with you? lol okay.

[George II]

46. If you looked into the deal in NYC, you would know that it's nothing like the one in Seattle. Next?

[infinite_wisdom]

36. They were allowed to move into Queens

They chose not to.

They felt push back and they decided to move somewhere where people were stupid enough to hand a company with a trillion dollar market cap free cash.

[George II]

52. Amazon was never handed "cap free cash". As I've said a number of times, READ the deal!

[lapucelle]

56. Yes, they chose not to. That's what makes the "quietly came to NY" reference particularly odd.

What was especially jarring was the link to a WSJ story on the boom in the rental of high end office space in Manhattan, as if the residents of Queens and the Bronx can call this a win.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-city-real-estate-savors-a-tech
boom-11562760760?shareToken=ste2a897e466444a5ea419de5ce3c6b9d6&reflink=share_mobilewebshare

[lapucelle]

51. So were Queens and Bronx residents.

New Poll Finds Queens Residents Support Amazon in Long Island City
Dec. 5, 2018 By Nathaly Pesantez

A new poll has found that Queens residents approve of Amazon building new headquarters in Long Island City—in stark contrast to the backlash and anti-Amazon rhetoric expressed by many borough officials and groups over the plan.

The Quinnipiac University Poll released today shows that Queens residents are not only for the tech giant locating its headquarters at Anable Basin, but approve of the billions in incentives it is set to receive from the city and state for the move.

The poll found that 60 percent of Queens voters approve of Amazon locating one of its new headquarters in Long Island City, compared to just 26 percent of voters who oppose the tech giant’s presence.

Queens voters, furthermore, support the $3 billion in state and city incentives Amazon is set to receive as part of its deal to locate to Queens, with 55 percent in approval compared to the 39 percent of voters that oppose the incentives package.

The poll also reveals Queens to be the borough most in support of the city and state’s incentive package to Amazon, followed by the Bronx.

https://licpost.com/new-poll-finds-queens-residents-support-amazon-in-long-island-city

The Amazon boycott may have played well to a national audience (as well as to donors who do not live in NY-14), but it did not play well to the constituents who elected the congresswoman to represent them.

It seems extremely disingenuous to broadcast via Twitter that Amazon, (by continuing with its long standing plan to expand it's rental of high-end rental space in Manhattan as Amazon) "quietly came into NY", as if they had changed their minds about building their headquarters in LIC.

From the WSJ story that the subtweet links to "prove" the misleading claim:

Amazon’s abrupt reversal sent shock waves through the New York real estate community, with some suggesting that the company’s decision to bolt could discourage other major tech companies from considering the city.

Instead, interest among social media, e-commerce and ride-hailing companies has been intensifying. Many of these companies are willing to spend big dollars renting high-end Manhattan real estate, rather than the older office stock in Queens that Amazon was prepared to lease.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-city-real-estate-savors-a-tech-boom-11562760760?shareToken=ste2a897e466444a5ea419de5ce3c6b9d6&reflink=share_mobilewebshare

[infinite_wisdom]

33. The claims they were making are just not believable

The public would have ante'd up $48,000 per job. The public should ante up $0.

The people involved with the deal claimed it would be a 9:1 ratio in gain:loss for the public. I find that humorous but in a sad way.
Why? Because it's just not believable.

These deals are always sold as being spectacular and they NEVER work out that way. Corporate PR and corporate negotiators are very smart and they are very slick. And they have a real strong inclination to lie through their teeth.

Again, look at Foxconn in Wisconsin. Do you think that deal is going to end up being as great as it was sold to the public?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-02-06/inside-wisconsin-s-disastrous-4-5-billion-deal-with-foxconn

[George II]

39. The Foxconn deal was nothing close to the Amazon deal. There were virtually zero tax exposure...

...to the city or state. What people don't understand is that Amazon would have paid the full rate of taxes but, if they met certain established criteria they would get an incremental REBATE on what they had already paid. That means they would have paid 100% of their tax liability, but if they met the 25,000 job creation goal they would have gotten about 20% of that tax liability refunded (not sure of the exact number). Still, 80% of their taxes would have been paid. 80% is infinitely better than 0%!

[Lordquinton]

44. If you believe that I have a bridge to sell you

Conveniently close to Queens.

[George II]

47. There are no bridges in NYC available for purchase.

[AlexSFCA]

21. She is the heart and soul of Democratic Party, and some brains too

future NY governor, senator and president.

[SCVDem]

25. Let's not forget

Scotty Wanker selling out Wisconsin to the Chinese with the Foxconn giveaway.

Nothing but subsidies without return on investment!

[George II]

30. Amazon's "subsidies" (which they weren't) were based on performance, completely different than....

....the Foxconn deal.

BTW, that name is emblematic of republican deals, "Fox con"!!

[spanone]

26. Brilliant

recommended

[TexasTowelie]

42. Mixed blessings.

With the tax abatements that were offered, the city and state had the ability to control the number of jobs, affirmative action requirements, use of union vs. non-union labor, environmental concerns, and create infrastructure to support the expansion by clawing back a portion of the subsidies. All of those controls are jeopardized since the tax abatement is no longer involved. Although AOC is correct in some aspects, it should not be viewed as a complete win for AOC either.

[George II]

54. There weren't tax abatements, there were tax refunds based on performance. They would pay....

...100% of their taxes and, if they met the established criteria they would get refunds on the taxes already paid. But they would not have ever gotten 100% refunded, indeed nothing even close to that - more like 20-30%. That means the remaining 70% that they paid would STILL have been paid. That's a far cry from today's 0%.

[zaj]

53. Maybe... Maybe not

HQ2 was 20,000 jobs

How many will Amazon add without HQ2?

Not saying what the right or wrong policy should be, but this could be a $billion apples and oranges comparison.

[jalan48]

55. Now this is some of that three dimensional chess I can get behind.

[eilen]

57. One Court Square

will be practically empty once Citigroup leaves in 2020. Whoever runs against AOC should put their campaign center there (they could probably get a good discount) and take lots of pictures. AOC is bragging about this. In upstate NY where I am from, we would have loved to even be in the running for this deal.

[Uncle Joe]

61. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread Autumn.

[BeckyDem]

62. She knew and this speeaks poorly of Cuomo and DeBlasio.