On the one hand the shortsightedness of the Amazonexiteers is just not very smart. NYC is not middle America, but it is not independent either. We can't make it on our own; we must compete in a global and national economy. On the other hand Amazon is being a prima donna. Maybe it expected a special booth at the county fair and a big Main Street parade, but it should have known that NYC is a city of cranks and kooks and geniuses, all constantly in contention. People have elbows here. Amazon does not seem to have understood that.
7
It's easy to stick the middle finger up when we're currently not in a recession and unemployment is not in the double-digits.
Let's hope no one is kicking themselves too hard next year when we're in the middle of one.
7
University Professor Elizabeth Anderson estimates that Bezos earns $100,000 an hr while many of Amazon's employees on the assembly line wear diapers because their bathroom breaks are few and far between . AMAZON just reported over $11 billion in profit in 2018. They paid NO TAXES. Instead, the company will receive a $129 million federal income tax rebate.
They never negotiated in good faith with N.Y. Bezos doesn't want unions. He sent 1 Amazon employee to talk with the neighborhood. AMAZON is greedy, arrogant and does not care about the citizens of Seattle or NYC.
GOOD RIDDANCE.
16
Amazon is a death star. We need to recognize this and wake up.
10
This editorial does not mention one word on labor;
That is incredibly disappointing.
Those of us in the labor movement knew what was going on when Amazon answered a simple question:
They would definitively oppose unionization.
Your reporters divulged this;
the Wall Street Editorial used this as a reason to support
Amazon's decision.
However, the New York Times decides that the concerns of labor are just not worth mentioning.
17
Lolz, one million in subsidies per job? Can you guys do simple math?
9
Well, you wrote this, remember? It wasn't just politicians who worked to push Amazon out. You can't play both sides, NYT Editorial Board.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/14/opinion/new-yorks-amazon-deal.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article
8
Oooh!! Everybody in New York was so mean to poor Amazon so they are taking their ball and going home. From the very beginning something wasn't right with this thing, we were getting sold a bill of goods. Apparently lots of my neighbors were suspicious too. Also no one, especially New Yorkers likes being told how grateful they should be to someone for some great thing you are doing for them.
Amazon got cold feet and now want to blame everyone else for speaking plainly and pointing out the facts as they are.
This was ill-conceived and people on the ground knew it.
We travel on roads built in the middle of the 20 th. century and and use mass transit laid out in the Coolidge administration, we can't get reliably from point A to point B as it is now add this.
If they were already here their growth could be managed organically but dropping this thing down out of the sky? in the busiest city in the world, at a major commuting and traffic choke point? C'mon nobody likes hustling for a buck like New Yorker's but this set up was not going to fly.
9
Every criticism of the New York political class contained in this editorial has validity.
And Editorial Board of the Times bears responsibility for the members of the New York political class whom it is now criticizing.
There is not a single maladroit, arrogant, and entrenched pol against whom the Board is now inveighing who has not been endorsed by the paper, usually numerous times.
Don't like what happened with Amazon? Looking for a scapegoat?
Look in the mirror.
10
Stupid^2.
Beyond belief, when hundreds of thousands of city people are looking for jobs.
5
The last paragraph of your editorial should have been your first. You buried the lead.
6
Do the NYTimes opinion page have a role in this?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/14/opinion/new-yorks-amazon-deal.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article
5
Amazon was just looking out for themselves, as is their right.
Queens residents were just looking out for themselves too, as is their right.
To make the deal work, De Blasio and Cuomo would have needed to ensure it was in the interest of both Amazon and local residents. This should have been easy to do: they could have offered local small businesses the same $3 billion tax benefits that Amazon was offered, or publicly committed to spending some of the $27 billion in estimated tax revenue to local public schools, truly affordable housing, transportation (esp. the subways system!)... or all the above!
Instead, they negotiated with Amazon in secret and then told the local community it was a done deal they'll just have to welcome with open arms as is. They showed nothing but contempt for local residents who raised concerns about the deal or even questioned what was in it for them. And now they are indignant that Amazon backed out of the deal because some people weren't sucking up to them as much as de Blasio and Cuomo did.
If you can't sell people on a deal that is such a "no brainer," you are either an ineffective political leader or you've got no brain.
10
A huge win for the socialist democrats led by Ocasio-Cortez.
A loss of 25k jobs, 27b in revenue and countless more jobs and taxes as a result.
That is what Ocasio-Cortez calls a win.
Nanci Pelossi, could you please rein in your unruly child? she just costed NY the deal of the decade, maybe longer.
12
These geniuses have made NYC a "don't even think about it" in boardrooms throughout the world.
Anti-business bigots like AOC are the enemies of working people.
10
NYC democrats would prefer keeping a great number of people dependent on handouts and their inept government rather than create jobs (based in an undesirable neighborhood). Pure and total idiocy. Congratulations, NYC!
5
NY Times editorial board 3 months ago vs. now--"whatever it is, I'm against it!"
https://www.nytimes.com/…/…/14/opinion/amazon-new-york.html…
https://www.nytimes.com/…/opini…/new-yorks-amazon-deal.html…
4
This is the most snarky editorial I've read from the Times, which,
predictably, lines itself up with other corporate forces.
9
NYT editorial from November 2018 said basically the opposite of this one. @failingnyt, you are losing credibility fast.
7
The NYT editorial Board certainly sang a different tune three months ago:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/14/opinion/new-yorks-amazon-deal.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article
8
I think the NYT Editorial Board is unhappy because they lost 25,000 folks in their readership demographic.
6
Well, what did the Times, Cuomo, DiBlasio, etc. expect, when all of them have taken a Leftist stance against capitalism, big business, almost any kind of business, and believe that those who shout the loudest are the ones who rule the roost? In this case, DiBlasio and Cuomo were right and the ubiquitous "working people" who protested loudest in following their local Leftist political leaders were wrong, but DiBlasio is even more wrong when he blames Amazon for folding its tent and leaving. Why should they stay just to be vilified by idiot Leftist politicians and the brainless masses who follow their lead (see photo). Amazon did not NEED New York City. They can set up almost anywhere. But where do we now get 25,000 jobs from in one fell swoop? Many billions of dollars in tax income over a decade lost. More billions in spending by those 25,000 people lost. And our new media darling AOC, the poster child for airheadedness, bragging that now the City can fork over that 2.5 billion bucks they were 'giving' to Amazon to the poor and the homeless and the infrastructure, not even understanding that the City was not "giving" anything to Amazon, but just making deals worth that much in incentives to draw Amazon to New York. There is no 2.5 billion back in the City coffers, AOC, because it was never going out of those coffers to begin with. But there will be no multi-billions going INTO those coffers now. If AOC's thinking on this mirrors the nation's, then we are on our way out!
8
I'm glad that the NYTimes thinks that it's bad for the city that Amazon ended the deal. The Ed Board at the NYTimes seems to understand what a devastating loss this is for the city in the long run. This wasn't an ordinary company coming to NYC. Amazon is always creatively planning for the future, and I think its presence would have helped NYC do the same.
But here's the problem I have with the Times: Where was the paper when it saw the resistance from the protesters who were threatening the deal? Protesters who were only afraid of change. Couldn't the Times have educated the them about how Amazon was going to help the city? Couldn't the Times have told AOC that Amazon was getting 3 billion in tax breaks and not cash? She seemed to think Amazon was getting cash from NY and was parroting that idea. I think the times missed a huge opportunity to help educate the public and possibly save this deal.
15
Just saying, but if I was going through a multi million dollar divorce, I would cancel a few projects myself, guessing the lawyers are talking at this point. My spidey sense is saying this is the reason for cancellations atm and I wouldn't expect any big announcements until the dust settles.
4
This was a short sighted play by low level politicians who didn't get asked to the table when the offer was made. Look around the US and realize this "incentive" game is what is played to get large companies to come, invest, hire, stay in your city/state. It's how Seattle, Atlanta, Austin and Houston grew. If you are so self righteous about the game it may be time to leave the US if not the planet because this is how the game is played. I want jobs and opportunities that come with having big corporate entities in NYC. The small minds like the city council members, state senators and newly appointed Queen's reps can turn up their nose but how does that 'holier than thou' attitude help your constituents? If Amazon's interested BK has Industry City, space @Bk Navy Yard and in Bushwick; we'd be happy to have you.
5
We just witnessed Ocasio-Cortez’s 15 minutes of fame.
12
I am a little confused by this editorial, since the New York Times Editorial Board in November said the Amazon deal was a bad one. Isn't it possible that your editorial convinced local activists to rally against the deal? I would think you would be celebrating the decision to reject a bad deal.
20
Not a New Yorker but my Dad and my brothers and brother-in-law work(ed) in NYC. Fantastic city but too big for me. We all got earfuls of funny and tragic stories of the Naked City. I didn't appreciate the rat stories myself. I did work for Amazon, briefly. The most impersonal, anti-personal, unintellectual place I have ever been in. Bezos is not a warm-fuzzy business man. Maybe NYC is better off w/o his business model.
12
Now if only the other welfare-state corporations that are robbing taxpayers while enriching themselves would stop taking New York's overly generous "economic development" benefits paid by (people) taxpayers whose taxes keep rising (now with limited SALT). If there's a Walmart near you, for instance, it likely pays $0 in property taxes, while the Mom&Pop stores that it forced out of business did pay taxes. And so do you.
You probably never even heard of Tax Increment Financing (TIF), but rich corporations love it. In TIF, a local government issues bonds to raise funds in support of a company’s project and the bonds are supported by an increase in local property tax revenues.
Finally, if Amazon actually created 25,000 jobs that each paid $150,000 it would be the first corporation in the state to live up to its initial (not revised later) job creation promises. Therefore the "pay back" Cuomo keeps touting is equally suspicious as it comes from taxes to be paid by Amazon workers, not by Amazon. A concept that by itself is an insult to workers everywhere.
11
There are so many conflicting thoughts about Amazon getting into Queens or not getting into Queens. OH MY GOSH...yes, we are talking about *business* but come on, Amazon, if you were really that great, would you not *TALK ABOUT HOW YOU CAN CHANGE THE STATUS QUO FOR PEOPLE AND MAKE SOME THINGS BETTER.* This country needs something different. Is that not evident from this scenario?
6
Amazon... one of the big corporations that's been taking their employees tips to compensate fin some portion for the wages they must pay.
5
Everyone who lives in the neighborhood should celebrate that there will not be a stream of helicopters churning overhead, bringing Amazon execs to and from the airports for their convenience.
7
To all of the "Readers Picks" at top saying that Amazon is at fault for discouraging unionization and paying low wages to warehouse employees - is is lost that the 25,000 jobs in New York were going to be salaried positions, paying on average $100K+, and with competitive benefits?
Or is Amazon expected to change its practices everywhere, in all levels of its operations, in order to have the great privilege of employing the holier than thou inhabitants of our great city?
12
It’s called solidarity.
6
It's the Brexit referendum and Trump's election all over again.
It seems the decision-makers on both sides of the political spectrum prefer grandstanding in front of their preferred echo chambers to governing. Or even looking out for the electorate, who's clear preferences were ignored (in the case of Amazon and New York, and in the case of the majority of the popular vote cast for Hillary Clinton) or grossly misled by lies without effective correction and rebuttal, in the case of Brexit.
We - the majority - need to hold our politicians accountable, not let them walk off with cheers from their small, loud, ignorant, deluded and self-interested base. Otherwise we're doomed. Really doomed. And we need to come to terms with just how bad 'doomed' will be, as the British are just beginning to, to their dismay.
4
You've got to be tough to make it in Haiti or Chad too. Or in Venezuela or Cuba.
Unlike New York, however, last I heard, no one was hoping to create 25,000 well-paying jobs in any of those places.
Talk about delusional hubris in New York.
11
In 1992, the Philippine government kicked out the U.S. Naval base in Subic Bay. There was an immediate loss of 20,000 jobs. They hoped to transform SB into a dynamic port of international trade, commerce and prosperity. Well it's 2019, and Subic Bay is still an underdeveloped, 3rd world dump.
And so shall be Queens...
You guys get what you give!
16
AOC and Progressives take their first scalp in their new War on Jobs! Elizabeth Warren couldn't be prouder.
18
In your opinion published on November 14th, 2018 you described this deal was a "bad bargain" for NYC. What made you change your opinion?
12
I hope the editorial board actually reads the comments here and revises this editorial accordingly. Our society is so used to unbridled, pro-corporate policy that a major US newspaper can't even hold Amazon to account for its impact on the world in which we live. The hypocrisy and puppeteering of this company is unbounded, and the so-called progressives who bent over behind closed doors disgust me. DiBlasio and Cuomo stood by while Amazon trampled over any attempt to carve out a just, democratic plan that protects workers and maintain affordable housing. If there is any blame to be assigned, it's on them. Not on the 'radical opposition' you seem to want to paint. Do your homework, NYT.
7
For more info on corporate extortion techniques and how to challenge them, go to goodjobsfirst.org
3
The city made their position clear, with demands that Amazon add lots of random clauses to their contract with the city - including being supportive of unions, and also an "innovator" - items with no particular definition that would be impossible to satisfy; while appointing a firm opponent of the deal to the board with veto power over the deal - someone who refuses to meet with any Amazon person.
That's not a company being unable to handle New York - that's a city telling Amazon in no uncertain terms that the deal was dead, but we're going to make you look like the bad guy here.
7
Imagine an alternative universe. That universe would include sufficient taxation and investment that the subways work (read your own newspaper). It would include available and affordable housing. It would include street not pocked with potholes. It would include adequate infrastructure.
Then maybe, just maybe, the "anti-corporate activists" would have less of an audience.
And why the private negotiations? And why three times what Virginia paid? And why not investment in the alternative universe?
5
This is utter idiocy and hubris. Do these activists feel they have won some sort of point ? As if NYC is so talent filled and attractive that Amazon and other companies would be lucky to get in? People go where the jobs are. Ask transplants to Texas who ended up living in a state they often abhor because the jobs are here and so is the low living cost and infrastructure. I do wish Amazon had picked somewhere that needed an economic boost but lets be honest here - business is business. They aren't a not for profit enterprise and they played the game of getting tax breaks as well as any other capitalist company in America would do.
These new idealist and uncompromising politicians are the Tea Party for the democrats but we get who we elect so really there is no one to blame but the voters in the end.
81
25,000 jobs. Suppose ranging from C-suite to door-stop, they make on average, $50,000 a year. Also suppose that the employment multiplier of the average job is 1.3. That yields $1.625 billion in the first year. Over the next four years, at a discount rate of 5%, the present value of this employment is $7.387 billion. The best info I've been able to get on New York's tax breaks for Amazon is $3.4 billion, although I doubt this is calculated as a present value, which would shrink the bill (https://www.marketwatch.com/story/what-amazons-hq2-means-for-taxpayers-in-new-york-and-virginia-2018-11-14). So the net present value of Amazon's project over the first five years would have been $3.987 billion. Did anybody think to do these calculations that a sixth-grader could have done?
5
Yes, but suddenly crazy liberal friends didn’t care. It’s like they needed a scalp. Somebody’s. Anybody’s. They took Amazon’s.
3
The city is responsible for the subway and housing. Not corporations. Have people so thoroughly bought into the notion of privatizing business services that we think businesses are supposed to solve those things?
Amazon's tax base would have helped, but it was never their problem to solve. And neighborhoods do change with time, it's something to accept in any thriving city.
The way the people who helped shoot this down commented on working on Virginia next (which is looking forward to Amazon's arrival), suggests that there's an agenda here beyond battling some high-handed, unwelcome takeover.
6
"Blame also needs to be assigned, of course, to a system in which powerful corporations can milk billions in tax benefits out of cities and states to locate facilities, without any added investment in infrastructure, schools and other benefits. Amazon, one of the richest companies in the world, run by the richest man in the world, had held a nationwide contest in which governments scraped together enough entitlements to satisfy it, even as those same cities struggled to fortify corroding infrastructure and stave off a housing crisis that has pushed the middle class to the brink and forced the poor into homeless shelters."
With this statement, you pretty much defeated your own argument.
6
The failure of this deal rests squarely on the shoulders of Cuomo and De Blasio. They made the deal with Amazon - 2 men in a room - intentionally side-stepping any input from City Council or other elected officials (not to mention residents). It blew up in their faces. Had they done this in an inclusive, transparent manner they likely could have addressed the very reasonable concerns folks raised. Pure arrogance -- once again!
4
The smart thing would have been to get the 25,000 jobs then fight for a better deal with Amazon, because if you ask the question the answer may be yes or may be no, but if you never ask the question the answer is always no.
Since there is no Amazon to ask the answer is no.
2
How say you when we doll out tax breaks to stadiums that CHARGE admission rather than paying $150k in average compensation? These were jobs. There is not just one answer, the progressive victim answer. There is negotiation and middle ground. That's where Mr DeBlasio and Cuomo failed because no one was allowed to see the negotiation.
I lived and worked in Stamford CT where UBS and then RBS built stadiums for financial market traders. Stadiums because no one (except me) lived in Stamford. Everyone drove in and out. So the city got no benefits and remained stagnant. And when both firms had enough, 20 years later, those offices that each can hold several 747s are empty shells. So the fear is real. Just need to cut better deals next time and be more inclusive.
1
Amazon and NY were made for each other. Amazon needs talent and hardworking people; NY had lot to offer. Unfortunately, things always work out that way. This article mentions that Senator Michael Gianaris refused even to meet with anyone from the company. Amazon had to decide whether it should continue to see the bad rap against the company or go to a place where it is more welcome. I think Amazon’s decision is justified.
It was a very good deal when you consider 4.1B for Foxconn. Amazon/Jeff Bezos can reverse their decision anytime, but will NY leaders give an inch?
2
Amazon's cancellation of its planned HQ in NYC is a challenge to progressive-socialists who seem to be gaining power within the Democratic party.
Amazon was used as fodder for all of Seattle's ills, including rising rents and a staggering level of homelessness. The remedy was to tax Amazon and other businesses. This referendum failed when voters rejected it.
The Democratic center is losing, the progressive-socialists are gaining power. As Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Ortiz gain in stature with calls for universal healthcare, free tuition, a "Green New Deal", this move forces one to ask "what can progressive-socialist's produce? How will they create jobs to help pay for all the things demanded?"
As an election year approaches, the divide within the Democratic party will be highlighted. Progressive-Socialists are being put on the spot. Whether it was Trump calling attention to Socialism or Amazon leaving NY, the end result is a question: does the extreme left have a viable form of governance or is it simply a collection protesters wanting things with no way to pay for it.
10
So how much are your principles worth?
$27 billion, apparently.
5
There is a special election for Public Advocate February 26th. Many local progressives who sabotaged the Amazon deal are in the race. If you are angry about the loss of jobs and opportunities, then vote for Ulrich.
6
NYC lost out on future tax revenue, new excellent paying jobs. 3.4 billion in new office space.
But for 25K workers that eventually would have ended up working in LIC and living nearby, they are not going to regret not having to move to an area with high taxes, terrible congestion, filthy and failing public transit, small overpriced housing with accompanying rodent populations and at best mediocre schools.
7
Natives versus newcomers.
2
Amazon missed an opportunity to change a city. To truly be revolutionary. Detroit or Cleveland come to mind. Instead, Amazon claimed that public transport was a deal breaker, and then proceeded to choose two sites with perhaps some of the worst traffic in the country, only adding to the problem.
They wanted the belle of the ball and that's exactly what they got.
1
Having lived in New York, San Francisco, and now Seattle, I've personally observed and been affected by the negative overall economic effect of tech in our communities. Yes, they bring jobs, but jobs for who? And at what cost to the larger community? The trickle-down effect of those high-paying jobs (for what exactly?) doesn't pan out. It's not just blue collar, but middle class and even executive level residents that are pushed out of their cities by overpaid kids and entitled management who expect extravagant municipal incentives for deigning to locate where they do. Enough is enough with these arrogant, aggressive companies. Progressive push back is exactly what is called for. Go New York!
10
The problem with giving big corporate tax breaks is that the taxes still must get paid. The roads need to be repaired, the schools need to be funded, the garbage needs to be picked up, and somebody has to pay for it. If employers get huge tax breaks, then the taxes get passed along to their employees, to pay as individuals through property, sales, and income taxes. That's pretty much a wash for the State -- it gets its tax money either way. But the employee feels the squeeze as a higher cost of living.
That high cost of living is why young middle class families have been leaving New York for states like Florida, North Carolina, and Texas for decades; it's why small- to mid-sized businesses don't want to locate here because they can't offer huge salaries; and why employers that are already here struggle to attract talent from other states. For Amazon, it might be a wash, since they would have to pay higher salaries to offset the higher cost of living, effectively paying indirectly the taxes they got out of. But it's not just Amazon that has to deal with the high cost of living for employees.
If we really want to attract jobs and talent to New York, we need to address the bloated, corrupt, crony-laden bureaucracy (see MTA as exhibit A), and reduce the cost of living and doing business here for everyone, not just the chosen few.
1
In its statement, Amazon cites “a number of state and local politicians [who] have made it clear that they oppose our presence.” The fact that it doesn't mention that there were many more who made it clear they welcomed Amazon, up to and including the mayor and governor, shows how hollow their commitment really was. This company doesn't have the stomach for a place where everyone fights everyone else over everything.
3
I am very skeptical about the 25,000 new jobs Amazon was going to create in the New York area - very likely, it would have poached 20,000 employees from other local employers and claimed all the billions of tax credits. And Amazon's premise that the employees would be commuting against peak hour traffic i.e., from Manhattan to LI City is misguided. For Amazon's pay scales, employees would very well have been commuting either from Long island or from Central NJ, places where housing is more affordable. New York City does need major corporations to expand their operations here but not by straining our resources - financial and infrastructure - to satiate Amazon's openly declared greed for tax breaks.
10
What an excellent, thoughtful, and well written opinion piece, thank you. In our current political climate of screaming, polarized tribal warfare it's refreshing to see such nuanced, balanced writing.
I'm usually a de Blasio fan, but I agree that his comments were unprofessional, undignified, and unnecessary. Not at all helpful.
I've lived in the Seattle area from the pre-Amazon days till now. Their impact on the region is very complex, and their impact of a city as large & sophisticated as NYC would likely be quite different than it was here.
2
NY apparently doesn't want an employer who wants to bring 25,000 jobs and related development. Amazon doesn't "share NY values" I've read. I remember when Chick-Fil-A came to Chicago and Rahm Emanuel said the same thing. The line to get in stretched around the block on opening day.
Whenever I see protests with professionally printed signs I suspect some unions are behind it. My guess is the average NY resident welcomed the arrival of a big high tech business. Unfortunately the city is now being run by a bunch of progressive socialist types. I guess it is better to be unemployed in the workers paradise than have a job.
8
I think Amazon should have tallied what percent of their workers would depend on the subway system - and offer to pay that same percent of what the subway system needs to get repaired and to operate - so the workers of the city don't have to bear that burden themselves.
3
Reported today: Amazon made $3 billion last year, which was the -second- year in a row that it paid -no- federal taxes. In fact, last year, it got a refund!
In 1996, Bill Clinton, along with Newt Gingrich's "Contract on America", ended "welfare as we know it" for the poor.
Over 20 years later, it's high time that we ended "welfare as we know it" for corporations.
And, if we do that, we'll have a good chunk of the money needed for the "Green New Deal" that is a necessary but not sufficient condition for keeping the earth habitable for over 7 billion people.
5
I may not be a New Yorker, but it seems to me that the Editorial Board has been sending mixed signals to the public about the wisdom of the Amazon deal and should ask themselves what role they may have played in its collapse. Back in November they seemed to suggest that New Yorkers should stand up to Amazon’s greed and that the state should be willing to walk away if they refused to play fair. Now they blame the state, and to a lesser degree the online retail giant, for the deal’s collapse. I realize that it was ultimately the failure of politicians and corporate leaders that doomed the deal, but doesn’t the Editorial Board bear some responsibility for souring the public against it? I realize that cynicism makes for good reading. But If you wanted the public to see the deal as an opportunity, shouldn’t you have made that clearer three months ago before the pitchforks and torches came to the streets of Long Island City?
9
It pretty much says it all that the twelve most popular reader's responses, enumerating a plethora of rationales, describe why it's not good for Amazon to be in NYC.
It's a rout. 12-0.
4
How will New York survive without an Amazon headquarters?
How will it survive the loss of 25,000 jobs in a city of 8,555,405 people?
The city may as well just close up shop right now.
5
Hmmm.... sounds like a microcosm of the whole country in this editorial.
I noticed The Times steered clear of any criticism of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who had a hand in stopping the Amazon project.
11
"Stood to gain 25,000 jobs." And what if they didn't ? Would Amazon agree to refund part or all of the incentives if they fell short of their revenue or job creation numbers? Unlikely. You really don't have to look further than the Wisconsin/Foxconn debacle to realize that taking corporations and their political allies word on these matters is foolish.
8
Twitter DESTROYED San Francisco.
Massive tech companies do not help a city, they help 3 or 4 people become incredibly rich while destroying the lives of tens of thousands or people.
7
This wonderful city needs a media institution with the power and heft of a NY Times — but that works for the PEOPLE instead of the POWERFUL.
It’s all too clear to its readers — and has been for many years, unfortunately — where the Gray Lady’s real sympathies lie.
:(
5
If Amazon was so serious about needing a 2nd city for HQ2 they would've had a backup city. They got what they wanted out of this, now they're putting false blame on others and again dividing the population even more so. It's all about the data. https://www.popsci.com/amazon-hq2-city-data-collection . Folks should also stop saying 25k jobs were lost to NYers , when we all know these kinds of numbers are usually inflated and many were to be transplants from the west coast HQ and other places. When locals started asking for details they decided to say, so long and thanks for all the fish.
8
@Shutterbug Thank you for the reference, this explains a lot that otherwise didn't make sense in this whole drama. The data gathering should absolutely be part of the story that NYT is telling here.
1
Don't forget that in the last congressional elections the progressives did not flip one seat!!
1
Seems like the Editorial Board should read the other article published today in this very same newspaper: "Even Without Amazon, Tech Could
Keep Gaining Ground in New York" (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/02/15/business/economy/nyc-tech-startups-amazon.html).
In short, NYC already has a strong tech boom and it will continue with or without Amazon. Amazon's promised 25k jobs were a drop in the bucket and not worth the $3 billion in subsidies.
5
For the NYT to suggest that this move spurred by a fringe mob of concerned -- and rightfully so -- lefty activists, will scare away future businesses from taking root in NYC is ludicrous and straight out of a Chamber of Commerce scare tactics playbook. We New Yorkers have every right to demand that corporate partners take into account our tax base, which directly contributes to the problems you spell out : terrible subway system, schools that are segregated and a lack of affordable housing. Amazon, like so many other corporate giants, successfully pitted desperate municipalities against each other for election time bragging rights of "25,000 jobs" -- BUT at what price? So glad we said "NO!!!"
9
This editorial illustrates the real bias in media: toward the powerful.
8
Oh come on. Can the Editorial Board retire?
From the colonial perspective of your real estate section to this out of touch editorial, it’s clear that you don’t really care about the welfare of this city’s more vulnerable classes. If you cut the paternalistic lens and the pandering to the powerful, then maybe the Editorial Board would understand the legitimate concerns critics had of this deal, and that gentrification shouldn’t be an afterthought. Knowledge that your younger and more colorful reporters already possess. Listen to them.
10
Wow, the board is staddling two sides of a fence here. Guess it's hard to state the truth - that a minority of progressives, led by or supported by local politicians just killed a potential for not just jobs, but for expanding the economic industries in NYC. But you will not say anything bad about precious Cortez or any new progressive of color or female and their derailment of this decision. Instead you say that NYC should a negotiated a better deal, but.... Way to go NYTime board; this way you can go in either direction of this issue going forward.
In the end, you should have educated the readers early on as far as what the deal really meant now and in the future. I think Cortez started reading the NYTimes and maybe she would have been more enlighted, or at least New Yorkers would have been. Maybe.
4
It’s distressing that a mayor and governor who can’t come together for the sake of the subways or public housing somehow managed to find common ground by doing an end run around the City Council and steamrollering the land-use process.
We won’t know for 10 years whether the promised 25,000 jobs will materialize. We do know that for decades states and cities have paid ransoms in the tens of billions of dollars to attract or “keep” jobs only to find themselves at the losing end of the proposition when companies moved on after the taxpayer freebies ended.
Oh, wait- I didn't say any of that. The New York Times Editorial Board did, in November of 2018:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/14/opinion/new-yorks-amazon-deal.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article
But now it's the fault of the "anti-corporate activists?" Baloney. Getting Amazon jobs in NYC would be great. But the mayor, the governor and Amazon blew it by trying to do it all in a smoke-filled room, without local sign off.
7
I hope Amazon takes another look at Newark.
1
Well so much for being the best and brightest city in the world, NY. We Upstate "hicks" do our best to welcome companies to the northern corner of the state, not chase them away.
Taxes are high enough. Your so-called Progressives may have caused them to become even higher.
You're editorial marks a sad day in the history of a great newspaper.
7
This from the editorial board that said on 11/20/2018: "New York’s Amazon Deal Is a Bad Bargain" ?
5
Amazon has no one but itself to blame. They exploited their HQ2 search for maximum publicity. They nakedly flaunted their ability to extract maximum concessions and let us all watch politicians grovel at their feet. They toyed with communities across the country, dangling the possibility of revolutionizing some mid-sized city like Raleigh or Greensboro or Richmond. And then, when the Charlie Buckets of America excitedly looked forward to the golden ticket, they sold it to Veruca Salt. The whole thing was disgusting and I am glad New Yorkers had the dignity to say so.
7
@D. Green
As an Amazon share owner (and you probably are if you have a 401(k) or pension plan), I am very happy Amazon did what they did. NY does not deserve Amazon. Many other cities do.
1
@Konyagi
Deserve Amazon??
2
25,000 jobs. How many companies have promised such huge numbers, accepted huge "incentive" payments and delivered a small fraction of the number they promised?
6
I am sorry for writing this so late in the game. My experience with big bidness claiming huge job creation is a bunch of nonsense. Typically PR firms use a "multiple" to account for job creation. So let's say a company decides to hire 100 people. The PR firm puts out a notice that the company will create 1,000 jobs. This forecast is absent of the fact that at some point in the near future the company will absolutely reduce staffing, if not by economic necessity but by better productivity. So let's say the direct job loss is 20 people, that translates to 200 indirects being let go. Now where do these unemployed end up, particularly if they have to contend with hyper inflated housing and other costs?
5
New York City does not need Amazon.
10
@John Xavier III And Amazon obviously does not need NYC. A win-win!
4
This editorial is bewildering. The editorial board hammers both Amazon and the local politicians that triggered Amazon to pull out. Pick a side. You cannot bash Amazon for offering "meager" city development proposals while at the same time bashing the local officials who demanded better development proposals. This editorial is nonsensical.
8
New York didn't "return" these jobs to Amazon, as you state.
New York never had these jobs. Amazon decided not to give
them to New York, because New York did not seem to want
them nearly as much as the 237 other communities who bid for them.
3
Another way to look at it:
The $3B in proposed tax giveaways to Amazon in return for 25,000 jobs = $120K per job. Money best spent?
OR
This 3B is less than the $3.8B NYC's new subway chief, Byford, needs per year for his 5-year $19B plan to fix the subways (# from NYT piece on this). If Byford, who is reputed to be honest, independent and committed, was funded for this and actually managed major subway upgrades, that investment would vastly improve NYC's attractiveness to big companies to locate here. It would also probably generate much more in taxes than Amazon would have paid. Oh, and how many millions of New Yorker lives would be improved by their governments investing in the systems and people they are actually responsible for?
Who's betting that the $3B Amazon has rejected will disappear rather than be re-targeted to invest in the city Mr. Cuomo and Mr. de Blasio profess to care so much about?
3
It cannot disappear because it never existed.
Honest question, WHERE did this "25,000 new jobs" assertion come from. Amazon, right? Has anyone else confirmed that these numbers were realistic?
Foxconn should have taught us to not uncritically parrot such self-serving employment claims.
9
I appreciate the sentiment here New Yorkers but it may be a bit misguided to chalk this reaction up as a win for labor.
Amazon's impact on Seattle has been mixed yet mostly positive as with any employer. While I'm more liberal than the next guy it seems a little foolhardy to use any big corporation as an example.
Would your perspective change if the city was about to get a few thousand highly-stratified jobs from a corporation who isn't a Fortune 50 company?
It feels more like political point-scoring than an organized dialog about labor rights from here.
59
@Garrett I'm going to disagree with you a little bit, no hard feelings, just my perspective. As a former Amazon employee making bank, I started my own company a few years ago. This made me aware of how badly Amazon has hurt Seattle, since I didn't have access to a giant paycheck any longer.
Amazon currently employs around 89,000 people in the Seattle area. The metropolitan area, including Bellevue, is around 4 million. For the 2% that work for Amazon, things are awesome, but for the remaining 98% it is not. Since Washington doesn't have an income tax, neither the company of its employees are contributing to the state/city financially, but drive the prices way up. Let me give some examples:
Having a pizza delivered used to be $10-15, now it's $35-60. Cocktails that used to be $7 are now $15. An apple cost $3. Rents that used to be $1000 8 years ago are now $2000. Buying real estate is only an option for people with $100,000 or more in income, the rest of us are priced out. The cost of living is now as high as New York (without being New York), and is now the 19th most expensive city in the world. This is driving people further and further outside the city or into homelessness. We now have the highest percentage of homeless people of all American major cities.
This is not a success story for the most of us.
20
How does a company berated for beating down on the little guy create the inflation you described? If anything, the purported widespread lack of adequate compensation would created deflation. Could all the ranting be wrong?
3
I'm becoming more and more convinced that the anti-business progressive wing of the Democratic Party will find a way to ensure the re-election of the worst President in American history. It is heart-breaking.
4
I'm not a New Yorker, but I have the impression that maybe Bill De Blasio isn't very good at his job.
11
I would guess Amazon realized it wasn't a good idea in the first place. They should choose higher ground away from sea level. They should choose a location where families will want to move to work for them because of less-expensive housing, or older workers, instead of the blatant age discrimination of gravitating to where only yuppies want to live.
1
Way to go NY!
Wow.
A swing and a BIG miss.
1
Most of the purported 25,000 jobs would have been filled by tech workers Amazon was to import. Few current residents would have been employed.
7
Remember when Amazon was conducting a search for ONE city to establish HQ2? Seems like this has gone all according to plan. NYC didn't lose anything, we are just a close runner-up.
Congratulations to NOVA now that they can be expecting 50,000 new jobs. HA.
1
Boycott Amazon and Whole Foods.
Let's stop making ourselves a victim.
Let's stop pitting ourselves against one another debating the upside/downside of cutting a deal with the devil.
Let's take AWAY the power Amazon wields over us.
3
@Matthew
Liberals boycott Whole Foods? It will never happen! Where else can you put your service dog in a shopping cart, parade it around the store while the entire Whole Foods staff claps and cheers. Whole Foods is emotional service dog paradise and liberals will never give it up.
1
This editorial is excellent , blames everybody, . Job is done.
What is the solution?
who cares?
4
What amazing gifts the Democrats have made for the Republicans in the last couple of weeks.
Top Virginia Dems turn out to be jerks of the first order.
AOC and Marky push a Green New Deal that is so fantastically unobtainable that it makes a Disney princess look fully grounded in reality.
Then Gavin Newsom pulls the plug on California’s high-speed rail project - a cornerstone of the Green New Deal.
Amazon walks away from NYC with tens of billions of economic activity and AOC crows about turning away thousands of jobs from her city.
These are all self-inflicted errors.
11
New York city administration was smart enough to win the deal but unfortunately fell to those left-leaning politicians who could not comprehend the simple math (as one put it) and lost it. NYC clearly wanted Amazon and that is why they struggled for it all these months but then they gave in to the 'buyers remorse'. You could call it as 'shooting yourself in the ...'
To say nothing of the unions. Amazon is a non-union company, in a non-union industry. Unions' demand to be let in undoubtedly mattered a lot more than a few squeaky local politicians.
3
"“The New York State Senate has done tremendous damage,” Mr. Cuomo said in a statement on Thursday. “They should be held accountable for this lost economic opportunity.”
This seems somewhat disingenuous from the Governor. This failure should be squarely placed on both his shoulders and those of Mayor DeBlasio (and the politicians who originally supported this deal but changed their positions in the last couple of months).
Cuomo and DeBlasio rolled out the red carpet for these guys. They're the leaders that NEEDED to make sure everyone locally was on the same page and agreed with the deal that was negotiated. As the leaders who led the effort, the fact that it fell apart and they couldn't get this done is on them more so than anyone else.
6
Amazon will do just fine without NY.
NY will move on just fine without Amazon.
What's going to have to happen now is how NY must prove that it is a great place for future tech businesses.
2
This was not about the deal, but the way it was secretly done and presented as a Fait Accompli.
You want to come to New York and build? Do it right:
1) Hold Open Meetings as demanded by the New York State Open Meetings Law administered by The NY State Committee on Open Government (https://www.dos.ny.gov/coog)
2) You go through the Uniform Land Use Review Process (ULURP) which guarantees public input via OPEN HEARINGS at every stage from Community Board input to the Borough President and City Council. The public gets to comment on the deal as it shapes up. We thus have a role in forming the deal.
3) Where was the environmental impact statement for this project? Where was the economic assessment? The lack of due diligence on the part of two overly enthusiastic politicians– to the point of gullibility – was a total breakdown in the system in place; a system that protects the interests of local residents and the City as a whole.
4) Present the public with an actual signed, enforceable contract, not some flimsy, warm and fuzzy "deal memorandum" or letter of intent that is unenforceable.
Both Gov. Cuomo and Mayor deBlasio know full well what the process entails.
They skirted the process & evaded the laws that have been in place for decades to do this on their own.
I only hope the cancellation is real and not cheap political theater; a stunt.
If everyone involved wants to start over, they can all do it properly. Not in a backroom deal.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
5
UCLA is expanding their campus housing and running into the same opposition from the neighboring low rent districts. Mostly low income "undocumented immigrant worker" families who prefer to live among drug pushers and gangsters and don't want to see their blighted neighborhoods gentrified by liberal college kids... How's that for irony! Hilarious!
http://dailybruin.com/2019/02/14/westwood-neighborhood-council-opposes-the-agora-plans-amid-building-controversy/
1
It's not a benefit if the new jobs are for new people who descend on the city, pushing current residents farther afield as their communities become unaffordable: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/business/economy/san-francisco-commute.html
And please don’t take corporate promises about good local citizenship on face value. Exhibit 1: The Barclays Center and Atlantic Yards:
https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/atlantic-yards-affordable-housing-families-making-100g-officials-article-1.1847375
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/27/nyregion/plan-expedited-for-affordable-units-at-atlantic-yards-near-downtown-brooklyn.html
https://thebridgebk.com/developer-admits-pacific-park-project-will-take-until-2035/
As I understand, Amazon was opaque and then, feeling irritated by New Yorkers, left the city standing at the altar. Sounds like it would have been an unhealthy relationship.
3
Remember the glowing review you guys gave the new Senate Majority Leader, Andrea Stewart-Cousins?
She Stood Up to Cuomo. Soon She’ll Be the First Woman to Lead the N.Y. Senate. https://nyti.ms/2GUGpQL?smid=nytcore-ios-share
And as usual, she was the "first this, first that," focusing on the cosmetics. Well, her incompetence just cost NY $27,000,000,000 in tax revenue over the last decade. I said it then and I'll say it again: stop focusing on race, gender and other completely irrelevant garbage. Let us have competence, regardless of what competence looks like.
5
NYT editorial board: how do you reconcile this heavy handed finger pointing with the call to action of your November editorial questioning this deal? https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/14/opinion/new-yorks-amazon-deal.html
3
New York leads all states with the most residents moving out of state, about 200,000 per year - 25,000 high paying jobs would provide so much revenue to New York - The anti-business leanings of New York is leading to its slow downfall from the epicenter of America - So sad
https://www.bizjournals.com/newyork/news/2018/05/25/new-york-ranks-no-1-in-losing-residents-to-other.html
3
Corporations locate in areas that provide a qualified work force to recruit from, available transportation services and quality public education opportunities for their executives and managers. Giving tax incentives which many jurisdictions volunteer is “frosting on the cake” to the corporations which receive these unearned and mostly unnecessary benefits. The benefits probably reside more with the leaders and economic development agencies claiming to have helped the community with both employment and and improved prosperity. The corporation will only locate if the self interest and the corporate bottom line prove the location has the ability to meet its needs. New York satisfies that agenda. What does the corporation bring to the relocation decision? Generally it’s jobs, preferably good paying jobs with benefits. Does Amazon satisfy this criteria? Good jobs in an economically depressed area may allow a lower standard but may not meet the needs of the corporation. An angry citizenry may mean a corporation has some PR issues to address. As the business grows and hires new and more employees the public outcry diminishes as people see the growth and benefits. Thinking about this I have to wonder why would Amazon walk away from the largest incentive package perhaps ever provided. Maybe it has more to do with what Amazon actually brings to the table.
3
Well, New York lost Amazon and Wisconsin kept Foxconn. Which do you think made the better choice? New York isn't picking up the tab for Amazon. Wisconsin is on the hook $4.5 billion. Amazon isn't building a second home in New York. Foxconn is building flat screen LCD displays in Tijuana and shipping them to its magnificent factory in Mount Pleasant, WI.
Donald Trump has weighed in on Foxconn according to Bloomberg https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-02-06/inside-wisconsin-s-disastrous-4-5-billion-deal-with-foxconn
“This is the Eighth Wonder of the World.”
So declared President Donald Trump onstage last June at a press event at Foxconn’s new factory in Mount Pleasant, Wis. He was there to herald the potential of the Taiwanese manufacturing giant’s expansion into cheesehead country. He’d joined Foxconn Chairman Terry Gou and then-Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker to celebrate a partnership he’d helped broker—“one of the great deals ever,” Trump said. In exchange for more than $4.5 billion in government incentives, Foxconn had agreed to build a high-tech manufacturing hub on 3,000 acres of farmland south of Milwaukee and create as many as 13,000 good-paying jobs for “amazing Wisconsin workers” as early as 2022.
Do you think Trump will join the editors in scolding New York.
2
Amazon depresses wages ( according to the Economist, which is hardly known for its left leaning positions), fights unions and is not the best of corporate citizens in any community. Why would New York city, with its high cost of living and need for jobs that pay a living wage bend over backwards (read -- pay Amazon) to attract that sort of business?
https://www.economist.com/united-states/2018/01/20/what-amazon-does-to-wages
5
When Ireland joined the EU in 1973 it was the poorest country in Europe based on GDP - it then invested in education and infrastructure and gave huge tax breaks to corporations to headquarter in Ireland - today it is the 4th richest country in the world based on GDP and future forecasts put it at 3rd richest. Corporate tax cuts can work for the average person in the long run.
https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Economy/GDP-per-capita-in-1973
https://www.focus-economics.com/blog/richest-countries-in-the-world
3
Over the years, I have read quite a few articles in the New York times reporting on companies that got tax incentives for creating jobs, but the jobs never materialized while the incentives did. We have no guarantee of 25,000 jobs, just Amazon's say so. The editors should have read this article in their own paper:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/14/upshot/amazon-foxconn-subsidies-critics.html
4
They received the same incentive as any other business.
https://esd.ny.gov/excelsior-jobs-program
Kudos to Amazon for seeing an endless shakedown waiting in the wings.
3
This past December, Google announced with no fanfare, that it was opening additional office space. https://www.blog.google/inside-google/company-announcements/google-hudson-square-our-expanded-new-york-campus/
This very paper, also last December, details how over the last decade plus, Google has been a good neighbor. Not looking for tax breaks, but actually investing in the community.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/14/nyregion/google-nyc-amazon-offices.html
It is about time our elected leaders say firmly 'No' to all of these tax giveaways to interests who do not need them.
4
Can someone explain to me: Why does Amazon, a company valued at almost eight billion dollars, need so many incentives to move? If Amazon wanted to do amazing things, move to Detroit or Flint and help be part of rehabbing cities that need it. Don't ask for huge subsidies, but rather, really enrich the site of your next campus and bring a failing city back to life. So far all I can see that's happened is my niece's rent has tripled since the proposed Amazon move was announced.
4
Why do you “need” toothpaste when regular baking soda will do just as well?
amazon isn't known for great working conditions. High paying jobs wouldn't necessarily to to current residents. Amazon paying $0 in Federal Taxes (regardless of use of legal loopholes) speaks volumes about how they feel about 'community'.
3
@ray 44 percent of American with income pay 0 income tax. No income tax doesn’t mean no taxes are paid. For Amazon there are still business taxes, real estate taxes, payroll taxes, etc.
1
Mega-corporation, recipient of government handouts defends mega-corporation, recipient of government handouts. Film at 11.
2
Amazon said they would create 25,000 jobs. The cost was much too high. 3 billion dollars in incentives is insane. Use that 3 billion to give loans to small businesses and help promote and grow businesses already in Queens and other areas. You should not have to give billions of dollars in incentives to companies to lure them to your state to do business and possibly create some jobs. In this case with Amazon, the price was simply too high, and their greed too deep.
3
Twitter received huge tax breaks to move to and supposedly revitalize the mid-market area of San Francisco. Homelessness and poverty are worse than ever. Used needles are littered on the streets. Minimum rents on a studio apartment are $2500, meaning that teachers, firefighters, waiters, even scientists cannot afford the most basic apartment.
Cities should think carefully before parroting the fantasy that because offices "create jobs" anything will come back to the people. Twitter conspired with other tech companies to kill a tax proposition to fund homelessness services. Companies will do everything they can to avoid giving any of their revenue to the city or community. These subsidies benefit the company and those on their payroll only.
4
$27BN over 20 years = 1.35BN/year in tax revenues. Versus a 3BN incentive. Thus (feel free to check my math on this...): in 2.22 years, Amazon would have paid taxes worth the entirety of the incentive program. Think about what kind of investment in public transportation and affordable housing could have been made with the remaining 24BN in taxes...The folks opposed to this deal had legitimate gripes, they just didn't realize that Amazon could also be part of the solution.
3
@londongirl They don’t want to see corporations as part of the solution. They don’t look at products that people need and buy or the jobs and investments. They aren’t even interested in taxes. They only care that a major corporation was getting tax breaks and they let emotion overwhelm good sense.
The citizens of NYC, like a lot of the country, is now aware that most of these utopian development promises are largely empty. This especially true for current residents of the target area.
Sure the Amazon campus would have created some new high paying jobs, but new infrastructure burdens would have appeared and current residents who work in other already high cost areas would be further displaced.
If you own property in that area, I can imagine you are now disappointed that all those new high-end residents won’t be arriving as soon as they would under the deal. At the same time, all those high-end residents would demand better subways and schools and the rest that will probably exceed the new tax revenue generated. I say this because other cities that have pursued this strategy have more problems, not less.
The development strategy that gives away tax revenue to newcomers at the expense of current residents will just impoverish the public infrastructure and further advance the inequality that is already too high. The shallow analysis about aggregate benefit ignores the cross currents about who get what. Empirical evidence suggests that the rich get the benefit and the rest get to move out farther away from their jobs.
4
@Jazz Paw Almost all cities have infrastructure issues right now. It’s not limited to cities with generous tax breaks for new companies.
I had a friend back in the 70's who was in charge of putting on New Age festivals all over the country. Usually, people are pretty cool, he said, peace and love and all that, but not in the NY area. There he used a great portion of his time dealing with complaints from festival goers.
With this Amazon thing, I hear an echo of my friend. New Yorkers love to find fault and their natural outlook on life is expecting the worst when the worst just isn't there.
4
The state I live in, Virginia, wants everyone to know that we welcome Amazon and the jobs they are bringing to the state.
I feel sorry for the many people that would have benefited in NYC. New York has elected s few bad apples that are ruining a good deal for everyone.
4
@John
I was going to say something about electing bad apples but...
Principle only matters when it's inconvenient. If, as a nation, we want to take a stand against corporate-funded lobbying, special interests buying off politicians, and backroom deals without public input, then that means we need to stand against them no matter what, even if they happen to have a big-time name like Amazon.
I applaud those New Yorkers who chose to push back against tax breaks and incentives for a company that didn't need them, yet wanted to take advantage of New York's infrastructure and workforce anyways. I'm of the opinion that companies - all of them, big and small - should pay their fair share. If they don't want to invest in the communities they'd like to define, then fine, find another state's coffers to raid.
3
@T Our State is more than happy with Amazon coming here and I for one am glad to see them coming.
1
Depending on your income level you like or don’t like Amazon bailing. My take is that West Coast laid back ran into East Coast in your face.Amazon bailed not because of the protest it bailed because when they made the deal they knew nothing of the culture of New York. The in your face attitude of New York must have been a shock for people who work in Seattle. If Amazon really wanted to stay it could have told the city and state it wouldn’t take the 3 billion in giveaways. Three billion bucks is pocket money for Jeff Bezos. After making the deal Amazon heard the horror story of The 7 train and the Grand Central Expressway and was taken aback. The deal could have been saved by not taking the 3 billion dollars or taking less. Does anybody really believe this deal couldn’t be saved if Amazon wanted it saved? For people to put the blame on the deal falling through on the activist is ludicrous. Amazon could have saved this deal if they really wanted.
3
@Steven McCain You shouldn’t have to beg people to give them good jobs and lots of tax revenue.
1
As with many complex policy decisions, there are two compelling sides to this dilemma. Both arguments- for & against -have merit.
Wisdom is required when facing such a choice.
Both balmy fiscal predictions and dire catastrophic urban disarray seem plausible.
Is NYC the best place for a huge corporate campus ? Is housing at risk ? Would tax revenues cover the tax subsidy? Would the MTA get funded? Should Cuomo/Blasio demanded a subway donation and affordable housing at the start of the deal ? Would Amazon feel generous ?
It's a fait accompli...move on.
2
Most of the 25,000 jobs would not have gone to New Yorkers, but to highly specialized workers who would drive locals out of the neighborhood by paying outrageous rents/prices for existing homes and force out others with gentrification of a great neighborhood. I believe that both Cuomo and de Blasio were not thinking clearly about these issues, and especially not about offering tax incentives to a company that clearly does't need then. Amazon payed zero in taxes last year. Let's keep NYC the wonderful place that it is.
4
You are quite right when you say that 'the subways don’t work, the streets are gridlocked, the housing is unaffordable, the shelters are overcrowded, and the schools are segregated and often inadequate.' But why so? Does it have anything to do with the neo-liberal policies on tax and public spending, fostered by both Democrats and Republicans, in which companies like Amazon prosper and ordinary folk suffer?
1
"Elected officials who identify as progressive painted Amazon as a rapacious engine of inequality. It seemed that few were interested in having a constructive conversation about how to improve the deal and make it work for the tech giant and the city." Like Captain Renault in "Casablanca," "I'm shocked..."
2
I was greatly looking forward to Amazon moving next door to me. It was such a massive win for the city that I was willing to tolerate the more crowded LIC subways that were to follow; however, when I started to hear that Amazon was thinking about pulling out, I was thrilled to hear it because it's hard to imagine a clearer demonstration of the absurdity of the policies people like AOC would like to see enacted.
AOC and her ilk have subjected the people of Queens to one of the most devastating self-inflicted wounds in the history of government. This event will be Trump's opening and closing argument, and it's all he needs to win reelection.
Republicans have argued for some time that the effect of raising taxes past a certain point is that wealthy tax payers will relocate to a place that doesn't treat them like marks. This event really demonstrates that as clearly as can be. This comes right on the heels of the discovery that NY's coffers are bone dry in part on account of the taxpayer flight caused by the federal government no longer subsidizing state and local progressive taxation. I love NYC, but this place is in big, big trouble.
8
@Bill
Over the years and in order to secure development, NYC gave Trump's company over $800 MILLION in tax exemptions, how did that work out for you?
You live in the alternate reality STILL that giving tax exemptions to rich people and corporations is good for communities. Unfortunately history does not bear that out, read some, you might learn something from it.
2
@Deus
I'm not familiar with the specific exemptions given to Trump, but I've read plenty on this general topic and am well aware that a lot of these investment projects do not pan out as advertised. Even if projections were off by 50% it would still have been a huge win. In an ideal world, tax exemptions would only be given to people who need them (not rich people/companies), but we don't live in an ideal world. You either compete for the business or you lose as NYC has in this case.
Maybe the Amazon deal would have been a bust, but I doubt it. We will get a pretty good look at this issue in the next 5-10 years when the investment in Crystal City starts to either yield fruit or not.
We need to get over our fixation with the word "jobs". We don't have a jobs problem in this country. We're at full employment. What we have is an economic inequality problem. At a rate that's sky high and almost unprecedented. When we hear that "jobs will be added" we shouldn't be satisfied. We need to ask if they'll bring real benefits to employees and communities. What's the use of more jobs and full employment if the middle class is gutted? And if people filling those jobs can barely live of them?
Sure Amazon would have brought more "jobs" but it also would have brought more economic inequality to a city that's already reeling from it.
4
@Alex How can a corporation bring “economic inequality” to a city?
The fact of the matter is, the 25,000 jobs are only a "promise" of that number over the next 20 years, nothing guaranteed or on paper and when it comes to business and the future of Amazon itself, much can happen during that period of time. This is verified within the large distribution centers themselves in which because of increased automation the numbers of people required to fill those jobs in the centers are already actually in decline.
Over the last 25 years, 60,000 manufacturing plants have disappeared in America, many of whom received similar "taxpayer handouts", yet, ultimately closed up shop, moved elsewhere in the country for an even better "taxpayer" deal or left the country in entirety and moved overseas to cheaper labor cost countries. There was never any "strings attached" to these deals and there isn't with Amazon either.
When The Editorial Board claims corporate activists got what they wanted at great cost, perhaps they should ask what cost the employees paid from the loss of their jobs from disappearing manufacturing plants(like GM?)and ask them what cost THEY paid.
I believe the American public has finally "had it up to here" with Corporate welfare.
6
What guarantees are there that Amazon would actually create 25,000 "well-paying jobs" in New York? Were there any accountability measures and consequences to Amazon for not meeting this target? Across the river in New Jersey, the State Economic Development Board is under fire for doling out tax breaks without doing due diligence about whether employers actually brought the benefits that they claimed that they would. In Wisconsin, FoxConn was given $4 billion in incentives to build a huge manufacturing plant. Then they backpedaled and said that they would be constructing it as a research center, creating far fewer jobs that require much greater levels of skill and education and are not really suitable for blue collar workers who so desperately need a boost. The editorial rightly points out the fecklessness of both Mayor DiBlasio and Governor Cuomo of selling the city on the cheap in secret and then being caught flat-footed when the cat was finally let out of the bag. How about investing in upgrading our work force and helping hard-pressed small businesses survive the welter of taxes, fees and regulations that hamper their ability to grow? As for Amazon, and Jeff Bezos, all I can say is "Hasta la vista!"
2
No employees and no buildings means no state and local taxes created. No taxes created, no tax reductions created. Pretty simple.
Ah yes, New York City, a place that is famously hurting for investors, will certainly miss this opportunity to subsidize a famously abusive company with public money to attract a few jobs, and homogenize and gentrify one of the few remaining working class holdouts.
5
Amazon ended up creating a huge PR disaster for themselves with their arrogant national beauty pageant. Most of America’s states and major cities made a mistake in reflexively bowing to Bezos, the newly self-anointed ruler of American fiscal policy. The regulatory blowback accelerated by this publicity debacle will cost Amazon far more than just a few billion over the long term. New labor laws and more vigorous anti-trust enforcement will come even faster, as average people grow tired of the constant abuse foisted upon them by immense companies and self-indulgent, self-righteous executives. Bezo’s childish impatience with local politics lays bare the bubble world inhabited by today’s super-rich and their lesser protégés.
3
Sure. Don’t bet the 401K on that forecast.
After the Fact Questions ???? :
How much of the $ 3 Billion Dollars “saved” :
...will actually be used to repair the NYC subway ?
.... will actually be used to repair the other NYC infrastructure ?
... will actually be used to provide for better housing ?
.... will actually be used for better education ?
... will actually be used to help the poor ?
Will NYC now be able to attract other large companies ? ... other businesses of all sizes ?
Will NYC be able to attract the tech talent to keep other tech industries in NYC ?
Will other companies want to remain in NYC ?
What affect will this have on the rating of NYC Municipal Bonds ?
Will AOC and the other “Progressive” NY politicians dedicate their Salaries to help the poor ?
2
@Henry There is no $3 billion saved to spend on the subways or anything else. That is not how incentives work. It's $27 billion (according to the ed) thrown away.
2
Amazon should head straight across the river to New Jersey. We have a well earned reputation for giving the store away before we are even asked.
Regardless of what party is in power at the moment, we will heap riches upon anyone interested in using us for our real estate, infrastructure and workforce. Go ahead, pollute us, wreck our roads and don't pay a penny in taxes.
Mr. Bezos...welcome to the Garden State!
2
Nobody is interested when the store you give away is the Dollar Store.
Amazon has precisely zero interest in "help[ing] address housing and infrastructure problems" in New York or anyplace else, and no amount of socialism for the rich is going to change that fact. They're a business. They exist to make as much profit as possible while crushing the competition in the process. They do that by driving down the cost of production at the expense of their workers and the environment. The NYT editorial board is either incredibly naive or blatantly complicit to suggest otherwise.
1
Bezos uses the word 'complexifier'. He was not willing to work with NYC to address their concerns. His negotiators refused to state they would not oppose unionization of the employees in the tech center. Amazon's behavior in Seattle showed they were not willing to address problems that the tech industry had caused with homelessness and the high cost of housing. Bezos considered locating in NYC a 'complexifier' and his intransigence was made clear by his actions in Seattle.
1
Bezos uses the word a 'complexifier'. He was not willing to work with NYC to address their concerns. His negotiators refused to state they would not oppose unionization of the employees in the tech center. Amazon's behavior in Seattle showed they were not willing to address problems that the tech industry had caused with homelessness and the high cost of housing. Bezos considered locating in NYC a 'complexifier' and his intransigence was made clear by his actions in Seattle.
The corporate center was not going to be unionized. All the employees there were going to be exempt. The unions had their sights set on the local distribution centers. They wanted Amazon to not exercise its management rights. Amazon told them to pound sand. That is the real story.
Like Brexit abroad and the election of Donald Trump here on our own shores, the groundswell of opposition to the Amazon plan is a direct byproduct of the feeling of powerlessness that vast numbers of ordinary people are feeling when they see oligarchs everywhere making decisions that directly affect their lives without any regard for the public's interests. The manner in which Governor Cuomo and Mayor DeBlasio presented the citizens of New York with a fait accompli, without any public hearings or even submission to hearings before the City Council, (typically in any case a rubber stamp for real estate interests), was particularly egregious. Residents of Queens, driving on the entry roads to the 59th Street Bridge have been witnesses to a virtual wall of new high-rise construction, companions to the pencil-thin towers now destroying the city's once beautiful skyline. Rents, real estate taxes, parking meter fees, across the board costs have risen rapidly. Congestion pricing promises to be another burdensome tax on the average citizen. The once beautiful streets and avenues of the city are now given over to bicycle lanes and parking areas. reducing parking for motor vehicles to a point where a necessary trip to a doctor's appointment in Manhattan now entails parking in a private garage at rates in excess of $50 for an hour's stay. T One need not be a social scientist to soon come to the realization that Manhattan has been in the process of becoming a zona rosa.
1
A huge blunder any way you look at it. Where do there "progressive" think tax revenues come from? 3 billion a small sacrifice for what would have been gained.
Queens Amazon would have created much more than just 25K jobs. Think of all the surrounding service industries it would have supported. The Queens campus would have created potential for the whole tri-state area.
1
I see a bright future for you in the NFL: as a shaker-downer of cities desperate to attract or keep a team.
2
@mbrody
A huge blunder? I disagree, Jeffrey Bezos himself, is worth over $100 BILLION dollars? Why can't a community just secure such a project on its own merits with out the "Corporate Welfare"?
Americans, like yourself, have been continually brainwashed into thinking that the ONLY way to secure such business is by "taxpayer handouts"(essentially bribery) to lure new business, yet, in order to protect that same taxpayer there are rarely, if ever, "strings attached" to these deals and, as a result, even after receiving considerable funds, many many companies have still eventually closed up shop or moved overseas to secure a "better deal" elsewhere, without any repercussions.
The fact of the matter is "Corporate We;fare" is no longer acceptable to Americans.
3
I am opposed to any sort of government "deal" whereby one private company gets concessions not available to its competitors. Although these deals are common I don't see how they can be legal. Government should not be favoring one company over another. This is a recipe for corruption.
Notice how it's always the big monopolies that get these deals? It's never the Mom and Pop stores.
2
What this revealed (as I we didn't already know it) is the incredible arrogance of the mayor and governor. After the pitifully small demonstration in Long Island City, why didn't they work the phones and organize a far larger demonstration there? Why didn't they do a talking and listening tour of the city and state to clear the air? I'd like to think they learned from this, but I know them all too well to have such a hope.
1
@HKGuy "After the pitifully small demonstration in Long Island City, why didn't they work the phones and organize a far larger demonstration there?"
You mean like Trump would have done?
This reminds me of Seattle in the late 70s, early 80s, before Amazon came into being. When the first new high raises where being planned, the city decided against making the developers cover the cost of the needed infrastructure improvements, including setbacks to widen the walkways and streets to allow the sun to shine down into what would become manmade canyons, arguing that the city would loose the business, as builders would take their business elsewhere. Where? Who knows. And so downtown Seattle changed dramatically. It was no longer people friendly.
The same thing took place in the Freemont neighborhood of Seattle as Amazon set up shop, overwhelming the area, consuming local businesses, and making parking impossible, but great if you ride a bike along the waterfront. And good luck finding affordable housing. There are plenty of new, expensive apartments in the area, but none suitable for raising a family.
Not requiring Amazon, or any other company, to include the cost of infrastructure improvements in any project is a failure to protect the tax paying public who will have to cover any cost.
1
Aside from the merits or lack of them to Amazon's Queens H2Q, I suggest the Mayor, the Governor and the New York Times editors reflect that in an age of populism, elites are struggling for credibility. The epic fail of the NYC subway system which remains ongoing has created an enormous distrust in the judgement of elites by city residents. The same people who can't get their stuff together to defeat the subway crisis are asking to be trusted on another huge undertaking for the city.
Okay, populism seldom results in useful policy, and opposing Amazon is likely a poor move, but the pain and helplessness city residents endure daily with the broken, over crowded, unreliable, dirty subway can manifest in unanticipated ways and I contend this discontent is a significant factor in our failure re Amazon.
1
After the deal was announced, I kept waiting for an article here or elsewhere in which a reporter contacted executives at big tech companies that have made a significant investment in the city about how they felt about this deal. I can't help believing that Google, which entirely occupies (and owns) one of (the?) the largest per-square-foot office buildings in the city and is STILL expanding, must have been ticked off.
@HKGuy
Google gets tax benefits for its job creation as well. These are standard programs that exist in every state.
1
@Bill Enlighten me here, please, as to what benefits Google has had for the Googleplex in Chelsea. Are they comparable to what was offered Amazon? And if so, why haven't the Times and others reported on them?
@HKGuy
If you're interested in learning about tax incentive programs that are offered to any company that is about to make any substantial investment in local real estate or jobs creation, I'm sure there's plenty of literature out there for you to enlighten yourself with. While the specific tax incentives provided to Google in connection with its recently announced expansion are not, to my knowledge, in the public domain, the likelihood that Google does not receive a very substantial tax incentive for making the kind of billion dollar investment they are talking about making is zero (assuming they actually make the investment).
Why haven't the Times and others reported on Google's benefits is an interesting question. There are a number of possible answers: (1) Google, smartly it now appears, made the announcement in muted fashion and, although the size of the proposed investment is huge, it was overshadowed by the size of the Amazon deal and therefore did not draw the public attention or scrutiny it may have deserved, (2) the tax incentives to be realized as a consequence of Google's expansion may be a mere extension of an existing agreement that was entered into some time prior when the scale of the original investment was smaller than what is now envisioned (so no "new" deal was needed), (3) the approval process may have been different (for reason #2 or for some other reason) which meant that less government bureaucrats were able to take the opportunity to grandstand...
Perhaps the "progressives" should be asked to explain how the lost tax revenues and jobs will be replaced - and some vague green program isn't the answer if you are at least slightly grounded in traditional economics.
I also find curious all the outcry about the effect Amazon would have had in northwest Queens (disclosure - I grew up in Flusihing before it changed so radically). Neighborhoods change; I do not recall any part of Queens having been designated as a national park or wilderness area..
6
The Times Op Ed is spot on here. Neither side handled it well. However, I believe this debacle will be used by Trump and the Republicans in 2020. The politics of the Amazon withdrawal may play well in NYC but no so much in the rest of the country.
3
@Christian A lot of people will jeer; a lot will cheer. I think it will overall be a wash.
There are still all those American cities where Amazon can make a real, positive change; instead of New York which is already incredibly vibrant. Of course, these cities don't have $3 billion in pocket change to throw at Amazon.
Here in Portland, I was relieved that we were long "out of the running" to land Amazon. Portland's infusion of high-salaried, job creating tech and software companies changed the landscape of the city. Yes, we're booming economically. So is homelessless. Our parks budget is being cut. Roads are crumbling. Traffic is miserable. In short, outside of dining in great restaurants (which we already had as well), Portland's overall livability has been diminished.
On so many levels our nation's economic paradigm works magnificently ($3 billion incentives not withstanding), and on so many others, it fails miserably.
New York State was willing to give 3 Billion Dollars in incentives ( tax breaks ) in the "hope" of infusing 27 Billion dollars of ecenomic benefit. That figure is questionable. New York State also sold Casino's to the population of the state as an incredible shot in the arm to local economies. One only needs to look at the Rivers Casino in Schenectady.. very poor performance and local municipalities based budgets on the predicted income generated for the surrounding communites.It has not materialized and most likely will not. New York has a poor track record when it comes to these type of projections.
2
I hope the actions of New York, force governments everywhere to end the practice of corporate welfare. Especially for ultra rich companies like Amazon.
5
Amazon should have at the very least given the state a line in the sand. Instead, in a spiteful bit of pique, abruptly announced it had pulled out of the deal entirely. While I was personally very much in favor of Amazon in Long Island City, the way Amazon handled this puts the blame squarely on the company for its thin-skinned response to a handful of protesters. I don't think this will deter other companies — the ones that are reasonable, that is.
3
If the anti-corporate activists who killed the Amazon headquarters in NYC have no view of the big picture, we could at least expect the city's leading newspaper to have one. But here are its two leading editorial headlines on the subject:
1. Nov 14, 2018 -- "New York's Amazon Deal is a Bad Bargain"
2. Feb 14, 2019 -- "New York Returns 25,000 Jobs to Amazon"
I'm sorry, but my computer screen is spinning. If the Amazon HQ was a bad deal in November, why is it a missed opportunity in February?
The Times bears its share of blame in this tragedy. Instead of helping to facilitate understanding of the project, it gave its sanction to the confused and reactionary opposition. Those with corner offices on the top floors of the Times building in midtown will now look out over a diminished city. I hope they learned their lesson, too.
11
@Leonard Flier
You are correct. In addition to the NYT editorial board shirking responsibility for what it did, you should expect to see all kinds of back pedaling by people on the left trying to distance themselves from AOC and her ilk.
AOC is now the Democratic party's version of Sarah Palin. She seemed so spunky and fresh when she initially entered the political landscape last year, but now that she is forced to opine publicly on matters of great importance and complexity, the limitations of her experience are exposed with disastrous consequences.
4
"and wanted more investment from Amazon in the city."
-- Why should a private company invest in the city, while the city and the state themselves do not?
Should Amazon be responsible for building housing, shelters, schools, subways, hospitals?
Meanwhile, what is New York (not) doing?
When will the full 2nd Avenue subway line be completed?
What about the Access to the Region's Core Project (ARC), the Northeast Corridor (NEC) Gateway Program, the Hudson Tunnel Project, the Portal Bridge Replacement Project, ...?
But who cares, we're already "Number One", aren't we?
2
NYT headlines 2020:
Trump wins Presidency again,
Dems blame France, Israel, Russia, Midwest, white people, a rising stock market,… Everything but themselves
Dems wake up this Socialistic agenda is not going to work a $3 billion investment to get back $27 billion is a great deal and if you don’t like it then move it down to $1.5 billion but stop with the showboating it’s only helping the Republicans.
8
@Paul You are spot on! This is a gift to Trump.
This will hang around Cortez's neck like a Cultural Marxist albatross for the rest of her political life. She won't serve a second term -- 25,000 jobs is not "chump-change".
7
@Alice' Restaurant
And who do you think would fill those 25,000 jobs? Local people from Queens? Doubt it. Most would be filled by outside white collar workers who would move into the neighborhood and drive up housing costs which are already out of control. The gentrification would force out many locals just like what's happened in San Francisco with Silicon Valley.
3
@Alice's Restaurant
Alice, you nailed it.....thanks to Ocasio and her associates, this will be studied in graduate business schools for decades under the title:
"How NOT to commit Economic Suicide"
1
@John
"Economic Suicide" comes in many forms--Cortez and her 1959 Cuba is one.
We have now entered a Howard Beale, mad as hell moment. For decades now, our political class, from both parties have allowed corporate America free rein over our economic and social welfare. Yes, we have had some administrations who fought for some form of what I would call regulation lite, but for the most part, even after 2008, our masters of the universe continue to enjoy healthy tax breaks, FREE access to public services, and, to add insult to injury, march their wealth right in front of our middle class face. Trump caught wind of this anger and exploited it, but, now, even he will become a victim to this growing populists rebellion against any individual or company whose net worth begins with a B.
1
@Amanda Jones: What so many people forget when they invoke Howard Beale to support their position is... the character was a raging psychotic.
Not quite the best role model to follow.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
1
Having waded through the "both sides" tripe to try and get to the heart of this argument, it seems the main takeaway is "don't hurt corporations' feelings." Is this really the hard-hitting journalism we deserve from the Paper of Record?
4
At what great cost ?!??, where are your numbers? Start with the 3 BILLION that amazon will not be paying for Schools, Police, fire department...oh wait, that 2 job Mom,she'll catch the slack....Really....your upset with amazon leaving.....where do you live? Happy with your taxes?
2
According to The Editorial Board, it was the fault of the local representatives of Queens, and the mayor, and the governor’s. Oh! Also Amazons. Seems to me The Editorial Board wants to blame everyone. Well if that’s the case, it probably was a bad deal made by Amazon, the governor and the mayor and instead of a lazy op-ed, The Editorial Board should be explaining why it was a bad deal. That is called journalism.
The NY Times editorial is laughable. Only a few months ago, the NY Times Editorial Board criticized the deal to recruit Amazon to NYC. Now, the Board is critical of the break-up of the deal. NY Times, where do you stand? Were you "in or out"? Why the muddled and inconsistent messaging? Perhaps each member of the Board should return to journalism school to learn out to communicate cogently and effectively.
4
Funny how the NYT along with Cuomo are blaming Republican Giannaris for the collapse of the Amazon deal. But no mention at all of the strong opposition from Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and her hard Left followers? Your remember: the supposed future of the Democratic Party? Millennial and Twitter favorite? The faction Democratic presidential candidates feel the need more and more to suck up to?
Now why would the NYT and Cuomo make no mention of that now? Such a biiiiiiiig mystery.
1
@JW
Sen. Giannaris is a democrat.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
@JW It's "Gianaris." And he's a Democrat.
Funny the NYTimes does not identify its own culpability in villifiying Amazon "as a rapacious engine of inequality" with relentless stream negative articles, when the company is objectively far from the worst actors in the corporate sphere.
4
Who really needed 25000 more slaves. That it just more people who work poor. Why does NYT believe that amazon would do anything but drive wages down and drive housing prices up. The richest man in the world designed it that way. Good for New Yorkers for choosing freedom over servitude. Shame on the outmoded NYT for berating them. Now you know how the British felt in Boston Harbor.
3
You editorialized against the deal, now you blame everyone but yourself for its demise??
4
Even the author of this article admits that Amazon offered almost nothing to help with infrastructure and housing affordability which would have without a doubt been exacerbated by their new HQ. That's reason enough to cancel this deal.
NYC doesn't need more employment. It needs more infrastructure, education, and affordable housing. NYC's money should go to that, not tax incentives for a company that already has more money than it knows what to do with. This canceled deal is a victory for New York and for a saner, more equitable capitalism. It's past time that ordinary citizens and local governments stand up to giant corporations who take and take without ever giving anything back to the community. And it's past time that corporations realize that they have a responsibility to their employees and communities and not just their shareholders.
Based on this tragedy I see the economic polarization worsening. Successful businesses and entrepreneurs have already judged NY to be hostile to them and they will choose to (re) locate their businesses somewhere else, a place where they are made to feel welcome. Over time, these new, more welcoming locations will thrive, while cities like NY will begin a slow, inexorable decline a la 1970's when Park Slope was a drug infested violent community and brownstones were being given away. Couple this devestating business outcome for NY with the elimination of SALT deductions for Federal Income Taxes and the future history of NYC is foretold in the recent past: decline, decay, depression. The curious current euphoria of the left at the outcome betrays a staggering ignorance of economics and history and will soon be replaced by depression. History will eventually wipe the smile off of their faces.
3
AOC and her ilk were successful in preventing a major corporation from moving TO the city. I wonder how long it will take them to chase existing corporations FROM the city?
5
Count on the Times to fall into line in the end.
1
what a weasel opinion, take a stand
It is amazing how little understanding of economics New Yorkers seem to have.
1
Was there every any solid guarantee in writing that Amazon would create 25,00 jobs at certain wage levels? Well, New York Times, what is the answer? Aren't reporters supposed to nail down facts? I subscribe because I want good answers but the NYT editors seem satisfied with vague reporting. Dean Baquet, where are you? Who's running the show? There is a standards editor, right? If there was a job guarantee by Amazon how was it to be monitored or enforced? Or was it just a "promise"? Wow, the newsroom really seems adrift. So much space devoted to petty political infighting and yet no basic facts about the Amazon situation. Guys, you have to do much better.
"But in grandstanding, they missed an opportunity to try to get the company to help address housing and infrastructure problems that the development, for all its benefits, would exacerbate."
Wishful thinking, NYTEB. That's not how it works.
Just when did Jeff Bezos buy the New York Times? I missed that story. Your paper should have covered it, no? Good riddance to Amazon. In a city with 4.3% unemployment, those jobs would have been a drop and they were not for sure. What was for sure was 3 billion of OUR money to a company that has paid no state and federal taxes in the last two years (at least). Please.
2
De Blasio can go back to targeting the specialty high schools schools and the Asian American community for not enough "diversity" in their schools. This city is taking the fast train to the 1970s.
1
thoughtful editorial and well-said.
Your snarky editorial in November set the stage for Amazon to leave. So don't for example blame a 29 year old wet behind the ears loud mouth politician for Amazon's departure. You should have invited Bezos to chat with your editorial board and offered to play an encouraging hand in heading off the inevitable. All it would have cost you is a few editorials. Virginia and the Washington Post (which Bezos owns) did it right.
1
The hubris of Gotham City has bode well in destroying it before. Being unable to control or even confront municipal labor unions, becoming super unfriendly to businesses (that fled the boroughs in droves) and engaging in poor accounting practices, it famously went bankrupt in 1975.
The names of State Senator Michael Gianaris and US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will go down in infamy as the most amateurish, communistic demagogues who alienated one of their own and preventing a left winger from Seattle from coming to NYC. The media cannot escape blame either. NYT editorial from November 14, 2018 was super critical of the concessions on future tax breaks given to Amazon and ended the narrative with a mocking comment, “So welcome, Jeff. Hope you enjoy your helipad.”
Yeah, what Marx, Engels or seventy years of USSR couldn’t accomplish became possible under the pseudonym for communists, “progressives.”
3
The announcement that Amazon will be paying practically nothing in Fed taxes on a record $11B profit shows this NYer that Amazon would have always acted in bad faith. Yet I’m the one who was expected to subsidize this corporate welfare further in NYC.
No thanks, NYT. Too many rich old white men on your editorial board?
Amazon would not allow workers to unionize. They said it very clearly. Glad to know you're anti union.
Yes, it is sad that Amazon has cancelled, and yes, the opportunity should have been handled better by all sides. Now how about we focus on a way that it is tough to be a small business owner in NYC, as opposed to the biggest company in the World: the ingrained hostility of NYC agencies to the small businesses of NYC, with a special Oscar going to the Department of Health for “Biggest Bully.” Witness the CBD ban/embargo, something the entire NYT, and specifically the Metro section, has failed to mention for an entire week. It is an unbridled act of hostility to the small food businesses of NYC, an act stupidity, based on nothing. The ban is unnecessary, unscientific, uninformed, and, given the ex-post-facto notices being sent out, unplanned for. Only in NYC can a food business be in violation of a rule that hasn’t been written as of the date of the violation. Speaker Corey Johnson recognized the DOH stupidity, announcing he would write legislation to overturn it and only the NY Post writes about it? Hey NYT Metro editor, can we now focus on the ways the NYC DOH, and other agencies, make small businesses feel like they are in a war zone?
from the comments, it sounds as though NYer's dodged a bullet that everyone else in the world is trying to throw themselves in front of
1
NYTimes Editorial Board:
"anti-corporate activists got what they wanted at a great cost"—
Can't the NYTimes see (they couldn't with Bernie Sanders' 2016 primary bid) that the "status quo" of the Democratic Party Machine is finished. It's over. I know it's comfy for you, but corporate and dynasty business as usual is over.
Perhaps, as the paper of record, you had better update.
Way to go New York......
That’s what happens when you elect people to Congress who’s only qualification was being a bartender last year.
Enjoy.....
2
Every time Ms. AOC and Ms. Warren opine publicly they convince the centrist voters that the left really is made up of incompetent socialists who want to confiscate their hard-earned money and give it to lazy people who don't look like them just like the nut jobs on the right say they are.
Those two egotists (and plenty of others) are The Committee to Re-Elect the President. Nancy, please explain to them all why Hillary is not the president and the orange box-of-rocks is.
They might as well wear tee-shirts that say, "Four More Years."
Unbelievable.
2
At the bottom of this anti-anti Amazon editorial bemoaning the foolishness that led to Amazon’s departure, there was a link to the NYT editorial of exactly three months ago that spewed the same foolishness. I congratulate the Times for not deleting the link.
So, the NYT editorial board's position is basically, "Yeah, it's nuanced and the tax deal was terrible, but we really shouldn't have scared Amazon away." Really? Excuse me, but Amazon ran without even putting up a fight. Amazon refused to negotiate, except with two Bozos in a room. Amazon ran because average New Yorkers wouldn't kiss their ring. Amazon can go, and New York won't miss them for a second.
Welcome to the cultural revolution.
Leave it to the Editorial Board to lament the saving of $3b in taxpayer subsidies for the richest company on Earth after the same company said it would oppose unionizing efforts from employees at NYC HQ2. The gentrification of Long Island City has been avoided (for now). Good riddance!!
Was it simply a coincidence that Jeff Bezos made this decision to pull out of Trump’s hometown only after Trump and his buddy David Pecker and the National Enquirer threatened to “expose” details of his affair? I’m not a big believer in coincidences, foreign or domestic, in this age of Trump.
Hmmm... Gun control appears to not be working in New York, because NY City and the rest of the state just shot themselves in the foot...
They should have offered to give Amazon "Tech City" in Kingston... It's been empty for decades since New York taxed IBM out of the state.
Oh well, I'm sure someone else will benefit from those jobs.
Maybe New Yorkers will get more food stamps or something to make up for it. LOL
2
This sabotage demonstrates that Alexandra-what’s-her-name and her leftist cohorts are just as dangerous as Trump.
2
"They should be held accountable..." Lovely slogan. Mantra. Short. To the point. Notes WHO-They. WHEN-in some future; not now. WHAT-"held accountable." MISSING: HOW? By WHOM?WHERE? Almost onomatopoeiac as a melodious riff. This mantra can also be used time and time again. For a myriad of unresolved issues. REsolvable problems. Both in NYC and other parts of NYS. Other states. Demonstrations in DC. At America's borders. Mass transportation problems? " They should..." Housing issues? "They should..." Rents? "They should..."Jobs? "They should..." Education...? "They should..." Racism...? "They should...Gender identity issues? "They should...? Immigration and acculturation issues? "They should...? Traffic problems...? "They should..." Health and medical issues? "They should..."The incidence and prevalence of obesity? "They should..." Children going to school hungry? "They should..." The sights of NYC increasingly for visitors, as its living sites become divested of working and middle class "homies"? "They should..." Political corruption? "They should..."Maybe, just maybe, ALL of US can...ALL of US will...Not just should! Uncloak ourselves from complacency. From being complicit; passively as well as actively. In the interim can we check out if accountability, as a social-health-commodity, is available at Trader Joes. Whole Foods.A local health food store, still in operation, anticipating a rent raise. Amazon and its Prime?Farmer's markets?Can the "unaccountables" be accounted for?
Well of course some of the ‘liberal elites’at the NYT might think that opposing Amazon was a bad idea because they are not so much affected by union busting and gentrification..
Immigrants aren't taking our jobs, leftist activists and pandering politicians are.
4
As a longtime Times reader, liberal Democrat and lifelong New Yorker, I must say that The Times bears substantial blame for the loss of Amazon and the revenues it would have brought to the city and state. I have followed the coverage and editorials closely. The Times was just another face in the thoughtless mob howling for Amazon’s departure. Now we get sweet reason in a feeble editorial? Too late.
2
Focusing on the text here presented:
>It seemed that few were interested in having a constructive conversation about how to improve the deal and make it work for the tech giant and the city
>a nationwide contest in which governments scraped together enough entitlements to satisfy it, even as those same cities struggled to fortify corroding infrastructure and stave off a housing crisis that has pushed the middle class to the brink and forced the poor into homeless shelters
>it’s partly thanks to the failure of these elected leaders to seriously address the subway and housing crises that Amazon was met by some with such visceral anger and anxiety
>If they’d better anticipated that reaction, they might have worked with the company to address these issues, and win local buy-in before things went off the rails
Why is vaunted "American know-how" found so lacking here? The US of A has long survived on its reputation for savvy business-sense, underwritten by a willingness to negotiate with the other party.
NYC, a mecca for the savvy, those able to make the best of a "deal". Why this failure then?
Amazon and the powers that be incapable of reaching a deal that might be of benefit to both? If so, why?
Ok, things are polarized, in politics ... but in making a buck (bu$ni$$)?
Sheesh, guys; where have your been? Locked up in the silicon valley? (Stanford so dreary, compared to other campuses, where students were not so focused on 6-fig $alarie$ (<: )
Ah, Bartleby, ... ah, America!
I reread your opinion from November 14. You told us all what a bad deal this was. Yet today, when you point out all the blame to go around, you have oddly left out yourselves. I will wait patiently for your correction.
1
To the officials who killed this, you have effectively launched a counter-reaction in NY to your white gloved progressivism. Last I heard, Democrats were the party of jobs. In NYC they are the party of NIMBYs, hipsters more concerned about the rents they helped drive through the roof themselves.
4
What’s $0 split by the millions of residents of NYC? That’s what AOC and the Democrat socialists have won for NYC.
2
Think...
Do you want NYC to become Detroit or Silicon Valley ??
1
Spot on.
Can’t return what you never had or valued. Good riddance!
I wonder if there is more going on here than first meets the eye. Apparently, Amazon was in the middle of negotiations with unions which the governor was mediating, when they shocked everyone with this decision to withdraw. They are not replacing the NY location and if it really was that fear of opposition (although, please, when has a massive company been sooo intimidated before by some local opposition, especially when they had the governor and the mayor on their side?) then they could have easily announced that they will reach out again to Newark: basically the same labor force pool plus more tax incentives. Many companies, including banks, already have offices outside the city just across the river. Yet, they are not doing that. So, I am sorry if I am a little skeptical that the whole story here really is all about Amazon being pushed out by local politicians and activists. Please dig deeper and find out what else is going on.
1
Based on this tragedy I see the economic polarization worsening. Successful businesses and entrepreneurs have already judged NY to be hostile to them and they will choose to locate their businesses where they are felt welcome. Over time, these new locations will thrive while cities like NY will begin a slow, inexorable decline a la 1970's when Park Slope was a drug infested violent community and brownstones were being given away. Couple this staggeringly poor business outcome for NY with the elimination of SALT deductions for Federal Income Taxes and the future history of NYC is foretold in the recent past. The curious current euphoria of the left at the outcome betrays an glaring ignorance of both economics and history and will soon be replaced by depression.
1
The word 'union' is not uttered in this whole editorial.
122
@michael
Thank you sir. I pointed to the fact in a comment myself but given the Times picked your great comment, let’s follow the logic through:
If they really believe you have a point, shouldn’t they amend their Editorial to reflect that?
Or is it just a little jest for its progressive readers who grow more frustrated every day reading the likes of Bret Stephens and David Brooks?
Unions are a hugely important requirement for a functioning democracy. It shrinking size (especially in the private sector to below 10 percent) is the best indicator of an oligarchy.
The cost of not having union representation in Amazon and it’s famous 25k jobs is enormous.
Thank you again for pointing the Board in the right direction. I am waiting for their addendum with interest.
13
@michael From the Wall Street Journal quoting Bill de Blasio addressing Amazon leadership.. “We’re a union town.” He added: “There is going to be tremendous pressure on Amazon to allow unionization and I will be one of the people bringing that pressure. I believe that ultimately that pressure will win the day.” This followed Mr. de Blasio’s recent declaration that there’s too much money in the city in the “wrong hands.”
Is it any wonder that Amazon made the decision that they did? They acted with their feet, just as many of the wealthiest New Yorkers are currently doing as the progressive agenda and its hostility to free markets (for labor and for capital) rules the day.
8
@MinnRick
"Free markets"?
That's rich (so to speak), when the deals are so much about corporate welfare.
18
The cost of living is so high in NYC, incentives were the only way Amazon could justify the investment. Maybe the city doesn’t need the jobs, or additional tax revenues. Any politicians that act like union representatives should lose their jobs. The city set high standards for minimum wages, which got workers more than a union could have for most workers. The ACA set minimums for healthcare. Why should Amazon face hurdles a 500 smaller companies combined would supplying the same jobs and expansion?
1
"Mr. Gianaris, who represents the district where the campus would have been located, had legitimate concerns over the arrangement and wanted more investment from Amazon in the city... Blame also needs to be assigned, of course, to a system in which powerful corporations can milk billions in tax benefits out of cities and states to locate facilities, without any added investment in infrastructure, schools and other benefits."
Honest question:
When did it become the firm's responsibility to improve infrastructure past it's own boundaries? its a failure of the elected officials to actually fund infrastructure with our tax dollars. Maybe if corrupt politicians hadn't turned a blind eye to the unprincipled MTA then perhaps the subway system wouldn't be a dysfunctional pit of despair. If everything is falling apart why are we mad at the business that's moving in? Anger should be directed at the politicians, right? Why is it the firm's responsibility to fix the politician's mistakes? Granted I understand in a situation when money &/or credits are given to a company upfront & is built on a mere promises (see FoxConn [more like Fox Con-job] in WI) but again this deal was incentive based on actual milestones that had to get done before credits were given. The state of NY didn't have a pile of money just sitting there earmarked for Amazon. It's not like the city now has a free $3B to spend on other things now, it was future credits off Amazon's future taxes that were to be paid.
4
"Things quickly got out of hand, though, and reasonable criticism of the deal was overwhelmed by opposition to the company itself ... Elected officials who identify as progressive painted Amazon as a rapacious engine of inequality. It seemed that few were interested in having a constructive conversation about how to improve the deal and make it work for the tech giant and the city."
Spreading the narrative that it was the people of New York, and not Amazon, that weren't willing to come to the table and talk over this is disingenuous. Ample quotes from Amazon, union leaders, and other community leaders involved in the discussion make it clear that there was plenty of room for discussion and it was Amazon who refused to talk.
Also, painting "Amazon as an engine of inequality" is not a deconstructive criticism - it is an incredibly valid criticism that needs to be discussed. Amazon does not pay a living wage to the majority of its employees, pays $0 in federal taxes, receives billions in government benefits and incentives, and has shown in Seattle (and now in New York) that it will fight tooth and nail against measures to correct or even address these problems. It was on the cusp of bringing in thousands of high-wage, technocratic jobs to a neighborhood where the median household income is $56,000 without any tangible plans to direct that money to the communities that exist here. Miss me with this "leaders who identify as progressive" gatekeeping and address the issue please.
1
@Grayson So apparently you they should be operating as a charity? Please provide data to back up your statement that they don't pay a living wage.. But first define living wage. They had no plans to tear down the housing project, so subsidized housing would continue to be a blight.
1
While many of the issues brought up by the so-called “Progressives” are real, - Slogans and Simplistic Solutions will not solve the problems —they have to be dealt with in a realistic manner. -
And Now that the so-called “Progressives” have vetoed the Amazon Deal, what do they have to show about it ?
Will the implied savings of $ 3 Billion Dollars really go into the repair of the NYC infrastructure... or make the lives of the poor better ?
The Deal, with all its flaws, would have definitely provided for the betterment of NYC for decades to come ... and would have even provided ancillary jobs for the poor- and even provided the revenue to address the real problems of the City.
Every family needs jobs in order to put “food on the table” ... and many of these companies - no matter what one may think about them- supply the jobs and “put food on the table.”
4
Maybe if Amazon hadn't conducted this whole smug, arrogant, condescending "convince us why we should come" campaign, playing cities off against one another, their move wouldn't have seemed from the beginning to be less about expanding their business and more about cynically exploiting their position to squeeze cities the way they squeeze the competition.
Thanks for an even-handed assessment of the situation. Everyone walks away with egg on their faces in this lose-lose, even if the so-called progressives are now celebrating the loss of 25k jobs (really 100K+ if all the secondary opportunities are factored in) and $27bn in tax revenue.
Yes, everyone is to blame. But what really gets me as a life-long leftie is how the opponents of the deal used crude slogans, anti-corporate populism and outright lies and misinformation to fight their battle. How is equating Amazon with gentrification any better than equating immigrants with crime? To each their own walls I suppose. When ideology wins, common sense loses. But this isn't just a college classroom battle. Real jobs are lost at all income levels, jobs that our friends and neighbors need to survive in this city. What a shame, what an embarrassment.
4
I chalk this up to lack of worldly experience from a solid core of New Yorkers. I keep hearing this bizarre theory that NYC is the greatest in the history of the planet, and that corporations should be begging to come there. You people watch way too much TV and movies, and read too many books about NYC by people from NYC. It's destroyed your view of reality.
I have traveled and lived in many of the major megalopolises in the world. If I had to pick the most powerful in terms of economic clout, it probably would be some place in SE Asia, the region, you know ,where most of the people in world live and that is growing the fastest, where a massive majority of things are made. Possibly Tokyo. In terms of culture and entertainment, NYC is far behind any number of cities in Europe. That's not even debatable. Quality of life is not even worth discussing. In terms of actual power, well, that's where I sit in the U.S. capital city.
Where does that leave NYC? With a superiority complex that is probably a manifestation of a stifled inferiority complex. You need to feel like the greatest, b/c you've made that important, and deep down you know that many, possibly most, things about the city are terrible. That turns you into misanthropes spurning the advances of anyone who could help out, God help them if they're an outsider.
NYC's self re-enforced narcissism is slowly killing it.
2
A $3 billion tax break is pretty shocking, given Bezos is the richest man in the world. You have to admit that. Maybe this would have been good for New York--or maybe not. But $3 billion is a whole lot of money to throw at a man who doesn't need it. I am surprised at how thin-skinned he is, though.
1
@Jane Eyrehead
You’re right that $3 billion is a lot of money. And by killing this deal AND “saving” $3 billion (in tax credits) NYC will forgo a NET GAIN of $27 billion in taxes generated in the future by Amazon being here. The classic definition of penny wise and pound foolish!
1
This feels an awful lot like the growing backlash to hosting Olympics. Ordinary people constantly being asked to work harder and make do with less are furious with multi-billion handouts to obscenely wealthy elites. Revelations on the same day as the Amazon story about Google's attempt to stake a permanent claim to a vast section of Toronto's waterfront are causing the same reaction
4
Dear Google,
I suspect you are feeling mighty smug today. You've managed to quietly and slowly build a very big--and getting bigger--footprint in Chelsea and the way west side over a dozen years. People barely noticed! And you didn't ask for handouts or subsidies. Bravo.
But you've also changed the character of a once very diverse residential and small business neighborhood, accelerating gentrification and the High Line effect. As the Times recently reported, your teams get food and entertainment right on your campus, so local businesses haven't prospered along with you. And while you are noted philanthropists, some local non-profits don't think you've been generous in your new neighborhood.
Maybe this will all blow over, but don't be surprised if the Amazon brouhaha results in increased scrutiny of your plans and emboldens critical neighborhood groups--and local politicians hoping that a "progressive", anti-business stance will make them the next AOC.
Could be a bumpy ride. Good luck!
2
The loss of 25,000 high-paying (and long-term) jobs will hurt. But what will hurt more is that NYC now looks like it's run by a shrill, poorly educated, anti-business mob.
5
NY's infrastructure has been crumbling for decades and its unafordable hoiuisng cost are nothing new either. Expecting the new kid in town to fix the city's problems is on-its-face misplaced and really just plain stupid. NY should have been fixing these problems long before it was a glint in Amazon's eye.
The arrogance of the mayor is breathtaking. Have him credit for working with Cuomo to get Amazon. Now he thumbs his nose hoping to bolster his socialist cred. All the while he is responsible for the lack of leadership in calming the critics, involving the nay sayers and communicating a vision of WHY he helped bring Amazon here in the first place. Take responsibility Mr. Mayor.
1
It's funny that we praise philanderer Jeff Bezos and hate Donald Trump in the same breath. I guess when someone has tax revenue and jobs to offer you, being a sociopath is acceptable. I'm glad his ex-wife is taking him for half. New York will always be New York. Companies rise and then fall, no matter their capitalization. Amazon is just another discount retailer, except a monopoly.
Bravo to Amazon for calling the bluff of these pandering politicians. You know that most of them really wanted Amazon here, but wanted to thump their chests as "progressive leaders". This time it didn't work and, as usual, the ordinary citizen will suffer.
6
In the 1956 movie version of "Moby Dick", Ahab has been become trapped by the rope of his own harpoon, lashed to the side of the whale and drowns, his arm flopping towards the others in their whaleboats. Someone says, "Ahab's dead, but he beckons!" Mr. Stubb rightly rejoins, "Enough of this! Enough of this!", but in reply Mr. Starbuck shockingly says, "After him!"
It sickens me, living in New Jersey, that after courageous New Yorkers banded together to drive away the Amazon leviathan (and its obsequious politicians) that our Governor "Starbuck" Murphy, heedless of his state's perilous financial position, instead dangles the same multi-billion dollar tax giveaways that have put New York State in a similar fiscal position (with no real discernible benefits). New Yorkers correctly said Amazon would bring overcrowding to transit and and higher rents to a strapped population that these tax giveaways could ameliorate if applied to current NYC residents. How I wish we New Jerseyans, trampled underfoot for decades by our own politicians, would rise up in a similar way and make similar demands of common-sense relief from overtaxing, poor political service, and deteriorating qualities of life in our state.
2
I don't believe for a second that Amazon pulled out because of neighborhood dissent. Are you going to honestly tell me a man that made billions of dollars folded because of some "Big Amazon go home slogans." I think their eyes were opened to a crumbling infrastructure, deteriorated transportation system and no one making a move to fix it. Citing the grumbles of the gallery gave them an easy out. With all the tax revenue and citizen money going into these systems why are they not gleaming. The reason is mismanagement. We are a debacle of financial misappropriation. How about this NY? Fix our city so that we don't look like a third world country looking for a handout. Do your job and manage the billions that come through your doors. Stop the pandering and nonsense. "Build it and they will come"
I'm not a New Yorker, but the Amazon 'deal' looked more like a raid and less like a partnership to me. Consider this:
In the West, the overwhelming majority of citizens have come to realize that hosting the Olympics is destructive and self-defeating. Cities that welcome the Olympics end up hosting a malicious parasite, and indeed any city that isn't a complete mess now chases the Olympic committee away with pitchforks.
Frankly, this isn't much different. It's interesting to me that the editorial board would pen a headline worth of Fox News clickbait. Amazon was coming as a predator. Only an unreformed Reaganite who had been in a coma for the last couple of decades would believe otherwise.
5
Amazon doesn’t proactively work to solve or collaborate on problems in its urban location. It mitigates problems on an as-needed basis for PR. Good call, NY. Find better partners. Greedy corporations run by megalomaniacs won’t ever be your willing collaborators in the better good.
Dem politicians like AOC and Michael Gianaris disastrously showed themselves to be ideologues pitching Amazon's entry into New York as a battle of poor vs. rich, i.e. good vs. evil. As a Democrat and a progressive, I still belive politicians need to be pragmatic and reasonable. Everyone from the Governor down to the city council members should have used the admittedly excessive $3 billion in tax incentives to Amazon to get the company to committ to necessary infrastructure improvements like subways and schools. The city governement should have played hardball to get what they need for their citizens, and allowed Amazon to look like a good partner if they did so, not shout and scream to kick out a company that would undoubtedly bring jobs and ancillary commerce to the area. So now the poor and working class are left with no chance at all to benefit from the company's presence. They won a "moral" victory that the politicians and activists wanted for them, but perhaps whal they wanted was a chance to be better off economically. Activists should learn to negotiate not just destroy opportunities.
1
idiotic politics turning away jobs and billions in tax revenue, all over a discount of $3B of tax breaks on a future $30B tax generating entity. Wacky.
common sense is so lacking amidst the far side far-lefters.
It should be a Far Side joke, one day.
25,000 good paying jobs turned away because not union jobs? Unions seem to care only about their own membership and not those other 25,000 beings. Awful.
out to lunch, far left
2
I'm surprised at everyone who thinks Amazon left because of mushy hurt feelings.
Amazon knows what it means to develop a campus and it's very difficult in an urban area. Without public support, without the city council, permitting and so on will take forever. I think it's great that people defended their city, but I don't understand why they think they were just "hurting feelings".
The message was, "we will make it so you can't do business here" so Amazon left. Amazon also left Seattle (this HQ2 threat) when they passed the head tax.
I commend New Yorkers for standing up for themselves, but let's not pretend we are playing some kind of emotional game here. We the People should negotiate the terms of corporate citizenship, for the sake of our children.
No warm fuzzies needed.
1
Sure Amazon would have provided some jobs, but at $15 per hour. If you think that is a living wage, then you need to ask the Amazon workers in Seattle what they are doing with all the excess cash.
Amazon would be doing the Walmart thing, that is send their employees to the welfare office to subsidize their pathetic wages.
Bezos and Amazon will find another location where they can extort the local politicians out of a few billion public dollars.
Ms.Pelosi and the Democratic leadership have their own “Tea party “now. Unfortunately this and economic security for those unwilling to work will not play well in the general electorate. The ultimate disaster is the greater possibility of 4 more years of don the con.
$24 Billion in tax revenue flushed down the toilet, after giving effect to the $3 Billion in incentives. AOC is on the radio fumbling through her victory lap because we saved $3 Billion in incentives. She didn't mention the $24 Billion net loss in taxes.
3
Why does one of the richest companies, run by the richest person on the planet, need a hand out from We The People? In fact the writer comes close to realizing this ... and instead of continuing the tired old narrative of glorifying the biggest exploiters, and feigning outrage at any who might dare to challenge the exploitation of We The People... they could have saved themself, and anyone bothering to read their oped a lot of time, if they could have just brought themself to eliminate the word "also" from the following:
"Blame also needs to be assigned, of course, to a system in which powerful corporations can milk billions in tax benefits out of cities and states to locate facilities, without any added investment in infrastructure, schools and other benefits. Amazon, one of the richest companies in the world, run by the richest man in the world..."
1
This result was thoroughly predictable. As the editorial board points out, the deal was done in secret and as a consequence human nature kicked in.
If you move into a nice bedroom community with a cul de sac at the end of your street, and 5 years later a mult-unit complex is proposed to be built on the cul de sac, you will instantly become NIMBY-MAN, or NIMBY-WOMAN even though it would benefit the common good.
Then throw in a dose of corporations are bad and people who buy coffee at their local roasters are good, then this is what you get. The temptation to do this behind closed doors is great but it needed some local buy-in. (Although the polls suggest if you are local and black or Latino, the. You were for it.)
“We have the best talent in the world, and every day we are growing a stronger and fairer economy for everyone,” the mayor said. “If Amazon can’t recognize what that’s worth, its competitors will.”
Bill de Blasio just talks too much. He should keep his mouth shut. He's been a terrible mayor - one of the worst.
This piece spends 10 paragraphs blaming activists and politicians that are listening to their constituents before it acknowledges that the mega-corporation that's spent the last year+ in an extortion campaign with every city in America might share some of the blame. Not to mention the mayor and governor who decided to negotiate in private while ignoring their petty feud over transportation that's left this city's infrastructure crumbling. This is a bizarre editorial.
3
You're completely wrong. Amazon ran roughshod over Cuomo and De Blasio because that's what they do and they're good at it while neither of those two have ever held a real job at a private company. All it was going to do was strain an already broken infrastructure and bid up real estate prices. Much better for everyone that those jobs go someplace that needs them.
You’ve got it all wrong. This was not an embarrassment but rather a victory for ordinary citizens who speak up for the rights and needs of themselves and their community
1
The underlying assumption here seems to be that NYC has something “special” or “unique,” that cannot be found anywhere else in the US. It’s an admirable position for a hometown paper to take, but I suspect residents of the rest of America do not share in that belief. Amazon certainly doesn’t, and no doubt they will prosper elsewhere. NY wasn’t “tough,” it was simply stupid - any sane businessman would have walked away from a signed deal when the signatories behaved the way NY did.
2
Gentrification is a great thing! Manhattan had slums and muggings and a lot more violence in the 70's and 80's. Gentrification has made Manhattan very safe now ... not a slum to be found and the violence has gone way down.
2
@Robert James Indeed!The Disneyfied Manhattan is extremely sterile! Still one wonders what happened to all the raucous scamps that use to play in the streets of the Lower East Side and Hell’s Kitchen and even parts of Yorkville? Gone! All gone!! Where? Who knows? Who cares?? Let us latte in peace!
First, I never understood this choice. Why wouldn’t Amazon open up a headquarters in Pittsburgh or Atlanta and really make a mark on the place? Second, I hope the politicians have learned that how you deliver news is as important as how you structure a deal.
Tax breaks are "taxpayer bribes" (Warren). Is that right? Who pays? Who takes? Turns out--the corporation bribes the polity
It's not graft. Graft pays people extra for doing their jobs--which they might not do on time or at all without the "tips". It pays for the non-omission of duties.
Bribes pay officials--police or other--for the omission of legal,
dutiful penalties--tickets are the common example.
Tax breaks are the omission of burdens (if not technically a penalty). What keeps them from being obvious bribes is no individual official person gets paid-off. Instead the payoff is collective--the promise of jobs and future taxes--certainly on employees.
But corporate tax breaks increase the tax burden on every other taxpayer. So yes--it's a bribe--albeit a collective bribe.
If all jurisdictions prohibited them, Corporations would then make decisions on the basis of other costs and benefits. More like natural advantages. m Where they will probably windup--unless the breaks keep coming.
Bribes for dutiful penalties OR burdens--to individuals OR
collectives--across the board--should be prohibited. Mere rules of the road--and business.
Bribing is gaming the system.
Unbelievable. At the very LEAST, you lost an amazing ROI, a once in a generation opportunity to expand the city and its jobs in one deal.
At the worst, you regressed, not only losing billions in tax dollars (that could've been used for redistribution or infrastructure repair) but amplifying an anti-business, anti-capitalism attitude that will severely hamper your city in this century. I hope its not the latter..
But really, I am shocked at the arrogance, myopia, and hubris spewing from these comments. Citizens living in the capitol of capitalism no less! I really expected a more level reaction.
And the bizarre strain of anti-immigrant sentiment is just plain contradictory. Aren't you the same group that wants to abolish ICE? Complaining about a wall in one comment and then writing about how Amazon might not hire locals! Just so silly.
Socialism is a dirty word therefore when corporations receive and demand it everyone uses the word incentives to the public.
Headline: "New York Returns 25,000 Jobs to Amazon"
No, New York is returning 25,000 rich people moving in all at once to Amazon.
"But that’s because the subways don’t work, the streets are gridlocked, the housing is unaffordable, the shelters are overcrowded, and the schools are segregated and often inadequate."
Right.
Bill de Blasio again demonstrated what a spineless wimp he is. He was intimately involved in the negotiations that resulted in an agreement. Now after totally underestimating the wrath of his progressive base, he fully criticizes the deal. He has no interest in the public good, his only motivation is protecting his progressive credentials as he nears his illusory bid for the presidency.
1
"But that’s because the subways don’t work, the streets are gridlocked, the housing is unaffordable, the shelters are overcrowded, and the schools are segregated and often inadequate."
Wow. Just think how an additional $3 billion in corporate taxes would've helped address the above problems. Don't blame folks for their lack of support for corporate greed, negotiated in smoke filled rooms at the Kickback Bar & Grill.
I think the fact that the deal was already made when first announced sowed the seeds of its destruction. Why?
First, there was no ongoing discussion over weeks/months where the public could get answers to questions and clear up what appeared to be misinformation or misunderstanding. For instance, when I heard of the deal I (an many others) thought the city/state was going to write Amazon a check for $3 billion! Ludicrous! But that could have been cleared up ahead of time with a full airing of the pros and cons BEFORE any deal was agreed to.
Maybe Amazon would be better in a different area of the city. We’ll never know because there was no input from anyone before the deal was sealed. Perhaps Amazon could have helped jump start fixing mass transit. Nobody discussed it or tried to negotiate it.
Amazon is now gone. Thousands of jobs and a NET GAIN of billions of dollars in tax revenue are not to be. NYC people are reasonable people. But they (like everyone else) need to know what’s being proposed and need to know all the pros and cons before something is jammed down their throats like buying a pig in a poke.
As for this “phenomenon called AOC” instead of working to understand the deal and making what could be a huge benefit to the city work for all...her sophomoric wisdom, spouting political platitudes, killed it. We might have been able to have our cake and eat it too, if only she tried to make the deal better rather than sabotage it!! An opportunity missed! A pity!
2
NYC sure came out ahead on this one. So much winning ...
2
I find this odd on the part of The NY Times editorial board. I guess that board fully supports the system where by localities have to pay companies subsidies to attract them to an area. This is a terrible system and NYC can afford to push back against it. The GDP of the state of NY is a trillion dollars a year, that of the metro area of NYC is even greater. But wait we “lost” 27 billion in tax revenue over 2 decades, utterly insupportable. The tax revenue prediction was probably overly rosy, they always are in these scenarios. No two decade projection will ever be reliable and the Times should have the dignity to recognize that. The 3 billion was definitely all being spent. And there really is no reason to believe that the NYC economy won’t grow enough without Amazon to generate as much tax revenue. Someday maybe the NYT will say something serious about these issues, today wasn’t that day.
AOC believes that NYC will now save $3 billion in tax revenue that can be invested elsewhere. She actually believes that. And progressives want to empower fools like AOC to run their lives.
2
As a Democrat, I worry about the far left leanings and how they may affect the elections in 2020.
1
So I learned after reading this editorial that everyone had a point and everyone is to blame. Thanks for the enlightenment. It felt like this one was phoned in. Pick up your game.
Will The New York Times Editorial Board like to address the fact that reams upon reams of research suggest that corporations never hold up their end of the bargain? Foxconn promised 1,000 jobs this year in Wisconsin. They're actually providing 100. The taxpayers of Wisconsin are never getting that investment back. Countless data proves the consistency of this pattern of corporate investment, going back decades. 25,000 jobs? Yeah right. New Yorkers are wise to the grift.
This sentence sums up what is wrong with America today: "..they (Amazon's critics) missed an opportunity to try to get the company to address housing and infrastructure problems..."
Is it the job of a private company to fix what our corrupt and ineffectual government won't? Would NYC be a better city if Amazon were calling the shots? A corporation that is answerable to no one and exists purely for profit? A corporation that doesn't believe in worker's rights? Would the Times support such a government official for office (who with credentials like Amazon's would certainly be Republican). Like our elected leaders, the Times can't rectify its desire to serve its wealthy readers with the supposedly Left politics that the Times pretends to support.
The fact is that the failure here falls entirely at the feet of de Blasio and Cuomo, who decided to broker this deal behind closed doors (much how a private company functions, but certainly not how a democratic government should behave) rather than involve the public. Anyone who knows NYers would have known that this kind of manipulation was not going to work.
But as de Blasio and Cuomo consider (laughable) stabs at a 2020 presidential run, certainly no one will be surprised when after their inevitable failures, they both end up execs at Amazon.
Very sad to see NYC reject the future. Apart from the bloodsucking financial industry, what industries does it have left? Garment making? Publishing? Music? Buggy whips?
3
“We have the best talent in the world....” Really, Mr. Mayor? Then why is it that Amazon, Microsoft, Starbucks, Nike, Apple, Nordstrom, are ALL headquartered on the West Coast?
3
I am not a fan of corporate give-aways, but there are such things as worthwhile trade-offs. If those 25,000 jobs really would pay $125,000 average, then with NY's high income tax of over 6 then 8% would have paid back the concessions in a little over ten years, without inflation, and on income tax alone. That doesn't even address the multiplier effect of spending dollars in the same community. If blue state leftists are too absolute and rigid to to make good use of that arrangement, fine. But they killed that goose for other communities who really would have enjoyed the return on that investment. What a waste.
2
Not one word about Amazon's negative impact on the environment; how it encourages mass consumption; propels more transportation and pollution; leads to additional construction of infrastructure - that all takes a toll on this planet.
Who cares about the environment when there is money to be made? New York Times certainly does not.
While amateur commenters can be forgiven for thinking that we were giving Amazon $3 billion, when it was merely a reduction in the taxes Amazon would have paid from $30 billion to $27 billion, it’s dismaying to hear informed representatives, like AOC, say the same - when they indubitably know better.
By the way, AOC was nominated by garnering the votes of about 9 percent of the Democrats in our District - and she was the only Hispanic name on the ballot in a half Hispanic populace.
1
So, if you refuse to give a 3 billion handout to a huge corporation that does not need it, you are being "hostile to business"? I am not just losing my trust in politicians and business people; I am losing my trust in language, words, and logic.
1
"May it also be a lesson learned."
The leftist Democrats in NY (and the rest of the US) will learn the lesson in 2020 elections and it is not going to be pretty.
1
Foolish politicians. I hope I hope Amazon comes to Mr. Bezos hometown. Very welcomed here.
1
The Philadelphia Inquirer points out that fracking, lottery’s, casinos, charter schools etc were going to save the day. Yeh...right...tell Atlantic City. What was the average New Yorker going to get out of this? Philly is enacting an ordinance against no cash businesses. They got a threat from Amazon which has some kind of cashless grab and go facilities. Does Bezos have to own all of the money on earth? Crystal city Va will be fine for them. If you’ve been there you’ll know what I mean.
1
I wanna know what the leftish plan is to replace this and help the city, and I are one.
1
Thanks, NYTimes for full coverage in your editorial, articles, listing of various NY views. So many different sides. I would hope that after some....days...Amazon and/or Mr. Bezos would write about what Amazon has learned from all this.
Like a product they sell, the ratings, reviews, should be given attention. Did this deal get....3 stars? What was the main problem with the product? Can the seller fix it? Was it the product itself, or the packaging, marketing (promises made but not....fulfilled?). Price?
When you host a product on your site and it needs review, what steps do you take with the manufacturer to make it better and maintain your reputation as a reliable platform?
Amazon has beat the odds in it’s formation, shown innovation in sales - indeed has taught us a new way of shopping. Where you lead, other companies follow. Lead now- tell us what lessons Amazon has learned.
So Amazon promised 25,000 jobs! And how many “affordable-housing” units did Ratner promise “blighted Brooklyn”? How much revitalization did the Steinbrenners promise the South Bronx? How much of the promise made to the working class Flushing Meadows folks was realized after a large portion of their daily bucolic refuge was sacrificed to the National Tennis Center’s occasional, US Open, wealthy Manhattan, day trippers? And why is acclerating the speed at which Long Island City is already gentrifying from rapid to warp being promoted as a foregone public good?
Moreover, why is it a bad thing to clearly suss out how many AVERAGE present-day Long Island City residents might be eligible for those Amazon jobs whose pay ACTUALLY approaches the vaunted $150,000 yearly Amazon AVERAGE! After all 5000 Queensbridge-Project residents could be working for minimum wage at an Amazon facility overseen by an Amazon Executive making a gazillion dollars and the average salary would compute to $150,000! Average can be a descriptor of a statistical mean at which the gruel to supp on is actually exceedingly thin!
So let’s not be so quick to demonize the Alexandria Ocasio-Cortezs who are attempting to pump the brakes on the march of this capitalist world’s Bezos Gods! While they ain’t yet Jane Jacobs neither was Jane Jacobs at her crusade’s beginning!
Never underestimate the stupidity of progressive Democrats. And they want to run the country? This episode will have a high visibility in 2020. I bet Pelosi is kicking her dog this AM.
So let me get this straight - It's fair to criticize the deal for all of its shortcomings, but we're supposed to let it go through unchanged because Jeff Bezos is a 'visionary'? Classic view of the NY upper echelon: "Say what you want, it won't have any impact".
Well, this time the will of the people over-powered corporate interests, and the NYT editorial board picks its usual side.
How could the Times possibly exempt itself from blame with a straight face? Your coverage of this issue, from the first sign of questioning of the $3 billion in givebacks was laughably biased in favor of those who were opposed. You never once, for example, calculated the annual income number for the 25,000 employees X the $150,000 reported average salary over, say ten years. That income number places the $3 billion in context as a generous but easily retrievable concession.
Okay, so Amazon is arrogant and naive about New York politics and culture; plus they messed up the "optics". And Cuomo is a lousy negotiator and the Times can stand the guy. But how will NY replace those good jobs? There aren't enough perfect Citizen Ben & Jerry's and Patagonias, to do that.
You should be gloating in this editorial. You got exactly the outcome you were looking for.
Jobs jobs jobs jobs jobs. At what cost these jobs? Are these jobs even good jobs? NYT has reported extensively on the nightmare working conditions at Amazon, in the culture of surveillance and suspicion in both the corporate office and the warehouse. To what end? To put small local shops across the nation out of business while further enriching the world’s richest man? NY needs infrastructure and affordable housing more than it needs this Leviathan and its garbage jobs.
NOW REALLY, WHERE DOES THE FAULT LIE?
de Blasio blames this on Amazon. Cuomo blames this on his democratic colleagues. Perhaps if these two nomads had ANY transparency (at all) with their constituents, the citizens, or even their fellow political "cronies", and allowed OUR input, a properly negotiated, well thought out "deal" would have happened. Instead, with their backroom negotiations, with no apparent input from any of the affected parties, US ( the citizens), well, you know the rest.
Who estimated the 27 billion dollar fairytale, and distributed over TWO decades no less? Emphasis on fairtale.
will the small pizza owner in Long Island city be better or worse off because of this.....hard to see how anyone can spin this as good....it wont change deals that Amazon gets from other cities, it wont change people using Amazon ad nauseum even as they hate it, the subways will get no better without more revenue....schools wont change as there wont be any impetus to force it.....but pound your chest by all means
"This embarrassment to the city presents a painful lesson in how bumper-sticker slogans and the hubris of elected — and corporate — officials can create losers on all sides."
Yep!.
"Your money or your jobs". Sounds like a stick-up to me.
You know what would be amazing? If Amazon decided join our community without the payola. Just imagine the goodwill the company would generate for themselves.
But, of course, they won't do that and it illustrates quite clearly how Amazon was putting its interests before ours all along. This is just a good example of "my way or the highway" mentality of our corporate overlords. It's time for corporate bribes to end.
It really must be nice when your city can hold its nose at 25,000 high paying jobs (NYC), or yearn for the good old days when Seattle was more Frasier's dad than Frasier. Come to the Rust Belt with your laments, and see how you do...
Two Americas indeed.
Good. We need another NYC resident not another overlord. Pride cometh before the fall.
I think its clear cut whose the big looser here...NYC. 25,000 white collar nice paying jobs. All those dinner's out at local restaurants, gone. All that local shopping, gone. All those state and local taxes paid by the 25,000 white collar employees, gone. All the other business those 25,000 people and their parent company would generate. Gone. And people get real....Long Island City is not currently a paradise on earth. New development there would be a good thing. If you're worrying about the lost corporate taxes.....first of all who would actually see that money well spent anyway, and second that loss would be vastly made up by the gain in taxes and business over the years. The cluelessness of the leadership is to think that a "competitor" of Amazon would come in to replace it. Clueless. What competitor?
This op-ed is evidence enough of NYT’s neoliberalism and connections to corporate, financial interests.
I’m not sure where Amazon got the figure that 70% of NYC residents want this. Perhaps I am wrong, but anecdotally speaking not one of my fellow residents that I talked to about this deal was thrilled about it. In general we were resentful of the notion of thousands of more people crowding our already overwhelmed public transit system, and not sure how or why the city could afford to give this massive, wealthy corporation $3mil in tax abatements when those taxes could have gone a long way in rebuilding that same crumbling infrastructure.
In the end, I’m happy to get Amazon out of our hair. Op-Ed’s like this show the NYT is just as focused on protecting the interests of the financial ruling classes as some members of the more classic business wing of the GOP. Huh, the things you know. I’ll remember to read with more grains of salt.
Wow. It only took AOC six weeks in office to do irreparable harm to NYC. “Let’s replace an experienced Democratic incumbent with a know-nothing who’s never held office-what could possibly go wrong?”
2
So some spoke out against a powerful billionaire overlord who helped crush small, medium, and large retailers and all the people he put out of work. We have to stop having Stockholm Syndrome for the billionaires and the breadcrumbs that fall from their oversized plate to American workers. Boo-hoo.
1
The single most important thing out of this entire debacle is not the loss of all the jobs but the future effect on other corporations who will likely steer clear of the lunatics who control New York
“Have to be tough to make it in NYC...”
With such kind of politically and union motivated resistance, and resulting corporate exits, the toughness will increase not because of meritocracy, but because there are not enough high paying jobs, Mr. Mayor.
Choose: Market driven economy, or Marxism for NYC.
Mr. Mayor, you seemed to be as rushed in welcoming Amazon as you are in bidding it farewell.
Toughness may have stayed in NY, but has inanity also crept in?
I'm sorry to see the NY Times Editorial Board so neoliberally myopic about this. Only time will tell if it was a good or bad move or, more likely, a mixed bag. The world is changing rapidly and there is simply no telling of Amazon will continue to be the big thing it is now, and there are already, just out of sight of the naked eye, so many independent and big name tech hubs forming in NYC and all over the fruited plain. I suspect it won't exactly be a wash, but that New York will come out on top, and that those companies more amenable to the well justified concerns of the progressives will find a way to meet them more than halfway. And again, I'm just so sorry the Editorial Board lacks the kind of nuanced, colorful thinking to understand and envision this.
1
So much wrong here.
For AOC, a revelation. Like many, I was attracted by her passion for equity and her persona. Stomping on Amazon makes me do a 180. Elizabeth Warren, too. Where is level-headed Bernie Sanders when you need him?
For New York, our brand had been “economic engine”. Now, fair to say it’s “build a wall”. An epic bad move far beyond the relative few jobs at stake.
We don’t have regional coordinated economic planning let alone national coordination, so the concept of “just say no” to corporations looking for advantages in exchange for job commitments is noble but so badly misguided and damaging.
For Stewart-Cousins, what a tragedy, caving to appoint a thug like Genaris. I was excited about the prospects of the new leadership in the state legislature; Cuomo’s “political malpractice” phraseology hits the mark.
The whole thing fills me with dread particularly because this makes clear the AOC/Warren wing doesn’t care about the middle.
1
It is time for every local government to quit prostituting itself to draw corporate construction. The promised returns don't materialize, then the corporation moves on to another location leaving damage in its wake.
NYC can't afford AOC.
1
An entire, scathing editorial about the tanked Amazon deal and yet not a single mention of Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, who did far more than any politician in NYC to destroy the deal.
Of course, Ocasio-Cortez is popular and a political shooting star so the Times might need access to her in the future. De Blasio, on the other hand, is an easy target and his political career is DOA so no surprise whom the Times chooses for the target of its pot shots.
Exactly the type of courage you'd expect from the modern New York Times.
I don't know if Amazon would've been good or bad for NYC, but *everyone* knows who was leading the charge to keep it out of the city. Which makes the editorial board's cravenness all the more obvious.
1
Was it planned to be good for the people already living in Queens?
Did it have their input, did it have their support?
Would it have forced them from their homes through higher rent?
Was it gentrification from the outside, that would benefit newcomers at the expense of those already there?
Was this a boat designed to lift the people of Queens or displace them?
Did New York do enough to promote the interests of its citizens that it already had?
Does De Blasio and Cuomo actually care about the average New Yorker?
Or are they like the NYT when push comes to shove are they Democrats for the 1% and sees color and inequality as well as the man famous for Starbucks Green with the same outcomes as a MAGA red hat?
I call "Shenanigans" on your headline. New York returns 25,000 jobs? Puh-leeze! You know as well as I do that most of the high-paying jobs will go to people who are NOT from New York!
1
All you Prime members who didn't want Amazon moving in, I suggest you teach Jeff a lesson: Drop your Prime membership and take your dollars to WalMart. Oh, wait....
1
Amazon got what it wanted, a shot in the arm from the Gray Lady.
Amazon here in Seattle never got to play the blackmail game. Boeing did when they threatened to leave unless our taxpayers, under the guidance of Patty The Weasel Murray, forked over billions to keep them here. Amazon in NY points out the need for national anti-blackmail laws. They will end up in some right-to-exploit state. New York should be proud.
At graduate business schools around the nation, those working toward their MBA's will study and analyze this incident for years when writing those term papers and trying to explain:
"How a City Voluntarily Commits Economic Suicide".
Dial De blasio, AOC, and Bernie Sanders for guidance right now at 1-800-killmycity.......Operators are standing by....
1
'Let them eat oligarchy'!! The new Corporate philosophy spoof;
This article shows that along with BDS, BLM, Antifa, Brexit, Corbyn; Sanders, AOC, Venezuela and Unions, politicians have no place in a truly modern advanced society any more than National 'SOCIALISTS' (a little Jordan Peterson Alt Right historical revisionism). Reality is that the more competent educated and lighter skinned executive classes need to run things and others darker types need to just do as they are told and butt out.
This is why, outside of Corporate USA, it is usually best to ensure the military can step in when folks vote wrong as they did before Pinochet and in Spain when the Communists threatened to destroy the land. Unions are terrorist organizations and the elections in Brazil and leaders like Sisi show the way (See how the military saved Egypt from the MB) by reimposing military corporate discipline, that must be run by the Elite and not by the ignorant masses.
Democracy is utterly inadequate in today's high tech world and all those 20th century rights and liberties need to be ruthlessly curbed. We need a competency caste system to ensure quality.
Of course capitalists should rule the world. You don't ask the hostesses to fly the airliners do you?? Democracy must be curbed to the point of not allowing the incompetent (95%+) to make decisions outside of their competence. The Elite are the Elite because they are SUPERIOR Humans. Most people are like children and need to be kept in line!
1
Well said, NYT – kudos...
Actually – outstandingly well said...
Now, any thoughts on how to actionably improve things – not just at city-scale, but nation-scale – heading into 2020...
No reason to believe this Progressive Paean going to play any better in Peoria...
Before Amazon picked NY and DC for its headquarters expansion, the Times editorial board said it was a bad deal in which New York was giving up too much to attract an already wealthy corporation. Now that Amazon has pulled out of Queens, all of a sudden the deal is an economic golden egg that was unfairly sabotaged by wild-eyed leftists. Did the Times discover something in the interim that made them change their minds about the deal, or is this just another case of "both-sidesism" masquerading as editorial impartiality, at the expense of logical consistency?
Good. Very little criticism here.
I guess the editorial board went back to check when The Times wanted to build a new headquarters and had the government condemn privately owned buildings, then wrenched tax breaks from a beleaguered city and got their property at below market rates.
To praise the loss of Amazon would have been hypocritical.
1
In case the NYT Editorial Board has forgotten, socialism has not yet taken over this country, yet. In a free market economy, competition is life's blood. Sure NYC had to give Amazon tax breaks to lure them to NYC, just as other jurisdictions under consideration did. However, even with the tax breaks, significant revenue would have poured into state and city coffers, not to mention tens of thousands of jobs taken by individuals who pay taxes. Let's also not forget the additional jobs and taxes coming from new stores and restaurants created to service Amazon employees. Liberals, not to mention socialists, do not understand business. A business needs to be sensitive to risk, and flak from the likes of AOC and her ilk represents risk any intelligent business such as Amazon would rather avoid. Then again, reality is not the strong point of many liberals or socialists, but there are progressives like Cuomo and DeBlasio who do understand the math. Amazon's departure is a significant loss to the region but as an Amazon shareholder I think they made the right decision.
1
Having lived through the dramatic renaissance of NYC from the dregs of the 70’s, it is painful to see it becoming the world envisioned in “Atlas Shrugged”, where envy of others (many of whom may be smarter, more creative or work harder) becomes the sole driving force for decision making. And yet, this is where progressives are leading us, today pushing away a company that was bringing $24B of new tax revenue, simply because they are so jealous of the success of Amazon or the wealth of its founder. All the other complaints (e.g. they aren’t building enough new infrastructure for the City, etc.) were simply smokescreen distractions that presumably our City/State government could have addressed using the $24B windfall. But sadly, it all came down to envy and resentment. It certainly doesn’t bode well for NYC over the years ahead if that is going to continue to be a primary decision-making principle.
3
It’s been some time since I worked in New York, but to be honest, it’s hard to put much trust in the politicians responsible for the state of the subway system.
I’m also pretty sure that Jeff Bezos is smarter than Andrew Cuomo and Bill DeBlasio, who remind me of a mixed doubles tennis team mired in a romantic dispute and still trying to score points against each other. Their closed-door negotiations must have been something to behold. No wonder Jeff Bezos looks so smiley these days.
Or perhaps he’s been on the subway lately, and had some second thoughts about the people he had been dealing with. Three billion in tax relief could be whisked away in a heartbeat.
Narrow escape. Big smile of relief all round.
"What a strange thing for the mayor to take pride in. It’s certainly true that you have to be tough these days. But that’s because the subways don’t work, the streets are gridlocked, the housing is unaffordable, the shelters are overcrowded, and the schools are segregated and often inadequate. " At the risk of being impertinent, and just how was Amazon going to help to solve any of that.
Living in Seattle 45 years and presently 5 miles north of the Amazon campus I have observed since the advent of the tech industry the startlingly one sided benefits to the tech giants not the community at large. They have driven up housing costs dramatically with little contribution toward affordable housing and driven out many long time residents notably the young and retirees. Would anyone care to see pictures of the many homeless encampments under the viaducts near Amazon headquarters. They require substantial taxpayer contributions toward the infrastructure that they require at the expense of older failing infrastructure. One would think that with Amazon and Microsoft headquarters here that we would have world class blanket internet coverage and world class public schools, not. They demand and receive special tax treatment. Many jobs are filed by people from out of state or foreigners with visas only adding to the housing shortage. The $3 billion tax giveaway from New York to Amazon was in a word "payola". Be grateful New York if they loved you Amazon would choose you without bribes.
3
We need to establish what is good for whom and what is the actual cost of the “benefits” a deal brings.
I advised hundreds of companies over 30 years on Mergers, Acquisitions and Divestments. Good advice always took both sides of the equation into consideration as clearly as possible. When the deals were transparent, their success was more likely. I can give many examples but Daimler-Benz’s Chrysler acquisition and the Time-Warner AOL “merger” are good examples of what happens otherwise.
The cost to the already suffering lower middle class New Yorkers of the move needed to be clearly exposed. The price of gentrification in terms of rent increases, costs of feeding families, even more inhuman transportation experience and of course non-union, minimum wage jobs passing as a bonanza in the presses and politicians orations had to be analyzed.
Kudos to AOC and Michael Gianakis for what they did. There are losses for the citizens of NYC but the gains are significantly more if this episode forces us to think holistically about investments by anyone in the city we love.
3
Does anyone who supported Amazon's hub in NYC even think for one minute that, once the supposed tax subsidies were recouped and surplus taxes raised from the (overly optimistic) 25,000 added workers, does anyone actually think for a minute that New York's politicians would have dedicated that tax revenue to affordable housing for the poor and middle class, repairing the subways, reducing congestion, green energy, etc.? No, these taxes would have gone to more subsidies and other tax incentives for developers who brought us over the past two decades to this unaffordable, overcrowded, surge in homelessness, and otherwise falling apart mess called NYC we're in now.
Had there been an ironclad agreement and laws passed that ALL TAXES recouped from the $3 billion subsidies and ALL TAXES from Amazon corporate and workers going forward were to go to ONLY affordable housing construction, public housing and infrastructure modernization and repair, job training, etc., then I might have been fully onboard with having Amazon in NY.
As it was, the deal was badly crafted and presented and it seemed like another greedy corporate grab for taxpayer financed projects, much like the NFL billionaires convincing cities to pay for their new football stadiums. The jobs they created? Hot dog vendors. Thankfully, we escaped former mayor Bloomberg's West Side stadium also and it doesn't seem to have affected the city one way or another.
3
Everybody I know in Denver jumped up and down for joy when Amazon didn't come here, where development, rents, and traffic are already awful. .
3
I'm glad this has happened. There's no way a mere 25,000 jobs should be paid for up-front with $3 billion in tax offsets. Amazon has enough money they shouldn't have to rely on tax gifts from any geographic area to expand wherever they wish.
2
Of course the rational thing to do would have been to cut a better deal, but nah. Let’s go with posturing and pseudo-leftisme.
Not even kidding; this’ll turn out to be every bit as smart as Christie blowing up the tunnels project, or St. Bernie yelling at TPP. How do I know?
Simple. What’s the plan to replace this?
5
Some people are writing as if these 25000 jobs and $27 billion in taxes were "lost" when this deal died. It's not lost, it's going somewhere else in America. That's the whole point--Amazon is going to make these jobs because it serves their interest and they will make even more money by doing so, and pay these taxes because it's their duty and it's the law. But they sound it to make it seem like it's a gift they're bestowing upon the luckiest city, and who will give then the nicest bribe to do what they will do anyway somewhere?
1
@Aaron It just won’t be NYC now. Some other lucky city will get the spoils of New York’s shortsighted ideas. The tax numbers and costs will be different in a different city but the impact to the community will be huge.
3
Hooray for New York,
As someone who has lived in San Francisco for over 30 years and watched our local politicians bend over backwards repeatedly and give away billions in tax breaks to attract tech giants while our homeless situation continues to get worse and and our parks and city infrastructures get trashed by tech bros, I applaud New York's citizens for standing up to a bad deal.
(How many of those 25,000 jobs were going to be for only minimum wage anyway?)
These giant tech companies need to pay their fair share.
2
@Jess Curtis This isn’t a low wage facility. It’s a white collar facility with an average wage of $150k which will easily support families and allow for additional jobs to be created in the community. What a waste for NYC that this is going away.
4
It's a shame because I can see both sides of the story. From Amazon's perspective, let's be honest, they compete for talent with many other top companies, and as such they need to try to get the best deal. There are many examples of top companies moving to one state or the other because they got billions in incentives. Don't blame Amazon for playing the game. Why would they disadvantage themselves? On the other hand, I get that locals were upset about the potential impact to housing / rent and already wildly congested public transportation. But, are folks now really better off? I lived in CA until recently, and every college graduate I know decided to move to Arizona or Texas because cost of living is so outrageous and there are not enough well paying jobs. NY is outrageously expensive, congested, and lacks good jobs, so the reaction of local politicians is what? To drive big businesses away? I don't get it.
3
This is New York's Brexit: a move based on ideology and principle that ends up costing massively -- here, New York's loss is $27 billion in tax revenues over 20 years. That's $27 billion that could be spent on making the city a better place for everyone who lives there. How will the city make up for the loss? It won't. The potholes will remained unfilled, the parks and low-income housing will remain unbuilt, and the schools will remain less well funded.
In the meantime, Amazon's opponents' "victory" will do nothing to stop the tax-break competition that fuels corporate location decision-making. Nothing whatever. New York will sit in its now much-poorer corner and rejoice in its righteousness. But Amazon and every other major corporation in America will continue to shop for the best tax breaks they can get.
5
When there is a vacuum of available information, fear fills the empty space.
With the caveat that I do not live in New York anymore, I think that Cuomo is off base. He reminds me of a sales person who blows the close and then blames the prospect.
There was insufficient community outreach to address concerns. Moreover, there is insufficient infrastructure to support a program of this size. To attract business, the first thing that should be done is to vastly improve the subway system - which is a wreck.
Moreover, I question if there is an ample supply of middle class housing to have supported this project. I cannot find any analysis on how Amazon might affect the rental market.
Maybe it is all there but Governor Cuomo and the mayor have not communicated with citizens.
It is really better if these Amazon jobs go to where they are more needed. NY has a big share of the jobs and we need to spread the wealth. Thanks NY.
4
Amazon paid no Federal taxes in the USA despite making $16 billion dollars in profit. Food for thought about government debt and why it doesn't go down.
3
@CK This is the government’s fault, not Amazon’s. The company does pay business taxes, real estate taxes, etc that would have benefited NUC even if they weren’t paying federal income taxes.
1
So New York lost 25,000 jobs "at great cost"? Oh, I dunno, let's do some arithmetic before we jump to conclusions, OK?
$3,000,000,000 for 25,000 jobs works out to $120,000 per job. Amazon workers are paid low wages so they don't pay much tax, but let's assume they pay $2,000 in State taxes per year. It would take a worker 60 years to make up the incentives Amazon was offered. A very bad deal all round, I'd say. New York shouldbe glad Amazon decided not to take up the offer.
4
@Wolf Kirchmeir what about the business tax that amazon would pay?
What about the money that these engineers would spend locally? in lunch, in buying housing?
5
@Wolf Kirchmeir
How about he taxes and fees associated with setting up the HQ in the first place? Property taxes? Sales and property taxes paid by the employees? Multiplier effects from the various occupations paid to support the HQ and its employees?
4
This is a false narrative. 3 billion was not spent. Rather it was an amount agreed not to be taken from Amazon over time. The Amount the state stood to collect overtime would dwarf that amount if it actually was spent. Factor in all the downstream jobs and the taxes they would have pulled in and it’s easy to see this was a huge blunder.
6
I live in the Bay Area which over the last 5 years has been invaded by tech companies and their employees. This invasion has resulted in skyrocketing rents, the public transportation is buckling under the massive increase in ridership, the freeways are bumper to bumper, the streets are overcrowded, the cost of food and energy are rising and the wages are inadequate.
The Bay Area is no longer livable.
New York City was right in fighting an Amazon invasion. Amazon is notorious for paying low wages and maltreating its employees. It would have added 25,000 more people to an overburdened transit system. It would have displaced thousands of New Yorkers and destroyed what's left of what made the City great.
It was a bad deal for New York City and its citizens.
3
That did not start just five years ago. Tech companies simply made all that worse.
In urban planning, there is something called an "impact fee." It is assessed on a development, like Amazon's, that provides a monetary figure for the needed local infrastructure improvements (water, housing, police, fire, roads, transportation, schools, hospitals) to accommodate 25,000 additional people to a local area. I can never understand why these figures are not part of the original discussions. That's where they should start. An environmental impact assessment might uncover even more need for offsetting fees to consider the damage to the natural infrastructure. Publicizing these figures ("Amazon is paying xx billion to provide infrastructure that meets the commensurate need") would be good press for the city and Amazon.
1
@Jim
But that would show "the base" that good thinking planning and government were possible and that is the last thing any rich person wants the people to know is true. If they ever figure that out again we'll have a new New Deal and real prosperity again.
1
@Jim That is based on the assumption that these 25,000 jobs are all going to be filled by people from outside NY moving in. Any of the jobs filled by New Yorkers will not add any water, housing, schools, etc; in fact, they may even cut down on the costs since the people will be employed during the day and paying taxes, not utilizing public services.
"The subways don’t work, the streets are gridlocked, the housing is unaffordable, the shelters are overcrowded, and the schools are segregated and often inadequate"
Every single issue would be exacerbated by a rapid influx of people & capital, all to increase tax revenue by 1.5% (2017 NY tax revenue 71B; estimated 1.1B ramp due to Amazon).
How many of those jobs lost would have been minimum wage with minimal benefits?
2
@RLW Bery few as this is a white collar facility, not a warehouse. The average employee at this facility was expected to earn $150,000 annually.
2
@RLW
You'd have to ask the already established NYC companies that would have done stuff like painting, landscaping, babysitting, food service, etc. for the company and its employees.
2
Perhaps this will finally make clear to large, wealthy corporations that they cannot demand excessive tax breaks in return for jobs. A new precedent needs setting. Why should the world's richest people get tax write-offs denied to smaller businesses and individuals? What gives them the right to hold cities hostage in order for job creation to take place? These businesses act as if they are setting up shop as a favor to others, not to their own benefits. Please! And, yes- thousands stood to gain well paying jobs. But how many people without those well-paying jobs would have been forced to move from their homes once they became unaffordable?
2
@Maia Brumberg-Kraus So NY has saved the 3 billion it was going to rebate on Amazon's taxes and lost out on the 27 billion they would have collected. Great deal.
2
If the City and State of New York were willing to give $3 billion to Amazon, why didn’t they do anything to keep the thousands of well-paying financial services jobs that were near-shored and off-shored over the past several years?
1
@Desiree That is something that you will have to ask your government representatives. I am sure it’s too late to get those jobs back. You still have to move forward.
If de Blasio and Cuomo want to cooperate on something that would REALLY benefit the city and state, how about fixing the subway system and MTA?
1
@Roy That takes money which could have come from Amazon but now won’t. New York has a budget deficit, not a pile of cash waiting to be spent.
1
Doesn't this rash action by Amazon put the lie to Bezos recent assertion that he is not one and the same with the business he owns?
Corporate boards are not prone to taking sudden action that has all the hallmarks of an emotional decision like this one does.
4
Oh well, ring up a score for the Green New Deal. Now, if only we can get rid of some of the big companies that already exist in New York.
4
Amazon had every opportunity to win over critics, including Senator Michael Gianaris. In a democratic political process, there are opponents. Deal with it.
Amazon's refusal to take a neutral stance with respect to union organizing was an arrogant rebuff to one of the most basic requirements of equity at work in the US political system, and a fact of life in NYC. No wonder politicians were lining up in opposition.
Maybe Amazon would have created good jobs in NYC, and limited the damage to low income people by gentrification. But there is still a bit left of a democratic process, and capitalism is constrained by that.
4
@Aaron Lercher
They can't limit the gentrification. the workers who would be getting the minimum wage Amazon could get away with paying aren't the agents of it. When has any warehouse worker, truck driver, packaging personnel, loaders etc job gentrified a neighborhood? The few dozen to maybe a few hundred coders and tech people they use to "streamline" and otherwise run the website are the well paid people who have the cash to gentrify neighborhoods.
Gentrification is not bad in itself. It is the effect on people who will never be able to buy that have to move out of their geographic homes where they have all the human infrastructure of their lives that it puts the real hardship on.
1
THis op ed highlights the solipsism of New Yorkers (exemplified by that infamous poster that shows the rest of the nation west of the Hudson as a small sliver of geography. I suppose thats fine as long as the extant industries (finance, fashion, tourism education ) can be sustained , but in the long run I dont see what could have been done even if obvious unions pressures,threats were overstated . The only surprise to me is why amazon even chose NY to begin with. In the past 30 years its clear one doesn’t need to be in manhattan to get a great meal, suit or even night of musical entertainment. I dont think NYC necessarily needed amazon, and the price being excited was high. But I am skeptical NY could have locked in the necessary reassurances re jobs and training and infrastructure that it was seeking, Nashville, austin, Pittsburgh even NoVa dont need that. NYC economy is a balancing act, and there needs to be much more intelligent proactive and projected planning going on to sustain it and THAT is the real lesson here. If NYC is to maintain its highly unionized, high wage, high tax culture, high costs of living , space constrained it needs to be much more intelligent. Creative and fiscally prudent to keep the goose laying golden eggs. It ,may well be NYC doesn’t need , or shouldn’t wantAMazon, but what DOES it need ? Thats the conversation that is needed, not simplistic rants about corporate greed, worker exploition, rent control etc. The old playbook isnt working.
5
As a journalist who has covered failed economic development deals for almost half a century, I can honestly say this one had a foul odor from the start: A bidding war created by Amazon based on the rule book for mixed martial arts cage fights. No wonder citizen opposition swelled. We need look no further from the Birthplace of Will Rogers than the industrial park just north of Coffeyville where Amazon built a huge distribution center, fueled great economic growth and then--as the city was trying to rebuild from a devastating flood--abruptly closed the door leaving economic devastation and dozens of empty buildings in its wake. We hope a new center it is building in Tulsa, 20 minutes from our home, works better but given its track record we aren't holding our breath. Your editorial identifies key failures in the process, but not the root cause--economic "development" has become a process where only bullies prosper. As long as governments continue to cave in, the bullying will just increase. Why should corporate leaders change their tactics when they work so well for the corporation's interests? When governments stop caving, good economic development deals for the long-term will start to become the norm.
1
AOC is the first representative I've seen who crows about successfully preventing tens of thousands of new high-paying jobs in her city. It will be interesting to see how this works out for her.
11
Amazon never seemed a fit for NYC anyway. I was rooting for Amazon choosing Detroit where maybe a company like that could help revitalize the area. As for having workers, you know what they say, if you build it, they will come.
It does seem though that the current governor and mayor of NY, separate and apart from this little fiasco, are not operating in general with the best interests of the area, meaning NYC, in mind. I mean, how can you let the essential subway system deteriorate so? Who’s getting rich(er) off that?
Great Job to everyone who refused to allow New York to give their hard-earned taxpayer money to the wealthiest man on the planet. He can use his own money.
25,000 job is B.S. Jeffrey Bezos takes care of only himself. He refuses to pay living wages, his high-paid executives push up real estate and other local costs and he is busy trying to refine AI to take over jobs.
Now New York lawmakers can do what they were hired/elected to do. Help individuals start true employee-owned businesses - with no outside investors to suck off the profits - where every employee shares equitably in responsibility, company direction and profits. That is the new business model we need.
2
DeBlasio and Cuomo should have consulted with the local community before jamming such a huge project down people's throats. Promises of jobs are too often unfounded or otherwise offset by increased infrastructure and/or social problems. In the end, all issues are local and it is time that the Times recognizes that. There's a whole lot more to the issue(s) than theoretical job numbers. In this case, the people won.
3
@LH
What did they win? The right to continue to live in squalor? That area is a dump- and Amazon would have helped transform it into a 21st century community .. everyone would have benefited.
Pushing Amazon out was the right decision. The City/state would do better by incentivizing developers to build a tech campus in LIC, but focus on inviting small tech startups and other firms that are working to create real solutions for real problems.
There is nothing wrong with giving tax subsidies to a company that needs it to create jobs that will have long-lasting economic impact. Companies that empower small businesses to be successful, that solve the housing/transportation/mental health crisis, and that cure diseases are more useful to our city. A cannibalistic company that is built around mindless consumerism and shutting out any form of competition is not what New York needs.
Even Wall Street, with all of its problems, became successful because the City worked to invite multiple financiers to operate in a small part of the City, which led to its prosperity. Giving away the house to a monopoly will kill jobs in the long run, because 25,000 jobs in LIC will lead to tens of thousands more in jobs lost to corporatization in Queens. Successful restaurant groups will be replaced by Chipotles, small banks will be swallowed by BofA - all of these small companies have office jobs that will disappear and be replaced by corporate workers in other states. All for what, so Amazon can fly in a bunch of tech bros from SF and Shanghai?
New York really can do better than Amazon. Jeff Bezos is a sociopath - we already have enough of them here.
2
Amazon isn’t evil. They have decided to not come to a hostile environment. Why the continued vitriol towards them? It’s over. Move on NY.
10
NYC was already unlivable
25 billion is chip change for NYC.
25000 jobs and its downstream effects would have been hugely important for NYC. NYC with its significant number of poorly educated youth needs some kind of employment/ entertainment ...
3
"It seemed that few were interested in having a constructive conversation about how to improve the deal and make it work for the tech giant and the city." This quote succinctly states what I see as one of the biggest problems facing the country today, not just in politics, but in the workplace and even in our homes. Today there is no such thing as "civil discourse" and until we find our way back to it there will continue to be increasing divides and unwillingness to listen to anything other than our own individual voice.
8
Statistics tell us the the small businesses, not big multinational corporations are the greatest source of employment in the country. In addition to the jobs they proved they help create neighborhood stability, part time work for teens and a range of local civic engagement.
In other words, small businesses are the real economic engine of our economy. So if our city and state politicians could find 3 billion for Amazon they are now free to spend that money supporting small local businesses.
With storefront rents skyrocketing and small businesses facing a daunting array of regulations, many which should be reexamined, there is certainly much to be done and 3 billion will go a long way toward ensuring the economic viability of our neighborhoods.
2
I agree that NYC cannot develop a reputation of being hostile to business, although many small business owners in the city would probably say that ship has already sailed. The benefits of this deal weren't evenly spread around, and Amazon wasn't really willing to engage or negotiate in good faith. They could afford to do this even without the $3BB in subsidies, but $3BB in subsidies for $25BB in tax revenues over the next 10 years is also a very good investment (second only to getting them for free).
Surely the biggest beneficiaries of this deal would have been those who own real estate in LIC, followed by New York State, which would receive the bulk of all tax revenues--which it may or may not share with NYC for use on necessary things like schools and transportation. NYC would receive a smaller share from the city income tax.
Most of these Amazon employees would probably live and spend money within the city, although as tends to happen in NYC, a lot of that money would be absorbed by the housing sector. It's not clear that local businesses would really benefit, as corporate campuses typically are designed to keep people in and working. Local residents who don't own their houses or apartments would probably suffer, and there would almost certainly be housing affordability problems.
A better deal was possible, but it seems like nobody was really interested in it. However, I'm still not sure that this whole episode is over for good. It may be only the beginning.
2
I see some people saying this will hurt locals who needed these jobs. But this is not a warehouse they are building. These are engineering and sales jobs. They will hire people with ivy leagues degrees or steal them from Google or Microsoft.
2
No acknowledgement that I've seen in this discussion of the ways Amazon is working for the NSA, Defense Department and Homeland Security to develop technology that will enable these agencies to collect personal data and identify and track the movement of literally everybody. In addition to all the legitimate concerns about infrastructure, growing inequality of wealth and affordable housing, there is also the issue of Amazon's role in creating the technology that will remove any real privacy that's currently left to us. I say good riddance and the city needs to address it's problems without the help of Amazon.
1
Mr. Bezos, The majority of NY residents supported this deal including over 70% of Latinos and 80% of African Americans. I imagine you were especially frustrated at the number of progressive democrats against this deal when you know, and most New Yorker's share your view, that Amazon coming to NYC would not only help Amazon but would be an enormous benefit to most New Yorker's especially New York minorities. What scares me the most is that Republicans are going exaggerate the hostility progressives have against corporations to increase their chances in winning in 2020. When Graham initially proposed to you that you buy the Washington Post, you were disinclined. It was only after you realized you had something to offer that you decided to do it. Mr. Bezos you said, “When I’m 90, it’s going to be one of the things I’m most proud of, that I took on the Washington Post and helped them through a very rough transition.” Yes, New Yorker's are very argumentative, its in our nature, and I can understand you desire to end the deal, but in the long run I am positive that bringing Amazon the NYC will also be one of the things you are most proud of. Please, please, reverse this decision and come to NYC.
4
I have nothing against billionaires, but if NYC has $3B to spare, it should be reducing taxes on the good companies and workers who are already here instead of giving it to Mr. Bezos.
The collapse of the deal was a victory for free market economics.
5
So why, after 100 years of success (as proclaimed by the city and state), isn’t the “investment” for infrastructure the jobs, taxes (taxes are always paid by individual, not companies) and other things a big company contributes to the local economy? Why does a company have to provide everything, and they hand over huge amounts in taxes? At least that is the argument many here are proposing.
If the city can’t provide the required amenities in exchange for the collected property taxes, is that the fault of the people being taxed, or of the politicians that just keep handing cash out in order to stay elected?
No taxation without fair representation.
1
Bezo’s may deserve to be rich more than most CEOs, since he actually built the company. What Bezo’s doesn’t deserve are tax breaks, from any city or state. People are simply fed up with the greed and arrogance of anti-union, anti-minimum wage and anti labor law executives and financiers. This is a message from the left, every bit as much as the Trump debacle was a message from the right. It doesn’t matter whether Amazon opponents were exactly correct about the long-term math in this specific case or not. Over the longer-term, it’s the overall message that matters. The average person no longer considers greed to be good. Reagan’s siren song of the wealth-centric 80s may be finally coming to a political end.
5
One of the laws of negotiating is you need to be willing to lose or win. Amazon was willing to lose, so they are going to take their 25,000 jobs elsewhere. Virginia says they are willing to expand the center that already is planned. Other cities are stepping up with willingness have the company com to them. New York, by winning will still have their problems with infrastructure, schools, rising cost of housing and infrastructure. One contributor today, indicates other cities should wake up and follow New York's example. Well, Amazon is awake and reading invitations.
1
In economics there's the important concept of "opportunity cost." When it comes to Amazon and its owner who's the world's richest man, you have to ask whether or not the $3 billion offer of tax breaks and incentives could be better used elsewhere. Why support an incredibly wealth company that pays its workers the minimum wage and won't allow them to form a union? A better deal for New York and its taxpayers would be to try and lure GM back to Nyack, New York by allocating those incentives to the production of electric vehicles (EVs) that would employ thousands of unionized workers with high-paying jobs while doing something positive for the environment. New York could go even farther by mandating a switch to EVs for all new cars registered in the state staring in 2030 while offering a a tax abatement to the first 100,000 of those EVs purchased by residents. New York needs to think bigger and better rather than help the rich get richer.
3
When is it time to say of these back room deals that "enough is enough"? Even a good deal, when negotiated in the dark, is wrong. Did NY lose potential jobs? Probably, but perhaps it learned a necessary lesson that openness and transparency are paramount to the process of using the taxpayers' money.
2
Call me a conspiracy theorist or whatever: I doubt this 25,000 high-paying jobs (i.e. US$ 100,000+) figure Amazon promised were accurate. That would be a realistic figure for the 19th Century, but not in today's highly automated, highly informatized world.
Either you're talking about THE campus (by far the biggest campus in modern history), or you're extrapolating for every indirect job you're, statistically, likely to attract to the neighborhood.
And, even if the figure is honest (which I don't think it is, but let's assume it is for the sake of the argument) -- then you have to question how much time would they last, given today's accelerated level of automation.
Assuming, for the sake of the argument again, that those numbers are realistic, there's another structural problem in today's USA: the lack of well-trained, highly specialized workforce outside Wall Street. Wall Street was already scooping the best of the best in MIT before -- only not creating a shortage for NASA because NASA was already being defunded since the 1980s -- and will likely to continue the practice in NY. To top it off, there're H-1B visas, that is: how much of those 25,000 "high-paying jobs" would end up in Indian hands?
1
Good for New York. The non-taxpaying Amazon really needs three billion in tax cuts paid by the citizenry?
5
Amazon should come to Chicago. Far lower cost of living for its employees than Virginia and NYC, great transportation, outstanding universities in the city and nearby, and TIF funding that takes the power out of a small handful of politicians.
Amazon should also do a little more on its end. For example, on the front end adopt 10 schools and modestly pour $250 million in over 10 years, build some nice affordable housing units and invest in food security,
We will welcome with open arms!
My question is still, "Why Queens?" Why not Rockland, Ulster, Greene, etc ??? With a new high speed rail financed by Amazon and partnering with NYS? Why can't Amazon put some of its billions into a venture that, like the LIRR a century past, would open up new spaces and avoid the NYC area bottleneck? If Amazon does not put its money to infrastructure development it will go the way of Sears in the blink of an eye. Jeff Bezos, are you listening? Do something that will make a long term positive difference?
4
Amazon would have been an active force in combating sea rise threatening Queens, implementing technology from Tokyo facing the same threat. And then there is the ever growing intensity of Hurricanes. Queen's residents could have been housed within Amazon's grounds for protection. 2030 is just the latest "by"number. The catastrophes could come earlier.
2
The void left by Amazon’s giant foot will be filled and presumably NY wants it to be filled by entities that are willing to accept Ny giving them access to millions of people without perks. So Ny uses its citizens as carrots for money to support more housing to support more carrots. I would anticipate a lot of carrots are preparing to leave Ny.
1
Sorry Editorial Board, I usually agree with you but you are dead wrong on this one.
Start with the 2nd paragraph..."shelters are overcrowded...gridlock...subways don't work...schools." This from the same people who criticize Donald Trump (rightly) for inventing crises in order to portray himself as the savior. How is this any different? You've made the city out to be the dystopia conservatives want it to be...and Amazon is the savior?
Its nice that you mentioned corporate rapaciousness somewhere in there, but the first half of the article makes it pretty clear where you stand.
Lets be clear. Those 25,000 jobs would have been created anyway - whether in NYC or elsewhere. We didn't have to dump 3Bn dollars for Amazon to create them. And if there's one city in the country that shouldn't have to dish out massive corporate welfare so the corporate titans of the world can disgorge some of their bloated wealth and actually invest in the communities around them, its this one.
One more thing - you conveniently forgot to mention the backroom nature of this deal, and the fact that it was designed specifically to get around democratic accountability.
That tells you what you need to know. When the deal's creators try to shroud it in secrecy and shield it from oversight, there's a very big problem indeed - and its not with the people who just wanted to have a say in the first place. Maybe you should write an article about that.
4
What is glaring in it's omission in this opinion piece is that the talks with Amazon were done almost entirely in secret from day one. Ordinary citizens and their representatives were deliberately kept out of the process by the mayor and the governor. With that much at stake on both sides, I don't blame the people for becoming angry and basically telling Amazon and all the politicians involved where they can get off one the deal was announced and Amazon basically railed against the idea of unionizing. Considering that Amazon already has a large presence in other parts of NYC, it's not as though they didn't know the lay of the land and couldn't expect some push back if their Seattle location and development is any indicator for what would come in NYC. I also think that Jeff Bezos's divorce proceedings played a part in the company decision as well since his wife is entitled to half the company, thereby making this deal less attractive to him personally. Finally, while the economic impact of Amazon has been considerable, I'd also like to point out that once upon a time Wal-Mart tried and failed to get a foothold in NYC using similar tactics. Well, they still exist and NYC seems to have gotten by too.
4
Someone should make a note and compare the development (including many new jobs) that takes place in Crystal City, VA over the next 5 to 10 years thanks to AMZ vs that which will take place in Long Island without AMZ. My expectation is that Crystal City and the surroundings will benefit greatly and the issues that exist in Long Island will remain - if not be worse. Politicians have become so focused on the 24 hour news cycle and the cute tweets (yes that would be AOC) they can generate that they are losing sight of the benefits that take years to develop. Obviously some other US City will now benefit from Long Island's loss and NY's "toughness". And the decision makers will be long gone.
3
Crystal city already has a huge glut of empty office space that Amazon will “take over” at first, so the building boom effect is exaggerated. Richmond officials- and their moneyed real estate donors who own these empty buildings- were desperate to fill those buildings . There is no doubt that commutes and real estate prices will grow (the later is ALREADY evident -ask any real estate agent in NoVa) that said, the decision to bribe amazon to come to NoVa makes far more sense than t the typical city give away to major league sports owners re stadiums.
@buckeyeJeff
Long Island City...not "Long Island"
The expression cutting off the nose to spite the face comes to mind here. Not only is New York still forgoing that $3 billion dollars in tax breaks to Amazon (there was no "giving" of $3 billion) but now we're also giving up an additional $27 billion in tax revenues from Amazon. That money could have made a significant dent in the $32 billion hole facing NYCHA or the $40 billion that's going to be needed to prevent the MTA's predicted "death spiral." And for what?
Workers could still have unionized - Amazon just didn't agree to remain neutral. And what major employer in NYC has remained neutral in the face of a unionization push? Furthermore, in a city with a $15 minimum wage, guaranteed parental leave, and guaranteed 2 weeks paid vacation, what exactly are the inhumane conditions they'd need a union to protect them from? Frankly, those requirements are driving small businesses out of NYC so we need all the Amazon's we can get. And what major company would be acceptable to these NIMBYs? Is Google or Goldman really a better neighbor?
While some of the 25,000 jobs would have been filled by outsiders many would not have been. With large campuses for Google, Uber, Etsy and tons of other startups here, why would Amazon provide relocation packages for outside hires if they didn't have to?
The gentrification argument, is nativist nonsense. No group has a "right" to a neighborhood and if they did Native Americans would be the ones to get first dibs not recent immigrants.
11
A correction on “giving”: either companies impose costs on the city, or they do not. Amazon would have depended on the city for education, transportation, and other infrastructure. Those costs will not arise now that Amazon isn’t bringing them. They would have been borne by the taxpayers if they had. That’s the giving.
The city is stupid to reject Amazon. The tech sector could use an infusion of tech companies, rather than always being tethered to ancillary functions in finance. For the first time in living memory, it would have brought a goods company to the city, a company with an interest in moving something other than employees and money.
But the city, the mayor especially, was supremely stupid in how it went about it. De Blasio ignored local leaders, as though the Board of Estimate were running the show. Clearly he misunderestimated how the community would respond, and failed to anticipate that local politicians would remember where their bread is buttered.
@James K. Lowden You're not completely wrong that there would have been some marginal cost to the city but closer scrutiny reveals that it's quite insignificant. First, the assumption that Amazon would be bringing in 25k new people is incorrect. With Google, Uber, Slack and tons of other tech companies already in NYC, there's an established pool of talent to draw from. Amazon isn't going to want to offer relocation packages to more people than necessary and few elite tech workers would move cross country without them either, so at most it would be something like 10k new people moving here which is a drop in the bucket for a city of 9 mil plus.
Furthermore, the campuses location in LIC Queens rather than Manhattan would have further reduced the strain on transportation. Many of the employees would have been doing a "reverse" commute from Manhattan to Queens on near empty trains and many would have lived in LIC or Greenpoint and would have availed themselves of alternative transportation means.
Furthermore, most of these highly paid employees would have contributed more in taxes than they received back from the city in services like schooling or infrastructure. That's not the case for most of NYC's new residents who are predominantly poor immigrants, many lacking legal status, who contribute little more than sales tax to the city coffers.
So while there would have been some "cost" these new taxpayers most likely would have paid out far more than they took in in benefits.
1
All states and cities need to just say no to the billionaire class. They already don't pay enough taxes, why heap even more tax cuts on top of what they already have?
The problem started in the 80s. It was called a 'race to the bottom' to attract Japanese and other foreign and domestic development in a destructive cut-throat cycle of tax shelters and incentives.
2
@Chris Morris The rich pay the vast majority of taxes in America. They also spur the vast majority of jobs, investments, and innovation.
3
The rich pay taxes because they have money. If you tax people without money, you don’t get money. You get revolt.
As to jobs and innovation, debatable fact and debatable benefit. In fact many of the rich produce nothing but direct harm. Betsy DeVoss is a good example. As to benefit, they pursue goals at odds with what most of us want, because, what, they have different needs. The rich are different from you and me. (Probably. Maybe you’re rich.)
Progress doesn’t depend on feting the rich. On the contrary, building a society based on Pareto optimal solutions requires doing things they don’t want. Curtailing their power and wealth is a necessary, but insufficient, condition for that.
1
Those 25,000 jobs Amazon would have created were projected to pay an average of $150,000 pet year. That's really good money. But that's hardly the billionaire class. That's who these sort sighted fools said "no" to.
It actions like this that will also go a long way to rejecting Trump and the Republicans.
The $3 billion that would have been given to Amazon needs to be invested in small and medium size businesses to create a diversity of employment opportunities. Attracting 25,000 specialized new tech jobs would not have helped the majority of New Yorkers. Creating 25,000 new jobs in a variety of fields... now you're talking.
3
@Non profit specialist. The 3 billion were tax relief on projected revenues, not existing money to spend. So you are left with less now. This is the risk of following mindless Twitter posts by AOC et al.
2
@Non profit specialist
Right, the tax receipts from 25,000 low to middle income jobs in "varied businesses" would yield the same as the tax receipts from 25,000 high paying tech jobs.
Not a chance
1
Your post illustrates the ignorance that people have on this issue. There is no $3 billion to give out to anyone else. Amazon was being given a discount on the taxes they would have paid. By turning them away NY is giving up billions more in taxes that they would have received.
1
There was no loss to NYC here. Amazon would have cost a lot more than it generated as they renegotiated with threats to pull out or scale back over the years to come thus further mitigating this mythical $27B tax income for the city. The proof of this is the sudden pull back. Here they have extracted billions in concessions people changed their lives and Amazon had done nothing to encumber itself. And now they just up and pull out. they lose nothing and have profited greatly from the free data they suckered so many local governments to give them.
The question of any sensible government, city, state or federal is to ask "What will you give us to let you come here?" not "What can we do to make our own lives harder to attract you?"
2
Yes, that’s sensible. But, it’s unrealistic and contrary to policy as practiced by state and local governments for decades.
What’s needed to end this beggar-thy-neighbor race to regressive taxation is a federal law prohibiting it.
States and cities don’t want to offer tax breaks and incentives. They do because they have to. It’s the old schoolyard excuse: everyone does it. If it were against the law, no one would.
By the way, Congress has the authority. Its power to regulate interstate commerce is usually interpreted as prohibiting barriers to trade. It can inhibit incentives, too. Two sides of the same coin, no pun intended.
1
@James K. Lowden
it has only been practiced "for decades" because the republicans repealed the laws against this form of corruption. It is economic blackmail and bribery legalized.
When they saw "free markets" they do not mean fair markets where anyone can come to sell or buy. They mean markets that are free of regulations that prevent them from rigging them to benefit a very few while strip mining the people for their cash.
We had all these problems solved before the republicans fixed us good under reagan.
Riding the R towards Flushing, you can hear Spanish, Mandarin, Tagalog, Sundanese, and Thai spoken casually by straphangers. Strolling through Queens, you can see FedEx shops adorned with Tibetan religious icons, have your hair cut at a Punjabi barber shop, eat dinner at a Bukharian restaurant. What makes Queens special is not any point of geography or any special feature of its government. It is the (often poor) people scratching out a living there.
How would Amazon have benefited these people? It would bring jobs, but those jobs would probably not be available to most of the people who make Queens what it is. Sure, the apparatus of New York’s government would benefit. Possibly some of the new tax money would find its way to MTA. But New York’s government serves the people who live in New York, not the people who have been pushed out. Who would be living in Queens to enjoy an improved MTA in five, ten years if Amazon planted roots?
2
@Jake Gillis - Those immigrants did not move to Queens for the government programs, they moved there for opportunity - Jobs. They are hustling to make money, like opening a Fed Ex franchise. 25,000 tech jobs and the $24 billion in net gain in taxes to New York would pay for allot of programs too.
1
I don't know why anyone would be certain that those 25,000 jobs will actually be created. History shows that companies who get these kinds of tax breaks usually don't hit their promised job numbers. And are all the jobs going to be "net new jobs?" Who else in NYC might go out of business, or have to lay off workers, due to Amazon's corporate expansion?
I don't know why anyone would be certain that Amazon is going to stay in NY for 25 years. Why not move, in 5 years, or 10 years, to another city offering a better deal?
Excuse me if I missed the part where Amazon promised to directly pay $27B in taxes to NY no matter what happens. Did I miss that part?
I don't know why anyone would be certain that any new tax money would actually go to improving city services, other than, perhaps, the infrastructure needed to support Amazon's presence.
2
I have no dog in the fight. From my point of view, it all came down to who needed who the most. Final call, New York, state and city, needed/wanted Amazon more than Amazon needed them. Why date the high maintenance prima donna when there are plenty of other options.
@Bob Hein
There's only "plenty of other options" on the same scale (or even 25% of the scale) as Amazon, IF those companies feel they can operate here with the cooperation of with residents and local, city and state governments.
Many of "these options" now see how hard it will be to work with these groups and officials and will decide not to be bothered with bureaucracy, red tape and pure arrogance.
Moving forward, this will be a big loss to the NYC tax base
Amazon in New York City? Packing more rats in a limited cage. Not for me if I am forced to live in an airless, concrete bound tunnel leading form a dark apt. to fight for public transportation to limited choices at the market where I am unable to shop as a consumer with choice. I got out of NYC in the 60's and don't want the same threat from Amazon here in Atlanta. The profit Bezos gets come at the cost of my living with less stress. I'll never see any tax benefit for the predicted"tax revenues." It will be a repeat of the Braves Stadium deal in made in Cobb County GA for the Atlanta Braves.
Amazon coming to NYC would have placed an undue burden on housing, transportation - indeed, the whole infrastructure of
Western Queens. The unseemly corporate welfare to one of the richest companies in the world was also a negative. NYC will continue to thrive. If the City can survive 9/11, it can survive anything.
2
Why has the US set up a system where cities are allowed to compete against each other to buy job creation? This is a net loser for the US, and the only question is which citizens pay for the loss.
If it were illegal to offer tax grants, and other enticements, then cities would have to compete by providing base infrastructure, transit, etc that would appeal to all companies, large and small. This would create jobs more broadly, sustainably and fairly.
2
I hope this starts a national debate about ending corporate welfare everywhere.
Corporations are allowed to donate to politicians campaigns and then they ask for "incentives" to move their businesses or to refrain from moving their businesses as they play one government against another.
I don't know how this could be done legally but it needs to be done on a national level.
OBTW, I am not anti-business, in fact I'm pro business.
When a company like Amazon gets tax breaks it is just shifting its tax burden to other business and individuals.
3
Am I totally missing something here? This deal was predicated on the idea that Amazon would be able to forecast their nyc labor demands over the course of ten years in the face of 1. A likely recession next year if the corporate debt bubble breaks, 2. The possibility of bipartisan antitrust action breaking the company into pieces, and 3. Increased focus on web presence from other large retailers.
Now, instead of providing some portion of 25,000 jobs based on year to year economic needs in exchange for three billion dollars, they're going to expand their current offices as much as year to year economic needs dictate in exchange for nothing. Which is exactly the same thing?
1
If NYC didn’t want this deal, they shouldn’t have applied for it. Now they’ve robbed some other city of the benefits, for nothing.
2
If Amazon didn’t want to deal with New Yorkers, they shouldn’t have tried to insert themselves into NYC.
1
With everyone so quick to blame "left-wing zealots" for Amazon's decision to to drop New York from its expansion plans, the fact that the city was going to shell out billions in tax incentives to one of the most prosperous companies on the planet, seems to get lost in the din.
As for those 25,000 jobs, no doubt the majority of them were only going to be minimum wage, with the best-paying ones already reserved at the top.
And then there was the effect it would have on a largely working-class community and an already over-burdened transit system -- not to mention the utter secrecy with which the Governor and Mayor went about wooing them in the first place.
So, all in all it's probably best that Amazon is going elsewhere and maybe, just maybe Mr. Cuomo and Mr. deBlasio should be going with them.
3
@N. Smith Did someone not read any of the news related to this deal. The average wage of the 25,000 new Amazon employees was expected to be $150,000. That’s along way from minimum wage.
2
@N. Smith this was a technology center, not a wharehouse. Salaries for most would be well over 100,000. Educated, highly paid people who could have made good things happen for Long Island City. Massive fail
1
From the opponents of the deal, I didn't hear a whiff of serious cost-benefit analysis. I just heard a lot of demagoguery. The new radical left in my view is every bit as bad as camp MAGA on the right. The only difference is that their bases have different fears and groups they hate so their instigators have to use different means to get them whipped up into an irrational frenzy.
Imagine, if you will, the deal goes through: you now have a large number of new people (not everyone hired will be a local NY'er obviously) paying New York's exorbitant city and state taxes, buying goods and paying its exorbitant sales tax, buying property and increasing real estate prices, which in turn means greater revenue from NY's punishing real estate taxes, etc. All of this money (which would more than offset the tax breaks offered to Amazon) could be re-deployed as the state and mayor saw fit, including to fix an abysmal public transportation system. Now it can't. On the bright side, this fiasco will allow the most vocal members on the left to celebrate their grand victory of destroying 25,000 high paying jobs on Twitter!
8
I somewhat torn between the two sides. On the one hand you have a company which received $.50 of every dollar spent on line for Christmas looking for a tax break. Also the odds are that one more part of NYC real estate would be priced out of reach for the middle class.
On the other hand you lose the opportunity to realize 9x the revenue from your investment. Either way it would seem a more sensible approach would have been a renegotiation of the deal.
I consider myself a liberal democrat but I find that these so called “socialist “ democrats seem to be unwilling to anyone who voices views different then theirs. If we pander to the extremes of either side then companies such as Amazon will avoid the city and we all will be the worse because of them.
3
This editorial seems very short-sighted. Amazon offered a very bad deal. The editorialists seem to think that Amazon should be required to invest in housing and infrastructure improvements, investments that would completely negate the company's benefits from the $3 billion bribe. Amazon, in its proposal, completely ignored the impact it would have on the existing community. Neither the governor, nor the mayor, nor Amazon bothered to look beyond the dollar signs. They paid the price for their sloppiness.
1
It's the new American phenomena called the Culture of Complaint. It's not a left or right thing. Or liberal or Conservative. Or Democrat or Republican. Quite simply people have become over provincialized which translates into this: Unless some phenomena or condition meets one's hopes or desires 100% it's rejected.
5
This is what happens when a company becomes a monopoly.
1
I’m hoping that Amazon is secretly negotiating with Nassau or Suffolk counties for their expansion. There’s plenty of room and housing and smarts. I doubt there would be any resistance in these suburbs... biggest issue for the state is to fix that wonderful commuter train but that’s about it.
You literally couldn’t pay Amazon enough to locate on the island. They simply don’t want to be there.
1
This is worth looking at from a Prospect Theory perspective. (Kahneman & Tversky). That theory explicitly states that you bundle smaller losses with bigger gains to eliminate the perceived loss.
Why? Empirical results show that people weight losses as much as 10x as great as gains. The $3b loss sticks in their craw.
Bundle the $3b tax loss with the $10b, $20b or $30b tax gain (depending on the economic multiplier of the 25,000 new jobs.)
Let's take the lowest, and least likely $10b figure. Now you talk about a $7b benefit to the city.
This is just a simple "framing" question. Why did the city ever allow opponents to set the frame, and emphasize the $3b loss? All along they should have been discussing the $7b overall gain.
The cup that Amazon is giving you is 70% full. Not 30% empty. In reality it was probably more like 90% full.
4
I tried to read about what the reaction in Virginia is to the announcement. It seemed that they were looking at this, as a generalization, as their gain at the expense of New York. From afar, the part that seems the saddest is that they were going into a neighborhood that could have used the help. Also, if I understand the deal correctly, this was not billions up front from New York with the payback coming later. Much of the money was future reductions in taxes. In addition, it is always difficult to be overly dependent on one kind of industry, so, this might have helped with diversification. It looks like a loss to NY, but, I do not live there so I may not understand the deal fully.
1
From afar, it’s very hard to appreciate the economic harm that sticking Amazon into the middle of NYC would cause to the tens of thousands of New Yorkers who’d pass their “HQ2” every day and seeing new transplants going to work at all those new jobs.
While other places struggle to lure investment, NYC struggles to contain gentrification and the rising cost of living. It is literally the opposite of what most American cities are dealing with, which can make it very hard to appreciate from afar.
1
Polls? conducted "showed wide support"?
If nothing has been learned about the "polls" one thing should be...."polls" don't matter to the people. The people who were out there were likely the fraction of people who were dismayed by the "deal" that Amazon was offering NYC.
The people spoke in 2016 and showed how important it is to be careful when speaking about "polls".
I keep reading "25,000" and "high-paying jobs". If that can be so easily printed, what is so difficult for the commitment by Amazon to the 25,000 jobs and the actual pay rate commitment to also be printed?
Apparently Amazon would not guarantee nor publicize these specifics? So NYC never had the opportunity to determine if the deal was worth the paper it was written on?
If that's the case, that's Amazon's arrogance and a setup for the future where Amazon benefits while the people of NYC would not.
Poor communication.
An irony: Amazon can't enjoy corporate welfare and do whatever it wants because of activists and politicians...who have been mobilized precisely because of companies like Amazon and the rapaciousness they represent.
Amazon suffers from a self-awareness deficit. Like it or not, having a CEO worth hundreds of billions of dollars is a PR liability. Their failure to understand this is corporate groupthink and delusion at its purest.
As long as there are CEOs worth as much as Bezos, and as long as he has the gall to extract cruel and over-the-top demands from cities that are supposed grovel at his feet, you can expect a robust grassroots counter-response from people and politicians who want to stand athwart the suspect values a company like Amazon represents.
Amazon is unique these days in looking for sites to build major technology centers. There are plenty of big companies looking for space to build warehousing and distribution centers that provide plenty of jobs that pay in the vicinity of minimum wages, but not technology centers.
Amazon, not only promised 25,000 jobs where the average employee would be generating $50,000 in taxes but would also have served to not only draw higher paying associated technology jobs to the area but also provide a destination for the technology graduates produced in NY that now mostly have to leave the area.
Instead, too many saw it as a cash cow for their local projects and "vision", a New York tradition formerly phrased as "Who do we have to pay off to get this project under way?"
This Amazon debacle illustrates why the likes of Donald Trump found New York a perfect venue for his view of business.
2
I think there is also another side to this issue, it would have been smart for Amazon to approach this whole project with less arrogance and more sensitivity to the community and spent some time going into open meetings with neighborhood groups to sell your proposal and educate the people on how this project would have benefited them, and be a win, win for the them and their community.
4
NYC has now rejected the world’s #1 and #2 retailers. No Walmart stores and now no 25,000 new Amazon jobs. Strange indeed for a city that bills itself as the world’s commercial center.
3
I think most NYers would choose NYC’s policies over Rincon’s.
1
It is very simple to me. People are fed-up with the billions in incentives being offered to a company who makes billions, pays little or no taxes, and treats employees poorly. How about building some low-income housing with the return of the 87 million?
2
I'm a life long Liberal Democrat, and I can appreciate AOC's exuberance in her being elected, but I think she should take a little time for self reflection and realize it may be in her and the Democratic Parties best long term interest if she just take a back seat for a while, and listen, learn and educate herself on all sides of the issues she is pushing....spend a little, no a lot of time sitting down with Nancy Pelosi and learn how to be an effective Congresswoman and Legislature; otherwise you may be the face of what returns Donald Trump to the Whitehouse in 2020.
Instead of railing against Amazon Jobs, you would have better served your constituents who by all polling would have benefited greatly from those jobs Amazon would have brought to your district; by meeting with Amazon Representatives, Jeff Bezos and discussed ways they could do it to make it mutual agreeable integration within the neighborhood and job location, and the outcome would have been a win, win result for everyone.
AOC's needs to understand there is a big difference between being wet behind the ears and maturity in politics, and she doesn't want to be a Liberal or Progressive who is no different than Donald Trump.
I think it would be smart and show a lot of substance if AOC, would without any fanfare ask to sit-down with Amazon and their representatives and try to salvage this whole plan to which would be mutual benefit everyone, work it out and prove that you can work to bring jobs to your district.
11
@Chico: Municipalities were undercutting each other’s tax bases to fill empty factories when the exodus of manufacturing from the US took off under Reagan.
The US Congress has apparently abrogated its Commerce Clause powers to legislate destructive internecine economic competions out of existence.
If I were AOC, I would never forget that I has won all this fame on an election fluke where only 12% of eligible people voted.
2
@Chico best comment ever. I too am a liberal Democrat, but AOC rubs me the wrong way. She is way too arrogant for her own good, and was one of the group of freshman congress people who wanted to oust Nancy Pelosi. Imagine what would have happened if they had their way! I predict that some years from now AOC will be on the cover of Vogue, attending red carpet events and pretty much living the life, forgetting her 'proletariat' past. This is just her stepping stone to fame. In the meantime, the people from the Queens Bridge housing project who were looking forward to the Amazon deal (and who wrote a scathing letter yesterday expressing their disappointment ) will be left hanging. Good work camarada!
2
What if you put just a fraction of those billions into growing local businesses and some infrastructure?
New York City should be a prime location for tech companies to develop a state of the art signaling system to add capacity to the already overcrowded subways.
1
@Steve Bolger
Wouldn't the eventual tax revenues brought in by companies like Amazon have gone a long way to helping fund and update the aging subways?
4
@Chico One of the benefits that Amazon had discussed in the deal was a $650 million investment in transportation and infrastructure (according to NY1). Why wasn't this point mentioned to the local communities? I think there was a significant amount of misinformation being pushed by the deal's detractors.
2
It's the age old problem. For the far left nothing is always preferable to not enough.
7
The one argument many people make here, namely that Amazon underpays its workers - which is obviously true - , doesn't apply to their white collar Headquarter employees.
The planned Arlington, VA headquarter - apart form hiring janitors and other hourly wage employees - is creating 25,000 jobs for white collar and highly educated workers at an average of $150,000 per job.
Yes, we are afraid of the mounting traffic in our area, and the tax cuts gift to Amazon, but a large number of buildings in Crystal City that used to be government office building have been empty for years, and are now turned into apartment buildings. Amazon's HQ employees can walk or bike to work. And those living a bit farther out can use the Metro with two stops within a couple of miles.
There will be a pedestrian bridge from Crystal city over a railway Reagan National Airport, when walking takes less time than taking a taxi.
Virginia Tech is building a new campus called the Innovation Campus a few miles away that will focus on computer and software engineering majors, and 500 master's degree students are expected fo be studying there within five years. A new Metro station has already been approved for that campus.
Ergo, depending on the city, Amazon coming to town should not always been seen as the devil coming to town.
11
Google came to the west side of Manhattan without any fanfare and any tax handouts. The editorial did not mention that city officials from Seattle came here to inform city council members what happened there with similar companies moving in then driving the rents up and creating homelessness. Look at San Francisco I was there in 1997, and there was a lot of homeless people milling around. Since then it's worse. Government workers can't even afford to live there.
Bruce Ratner's Barclay's Center project in Brooklyn made many promises. Even construction workers supported the project. Then I remember how they were bitter that the jobs they were promised never materialized. They also promised affordable housing that has yet to materialize. All the housing being built are luxury housing with tax money that allocates a small percentage of the apartments for the very poor. I tried to get one of those apartments downtown Brooklyn but was told I made too much which is laughable. Even more laughable is the idea that some of those jobs would have gone to people in the Queensbridge Houses. More likely most of those jobs would have gone to people from out of state -like Ohio- who would move here then get together as roommates then pay some greedy landlords outrageous rents. That would push out long time tenants. We have seen this before. I think we give away a lot of tax revenue to those who build luxury apartments while still having an ever growing homeless population.
2
Every time I pass Long Island City on the train, it seems another high-rise condominium is being built. The neighborhood is already extremely gentrified, and as developers continue to move in, it will only get worse. I just hope all the outrage activists and politicians have towards Amazon will be redirected at the developers who are dramatically changing L.I.C. But I am afraid it might be too late.
6
If you think negotiations would've led to Amazon giving up its billion-dollar handout, guaranteeing a living wage for its workers, investing in the city and its schools, and doing something substantial to address homelessness, there's a bridge in St. Louis I think you might be interested in...
When one week Donald Trump dismissively tells upstate New Yorkers "If you want a job, you'll have to leave New York" and the next week New York City residents drive off 25,000 high-paying jobs and billions in city and state revenue, it's hard to feel optimistic about our state's economic future going forward.
6
Not only do I hail from Seattle, I helped Amazon build its tiny warehouse office when only five people worked there. Jeff and Mackenzie Bezos were two of them.
The idea that any company has to give jobs to New Yorkers who have not gotten it together to find one yet in their lives is absurd. What sort of progressive privilege is this? I'm lazy, this is my turf, hand me a check. These are the people, de Blasio - who have NOT made it in New York.
5
@Brooklyn actually, the residents of the nearby housing project wrote a scathing letter yesterday, upset and angry at the politicians who torpedoed this deal. These people weren't looking for a handout, but for a way out, and the AOC's of the world ruined it for them. Don't blame the community, blame the politicians.
2
In feeding at the public trough, Amazon is no different from the NFL, either in locating franchises or the Super Bowl sites. Back when Houston hosted the SB, supposedly one of the deciding factors during the bid was how much the phrase "...at no cost to the NFL" amounted to.
3
It is easy to think Amazon in Queens is a great idea if you aren't on the ground facing the prospect of San Francisco- or Seattle- style housing and cultural disasters. New York City's economy can get by without Amazon (as it has for 400 years) and NYC residents will prpbably still be able to live in their neighborhoods twenty years from now. This isn't NIMBYism or parchialism. The protesters were realistic about what the real costs are; they don't live in the fantasy world of the Amazon glow.
5
If nothing else, Amazon's announcement exposes their previous contest to see where their new HQ would land as a lie. If places other than Crystal City, VA and NYC were in contention, Amazon would simply have turned to their next choice and announced it would build there. But from the beginning, Amazon wanted to build outside DC and in NYC. The contest was only a way to maximize their tax breaks.
2
Amazon works. NYC --- not so much. Not a great match.
As for this mayor caring for his constituents, all of them that is, there is no sign of that.
5
Amazon just pick any sun belt city and you will be welcome with open arms. Charlotte, Richmond, Atlanta, Myrtle Beach, Jacksonville Fl - take your pick.
1
I can see that corporate arrogance is off-putting, but that local politicians "berated the company’s executives in a City Council hearing and at rallies" suggests to me that Amazon is not the only arrogance displayed. New Yorkers must know that an anti-business climate can destroy a local economy. Look at Buffalo. Consider Detroit. No corporate arrogance left, just urban squalor. You can drive everybody out but the idealists and the progressives as they wait to do business with nicer people like turnip farmers and drug dealers. Let the Communists dance in the streets and congratulate themselves; keep it up and you can rename the area, Little Venezuela!
5
One of the most ridiculous editorials that ever marred the pages on the Times. Amazon was not looking to employ New Yorkers. They would have imported the “best” talent from around the country and world. My kids, born and raised here weren’t getting those jobs. There would just be another 25,000 people migrating to an overcrowded, mismanaged, poorly governed city.
This was just a deal for real estate developers who wouldn’t otherwise fill all the luxury apartments coming online in LIC. The mayor and the governor, I’m sure know this. When the developers go belly up because they speculated and lost, there will be cries that it was caused by Amazon. In reality those huge developments started way before there was any talk of Amazon coming.
I read comments from people around the country with the opinion that we blew a good deal. These people don’t live and work here and can’t appreciate how difficult it is to live here. The Times editorors should. Other parts of the country are hurting economically and really could benefit from those jobs. Amazon competely played those communities and left with a trove of data.
It’s also possible Amazon was smarter than we think. After taking a closer look, maybe they realized the path this city is on is not only unsustainable and will be virtually unlivable.
Shame on the Times for supporting this crooked deal.
Power to the people who rose up and defeated it
The people do have the power to redeem the work of fools.
4
Even if the 25,000 jobs were filled entirely by outsiders (a big if) all that would have done is broaden our income tax base that much more. What’s making NYC unlivable is the way the middle class is being crushed with subpar city services and high taxes. Now we get to fill the NYCHA and MTA budget holes alone while paying for De Blasio’s free healthcare for illegal immigrants.
That’s what’s ruining this city. 25,000 new people will still move here over the next five years. The difference is instead of being educated, productive and prosperous people who would have contributed to our tax base our neighborhoods and our schools, they’ll be folks who are a further drain on our social services while contributing little to nothing to our tax coffers.
4
@S wow, you have very little faith in your children. Why would you think they couldn't fill those jobs? My parents always taught me I could do anything I set my mind to.
1
@S
Those people who redeemed the power of fools will have lots of fun being Uber drivers instead of earning great money and having an interesting career!
1
why would any business locate to NY? Answer: they won’t
2
You guys aren't even owned by Bezos an you're writing this? Amazon doesn't need your neolib tears. There are workers to exploit and cities to ruin elsewhere and I'm sure the gear are already turning.
3
No state nor district nor country should accept to be blackmailed for creation of jobs! Pay your dues as everyone else. You create jobs! Good for you, be proud, enjoy your money and pay taxes like everyone else! Economy was at his best when taxes were paid fairly! now all go nuts because of these low taxes and we the people should also kiss their feet and prosternante! ?? they want to keep their sales for themselves, they want to be paid for creating jobs and believe they should be venerated for it. Maybe doctors should charge according to a percentage of revenues / assets, same for teachers, police and firefighters.... maybe they ll start appreciating things at their true value! When people like bezos will be charged 200 billions to treat a life threatening disease, maybe they ll realise it s not normal some people can t afford these kind of services, including some of his employees, because all of them would rather spend millions in avoiding taxes than contribute to society.
Thank you for the jobs, we need them, just don t ask for 3 billions from people when you already have 150 you don t even know how to spend. Let these be used for school, roads, health ... when all states and countries will stop competing with each other for these jobs through taxes... that s when people will get their power back. Taxes is what make democracies work (and education but one thing at the time... taxes will pay for good teachers... much better than tax cuts for themselves)!
3
Speaking from Arlington, all I can say is, y'all are gonna regret this.
4
A Valentine's Day Massacre.
NYC is now the poster face of progressive self-immolation across the nation.
And although they don't realize it in the moment, the AOC, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders boats just sunk.
6
As a northeastern liberal, I think your comment is spot on.
Ocasio-Cortez will wonder how her rabid entitlement programs will be funded. Soak people who actually pay taxes. Not her of course.
2
@skanda Amazon doesn't pay taxes and there is no evidence Donald Trump does either.
I tilt towards the no go although the activists have to be careful. I live in the area and you don't want it to go back to the old days of hookers walking the street, abandoned houses, factories, desolate areas etc.
The reason Amazon did not pick Po Dunk middle America for their new place is because there are few skilled IT workers there. NYC, has a ton of them.
I also believe Amazon will not pass up NYC and will by dribs and drabs with no fanfare put their tail between their legs and start jobs in NYC. They can't afford not to.
If even I am wrong, the area and many areas in NYC will do just fine without them, there are countless IT jobs and a million other jobs, NYC is thriving and these companies did not get corporate welfare packages like Amazon.
3
A very, very stupid decision by the anti-Amazonians. This shows that Democratic liberals can be as short-sighted as Republican conservatives, such as when GOP governors turned down Medicaid expansion during the Obama presidency.
5
A handful of progressives
just took progress out of their name. New name Ives which stands for nothing
4
Republicans love to talk about job-killing Democrats. This time even a great number of Democrats believe them.
5
The lesson learned here is you cannot trust the NYT to have your back if you are working citizens. The company is renown for cheapskate employee driving, oppressive workplaces and backdoor dealing with entities like this paper to run roughshod over the public.
What we learn here is that we need MORE opposition and organization, for instance everyone who used Amazon needs to become a union Amazon customer, and be organized to go on general strike against the company when needed. It's an interesting concept, are Amazon's customers pawns, or power players?
New York City is a wonderful, iconic American institution that has just intercoursed their people, their tax base & body politic by rejecting Amazon. Are you guys serious up there? It is laughable and tragic all together.
2
@Mark Andrew
Precisely. You nailed it.
New Yorkers are now trying to rationalize and justify this negative event? A Valentine's Day Massacre to be sure.
Another politically correct term for it is:
(And class repeat after me....)
Economic Suicide
The Editorial Board should pat itself on the back for this one, having been so eager to enable these fanatics.
They made a meaningful contribution to the radical leftists cause by making a bunch of wackos appear to be legitimate.
2
"Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Mr. de Blasio, in a rare fit of comity, rolled out the red carpet for Amazon." Au contraire, NYT. The color of that carpet was green. The same shade of green that's always been used for taxpayer dollars to fund privately owned sports franchises as well as the Olympics.
1
Make New York Poor Again!
2
I am overjoyed that NYC lost this opportunity. Arrogance and ignorance are a bad combination, and NYC has shown plenty of both. Learn to negotiate, or sleep in your malfunctioning subways.
25,000 jobs is a heck of a lot more than just a ball. Amazon was doing us a favor, its hard to believe we wouldn't accept it.
3
Trying to figure out what Planet I'm on. Really people think it's a good idea that Amazon has fled?!? Someone tell AOC and the others that wealth is not created by the government. Money for schools??? People in Europe get free college but what good is it if there is no JOBS??? Entry level jobs are not meant to be careers or family sustaining. You just blew it New York, Amazon please come to Florida.
3
Quite a few things wrong this Editorial:”..the subways don’t work, the streets are gridlocked, the housing is unaffordable, the shelters are overcrowded, and the schools are segregated…”. The local opposition was in part based on the very valid notion that Amazon would aggravate not remediate all these problems! Then, this: “an estimated $27 billion in tax revenue over the next two decades…” You do have fact checkers at the NYT? Then, more…”..they missed an opportunity to try to get the company to help address housing and infrastructure problems..” Risible! In a blatant and provocative insult, they told City Council, NO unions.But, they offered some delicious “incentives” like , computers in schools, funding cheerleaders, funding for pest control, spraying to wipe out malaria and Zika!! Last, their press announcement, so patronizing, so insulting to opponents, so hallucinatory for Cuomo, de Blasio and their more than $3 Billion gifting to Amazon without any NYC Regulatory screening is enough evidence for me that Amazon is unwelcome.
I did vote for Ocasio-Cortez in the 2018 primary, mainly because I did not care for machine politics in Queens although Crowley was sound. In part, because I thought she had no chance anyway. I am now quite pleased that she was a partner in the sabotage of the Amazon scheme which Crowley would likely have loved.
2
Does the Times board really think that Amazon was going to show up and solve all our problems? Please. They would have ensured the exact opposite - an increased strain on our infrastructure, skyrocketing housing costs, reduced control of our political process and more. I know the Times is controlled by wealthy corporate interests so “this is a huge loss” is the line you have to tow, but you are so very wrong on this and also - your welcome, the activists saved the City.
1
Now what newspaper company got how many millions in tax breaks for its West Side headquarters skyscraper and its Queens printing plant? Glass houses ....
2
Can we please stop calling an office park a "campus?" Please! Am I the only one who find this recent evolution in the use of this word utterly off-putting?
2
Hey Amazon, bring your jobs to Detroit -there will be no lack of ideas about how we can work together.
C'mon, we'd love to have you!
1
Ideology trumps pragmatism. This isn't what Alinsky had in mind.
Boy this is quite the hit job. Shame on you, NYTimes. There was ZERO guarantee that your vaunted 25,000 jobs would ever materialize. This was a corporate giveaway to the tune of THREE BILLION DOLLARS in exchange for more high-income white-collar jobs that would go to the same people who already have high-income white-collar jobs.
NO prospect of good, unionized jobs for lower income classes. NO prospect of additional infrastructure to support all the development. NO protections for the residents of LIC. NO public or even local rep involvement in negotiating the land use.
I honestly didn't think I felt this strongly about the amazon deal until I read this editorial. It reads like it's written by some spoiled elite investors whining because whatever money was coming their way has now vanished. Boo hoo.
6
The leadership of New York are all democrats, and they have displayed their complete incompetence in basic governing.
1) Democrats impose sky high taxes, but cannot deliver on adequate public transportation, schools, or homeless services.
2) They provide tax breaks to big business, and then the hypocritical liberals protest against those corporations that they don't like (e.g. Amazon), while overlooking tax breaks to industries that they like (e.g. entertainment). Where are the liberals protesting the tax breaks to Stephen Colbert's "The Late Show"?
3) Democrats pander to their liberal base by promising everything (e.g. free college! free health care! guaranteed income without working!), but then drive away the job creators who pay the taxes.
4) Finally, democrats distract the electorate from these failures by pandering to special interests and slandering anyone who challenges their delusions.
But the NY Times continues to downplay these blatant failures, and instead viciously distort and slander republicans and anyone else who opposes any democrat. The NY Times enables, if not encourages, the incompetence and arrogance of these elected officials. Want proof? Find one article that uses terms like "radical democrats" or "extremist, destructive policies," and then count the number of times those terms are used to describe republicans.
The NY Times also enjoys huge tax breaks and subsidies, but their support for democrats allows them to get away with it. Pure hypocrisy!
5
It’s shocking is that the New York Times is lamenting New York’s loss of Amazon. Is the New York Times truly so lacking in self- awareness? Only now it realizes that money to fix the subways and provide homeless shelters doesn’t grow on trees. Even more amazing is that the NYT doesn’t remember how it stirred up the very narrow special interest driven hatred of corporations that led to this result. How many times have I read on the front page of the New York Times fake news about how Amazon had wrecked Seattle.
3
New York City....you blew it big time and your posters are trying to justify and rationalize why you're better off without Amazon's presence? It is beyond comprehension.
City planners throughout the nation would love to get Amazon to their cities.....25,000 jobs and the billions it would add to the economy.
Apple just announced a 1 Billion dollar investment in Austin, Texas, another high tech corridor like Silicon Valley. There are other locations like North Carolina, Florida, Nevada and the list goes on.
NY, your elected politicians like AOC, are doing you no favors.
It is what it is...
4
Please publish the details of the deal. Inform the public. Leave headlines for The Post. Would be nice to see a thorough analysis. Those I have seen don't support your opinions.
3
I'm beginning to think that the NY Times is as informed as Donald Trump suggests. First, in the height of hypocrisy, the New York Times opposed the deal last year based on the "corporate subsidy" -- even though the NY Times itself received a corporate subsidy. Now, the NY Times seems to suggest that Amazon's abandonment is a lost opportunity. Maybe if the NY Times had the wisdom and character at the outset, the paper could have explained the benefits of corporate incentives that the State was offering Amazon and the Times could have informed both the electorate and the elected with that information. Instead, the NY Times has adopted a muffled and inconsistent position -- which, along with a handful of "progressive" and misguided politicians-- helped torpedo the deal. Shame on the NY Times for its incoherent and hypocritical positions.
3
Why are we mad at Trump again? We'll get proof on that Russian collusion any day now. It's been like two years. Also, he beat Hillary and it was "her turn" or something. But nothing he's done matches the damage that AOC and the Queens Democrats in Albany have done to the City. This is a group of people who's main economic proposal was "fight for $15/hour". Well, AOC and her socialist goons killed 25,000 jobs IN THEIR OWN NEIGHBORHOOD that paid an average of $150K/year. And she was an economics major?
1
On November 14, 2018, the Editorial Board published an article entitled, "New York's Amazon Deal Is a Bad Bargain". So which is it, NYT? "Corporate activists got what they wanted at great cost" or was it, as you warned in November, a Bad Bargain? It can hardly be both.
1
Is anyone really dumb enough to think that Amazon will bring 25K jobs to NY?
CUNY is being defunded as we write about poor poor Amazon and Jeff Bezos and how mean New York City was. That three billion dollar tax break---a couple peanuts for Amazon---would really help save the greatest public university.
1
Not being in NY and not a fan of Amazon, I have no ax to grind here. As an disinterested observer though, this is utmost lunacy. NYC pols, including Gianaris and AOC, are celebrating because what? Amazon get $3B - only $500M is upfront monetary inducement - for $27B over time. Even if NY and NYC have to sink more infrastructure expenses, which will benefit both Amazon and the state, it still a pretty good ROI.
CNBC anchor and NYT columnist, Andrew Sorkin, is known for a corporate lefty, and he was shouting at the top of his lungs on TV this morning, befuddled how stupid this political defiance is. Well, it reminds us of then NJ Gov Chris Christie rejecting $5B free federal money to build the 3rd tunnel at the height of the Great Recession. Perhaps this is the left's answer to that stupidity, spiting the face by cutting its own nose.
Mind you, Amazon 2nd half HQ is no hog farms. It doesn't just consume local resources or causing runoffs but it is also a talent magnet. Especially at a time when NYC financial sector is waning.
Another NYT columnist, Ms Maureen Dowd, used to marvel at how Republicans, especially Trump's, supporters vote against their self-interest, like those who need ACA the most. Evidently, the right doesn't have the monopoly for voters against their self-interest.
Worse though, the Dems may have gotten drunk with their 2018 successes, a repeat of 2008. You may want to file it under: why people don't deserve nice things!
4
There is plenty of money flowing through New York. The question is what it does while it’s here. Will it spread or will it condense? Will it help create opportunities for people who don’t have them? Or will it result in further income inequality, a strain on infrastructure, and an exacerbated housing crisis?
Amazon’s history in Seattle suggests the latter.
@Sean M
This seems to be Sen Gianaris's cool-aid. Well, at least his argument has some semblance of truth instead of AOC pulling $3B fathom revenue out of thin air!
There is money and there is money flow. Having Russian oligarchs and Chinese financial refugees parking their loots in NYC real estate is dead money, IMHO.
But jobs are living and breathing. I have a childhood friend who lives in Seattle all his life. He might have grumbled now and then but if you look at the city before Microsoft and Amazon, especially after Boeing relocated its HQ to Chicago (I think), it may very well be net positive. Sure, no one with ordinary means could afford SF these days; but a lot of people don't seem to remember NYC was bankrupted once in the Carter era.
Mr Gianaris wants to use Seattle as an example but the truth is NY could become another CT. Look at what has been going on at Hartford or worse.
Look, normal people should be able to do math: assuming you get $27B and 25,000 jobs in x number of years; then you rebate $3B. Even if you stick a 33% of that $27B as ongoing expenses. So $27B - $9B - $3B = $15B. And we are not factoring the network effect. Nothing comes from nothing. You have to give something to make something. But when people behave irrationally, it doesn't really matter whether they are right wingers or left wingers, they are still wrong
1
The NYT helped stoke this opposition. They should own their failure.
7
@B The editorial board probably didn’t think that their reporting would actually help to scuttle the deal. They are now internally dealing with their obvious miscalculation.
1
"Elected officials who identify as progressive painted Amazon as a rapacious engine of inequality." They're not the same bright, young officials who you're newspaper applauds daily, are they?
4
The far-left socialists have demonstrated once again they have taken over the Democratic party.
Despite 70% of New Yorkers supporting Amazon's arrival, and despite support from moderate Democrats in New York, including the governor, the socialists were able to destroy the deal to bring Amazon and its 25,000 jobs to NY.
The far-left radical socialists also put forward the radical Green New Deal, and immediately the Democratic presidential candidates begin falling over themselves in support of it, despite the fact that the Green New Deal is a plan to turn America into a Venezuela like Socialist state.
Sad.
4
I blame the pols who negotiated behind our backs. The idea was a bad one. Let another city put up with the overpaid Amazon executives who will push up housing prices, unleash more expensive coffee bars and restaurants, and artisanal beer, bombas, rothy's...
1
I am on record here as saying this was a monumental foulup by NYC.
That said, one, perhaps unintended, consequence is that it serves notice to anyone not paying attention that Amazon and likely others of their ilk play hardball.
That will and should keep a few city leaders up at night in the future, I expect.
Step onto the playing field with your eyes open.
2
The pendulum is swinging. For too many years we have heard how NYC, Boston, San Francisco and Seattle were the only places worth having a business, because of some kind of special magic that comes from being liberal and coastal. We're due for a renaissance of mid-size, mid-western cities, that have room to allow people to raise families, less traffic, and a reasonable cost of living. Looks like it's time for poverty and crime in NY again -- can't think of a better mayor to usher that in than Bill Deblasio.
3
That would be great! NYC cannot be the only place to find a high-paying job west of Silicon Valley. Our housing and transit system cannot handle it any longer.
Unfortunately, no other city in America could pay Amazon enough to set up shop there. Even now Amazon isn’t moving its HQ2 plan to any of the runners up — and it’s still going to create more jobs in NYC without the hype or tax incentives.
When the rest of America can sort itself out, it’ll be better for all of us.
1
Amazon had a “plan” but it wasn’t to bring a headquarters to NYC.
This was a carefully orchestrated sham on Amazon’s part to assert their dominance over unions “progressive” politics.
Let’s examine the facts.
For the first time in history, a big company decides they need TWO headquarters on the East Coast and one of them is planned for some of the most expensive real estate in the country.
Amazon gets the expected feedback from a minority of residents and a couple LOCAL politicians even though 70% of New Yorkers approve and it has the backing of two of the most powerful politicians in the State and in fact, in the country.
Then, the world’s most highly valued company decides it doesn’t have the stomach to take on a few community activist and a couple back benchers elected to two year terms.
Oh – and magically, they do NOT need a second headquarters after all and though they will be adding a few jobs to their current NYC footprint.
The unions look bad, the “progressives” look worse and suddenly everyone is taking the side of a company that doesn’t give bathroom breaks to many of it’s workers.
All in all it is a well played charade by Jeff “Scott Walker” Bezos who didn’t get rich writing a lot of checks.
It turns out Mr. Bezos, like Mr. Shultz, leans left on social issues but don’t get close to their wallet.
I have no problem with tax breaks to companies to create jobs but this whole deal doesn't smell right.
4
So Cuomo and DiBlasio privately negotiated the deal? No community involvement? No "What are your concerns?". No let's have a community forum to hear what the residents have to say.....um to give the people a voice? No trying to rationalize giving a tax break to a company for whom $3 billion is a drop in the bucket. We know best. Don't you think they have heard the "what could go wrong?" song before? The average person is going to pay for all the tax breaks for the wealthy (remember theirs is not permanent and in fact will end) and the lower corporate taxes. But if you act now, we will throw in a $3 billion tax break for a company who will come here, use lots of resources and drive up your cost of living exponentially. With lots of new workers, yes. All from the NYC area ? Or bought in from somewhere else? Yes, you get much higher rent so a person from Portland has a great job? Did the people shoot themselves in the foot? Perhaps. But they also recognized the devil they knew may be better than the one they didn't. They were afraid. And no one, absolutely no one thought to try and alleviate their fears. Trump got elected by promoting fear. "I know best" Cuomo did nothing to try and relieve those fears. And he wants to run for president? Starting out by handing over Queens to the other side is a rookie mistake. Good luck, Andy.
Radicals who pushed Amazon to pull out of NYC will only have themselves to stare at it in the mirror when Trump gets re-elected. Thanks for nothing!
2
The only people hurt by the pullout are speculators and embarrassed politicians. This was a backroom deal that should have seen the light of day much earlier, involved community stakeholders including the local elected officials. I would love to have seen an impact study on what the development would mean to mass transit, infrastructure, housing and local schools. Instead we got an offer of a few little programs in the schools and no promises of how many jobs would go to locals, and no assurance of neutrality if they wanted to organize, which is what built the middle class. Good riddance to bad trash, and let the pols who cut these types of deals in secret take notice.
1
Unless this is a pun, it's not clear to me who stated: 'Because, you know, Amazon’s competitors have a great track record of seeing the future more clearly than Jeff Bezos.'
To all of you complaining about the lost tax revenue, what about the 3B that tax payers were never allowed to vote on? And do you really think Amazon wasn’t gonna find a way out of paying those taxes too?
As a former Seattleite, I suggest caution. Bezos et al are monsters. They would have drank your milkshake the same as they drank ours.
If we keep giving corporations what they want, they’ll just keep walking all over us. Amazon would have been fine in LIC if the city and state hadn’t given them anything.
Enough is enough.
2
The Amazon opposition is epically short-sighted. They will be remembered for how they obstructed 25000 opportunities for the middle class, and made New York loose its luster. Come the next election, I'll be doing everything to throw this class of bums out.
4
Why is this the progressive wing of NYC's fault? Shouldn't it be just as much the fault of everyone who supported the things that led to the underregulated crony capitalism we have today? Or everyone who wouldn't support the needed infrastructure work for the past 30 years? People get sick of being taken advantage of.
2
Thousands of jobs up in smoke for the state of New York. That sure showed them!
3
Insanity or intellectual dishonesty?
$3B in reduction in the future $27B in taxes... was portrayed as a rich gift of some kind to this large employer and job creator.
If we didn't have such high taxes and high costs, perhaps such preemptive tax cuts would not be necessary.
Meanwhile Cuomo blames rich folks who moved out of NYC for his big budget hole.
Let's wake up and change our abusive tax system in New York state
2
Ignorance is part of the game. Ignorance won. Amazon is out of New York.
2
I thought New Yorkers were pretty smart. But based on reader comments, most of them didn’t even understand a simple concept like a tax credit.
It was also interesting that blacks and browns were the biggest supporters of the deal. There saw opprtunity.
Amazon will do great without New York and vice-versa.
2
Anti-corporate activists or anti-corporate welfare activists?
Not for nothing, you shouldn't be buying anything from Amazon anyways. We will all wake up one day and there won't be any retailers left downtown. Amazon - bad for Main St. Bad for America.
1
25K jobs?
I'd love it if the NYT checked how many times a company promised X number of jobs and actually delivered on that promise.
Most likely an inflated number is dangled to get corporate tax breaks and then very little comes of it.
It's not an Amazon thing - most corporations do it.
For the record, I'm a staunch Centrist who believes in a mixed Capitalist/Socialist economy.
The NY Times editorial didn't go far enough in naming names. Michael Gianaris didn't even bother to meet with Amazon--he refused all requests to meet with them. Andrea Stewart-Cousins deserves special mention for appointing Gianaris to the review board knowing full well that he would kill the decision. And let's not forget Jimmy van Bramen and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who after only six weeks in office, seems to know more about everything that ails the U.S. than anyone else. Thanks to all of them and I hope the voters get to thank them at the polls for opposing Amazon.
1
I’m surprised that this editorial makes no mention of the bait-and-switch Amazon pulled when they split their second HQ into two satellite offices. Do you really think they would not use this arrangement to extract further concessions from both DC and NYC? Amazon had been negotiating in bad faith from the start, people without AI and cloud computing skills (i.e. everyone) stand to get priced out if their apartments, and the establishment left writes editorials like this. With an attitude like that, don’t be surprised by another four years of Trump. You still don’t get it.
1
Elections have consequences. NY elected AOC and she trashed any hopes of Amazon coming to NYC. Welcome to the new age of anti business anti wealth socialism where AOC will ban all cars in NYC and pay the unwilling to work money to live on. This is the same woman who claims to care for people but stiffed her own staff of benefits.
1
The Left's hypocrisy is breathtaking. Amazon was offered up to $3 billion of tax rebates, against up to $27 billion in tax revenue that was to be generated by 25,000 new, high paying, private sector job. For those who can divide (as in 'add subtract multiply and divide'), that's a subsidy of 11.11% (to offset NYC's ridiculously high taxes, relative to other finalists like Alexandria VA and Nashville TN). Leftists found that outrageous. What I find outrageous, is that Leftists always are in favor of creating more government jobs. Government jobs are, by definition, 100% subsidized 100% by taxpayers. 100%! It would have made vastly more economic sense for NYC to cut back $3 billion from the government payroll, and use that cash to honor its deal with Amazon. And to be clear, the Amazon debacle is being watched nationwide. No CEO of a major company will now propose a major expansion in NYC, for fear of a similar shakedown by AOC and her social justice warriors. DeBlasio is a 21st century Abe Beame, who will preside over NYC's 2nd bankruptcy in 50 years. State and city residents (the ones that can't escape) will now re-learn the excruciating financial pain that accompanies handing every branch of both state and city government to Democrats.
1
No jobs lost. Bezos lies rejected. Queens still a good place to live.
I've seen small towns in Minnesota and Wisconsin pay to have a "big company" "invest in our town" and the hick-town had no lawyers and the "investors" take the money and run. And all there living on on Social security and their kids move to the city and clean hotel rooms for minimum wage or less.
The story is -- NYT hear this
The story is -- "Retail make billions all last century and a half"
Sears Roebuck. Early 1900's
Walmart. Late 1900's.
Amazon. Early 2000's.
The next half-century -- not so like not so much.
New York City -- Love the place, won't live there,
But -- the high ground (sea level a few meters higher before I die)
New York City I think will survive -- Rome has, and even Venice.
Amazon and Bezos are like those Romans who made millions on the fall or Rome, and -- what was that place where the world killed and recorded -- Pompeii?
People take care.
New York is so fortunate an evil company decided to go somewhere else. Just as it is fortunate so many of its citizens move away each year. Keep it up guys. How many congresspeople are you projected to lose after next year's census, two or three?
Perhaps Messrs. Cuomo and di Blasio should have better "sold" the project to the citizenry.
1
Your board wrote an editorial on November 14 saying the Amazon deal was a ‘bad bargain.’ And now you’re scolding your readership for taking action to advocate for the investments in infrastructure and other tangible benefits you lamented as being absent in the initial agreement? C’mon. We all knew this was a terrible deal from the beginning and Amazon was unwilling to negotiate on anything. Good riddance.
NYC, as of August, had record low unemployment, with Queens being the lowest of the boroughs.
Most city planners would be licking their lips to get Amazon. Not NYC so it is your loss. Other growing corporations will remember this in the future. Simply unbelievable.
Amazon has the option of going anywhere and other states have far more to offer. Apple just announced a one Billion dollar campus in Austin, Texas, another high tech corridor.
NYC, your elected officials are not doing you any favors.
it is what it is......
2
The fact that NYC needs to pay a $3B bribe to attract the attention of the company of the future should serve a s a ringing alarm bell on the noncompetitive local tax structure. Why is there no mention of this in any of the NYT articles? This newspaper seems to only mention NYC taxes when registering complaints that locals can no longer get a deduction for their outrageous income & property taxes in their federal tax filings.
3
"Because, you know, Amazon’s competitors have a great track record of seeing the future more clearly than Jeff Bezos."
The only future Jeff Bezos represents is a return to the gilded age of robber barons. He literally is the biggest of the the modern robber barons with a trail of job destruction behind him, and the editorial board is cheering him on? Talk about being smug and out of touch...
The supporters of corporate pimping in the editorial board can wag their fingers all they like, this backroom "deal" is the epitome of US capitalism at its worst : it represented very dubious gains set against very real costs. It deserved to die and for once, thankfully, it did.
2
Best talent in the world, if you can make it there you can make it anywhere etc. Really? Does the NYC area really have the best tech talent in the world? I think "the world" has grown weary of the self-congratulatory "NYC is the best of everything" state of mind that, I suspect, is in many instances a self-delusional fiction. Fix the subways and maybe you can be on some top-10 lists. It's 2019 not 1955.
2
If the left takes comfort in this and acts accordingly, welcome to six more years of Trump.
2
I must admit being confused when the editorial board made the opposite argument a few months ago. See "New York’s Amazon Deal Is a Bad Bargain" from Nov. 14, 2018. It's even linked as related on the bottom of the page online.
One word, for those who take satisfaction from making things hard for business, especially on a large scale: Detroit.
1
I'm surprised that the Editorial Board's view is so regretful for what might have been. It's ironic that the Times' coverage of the story - going back years - was part of the reason for Amazon backing down. Remember that scathing front page story about how Amazon ill-treats its workers, Mr. Bezos's denials, and the Times standing behind the story?
Such constant anti-corporate coverage - more so, after the deal was won - gave fuel and fodder to the AOC crowd.
Hundreds of cities spent millions wooing Amazon. Only two won the contest. And New York had to wear its halo all around it to kill the deal. Shocking how America has changed. This is a great preview of AOC's Green New Deal.
How about addressing the problems with housing, infrastructure, and the subway regardless? Then perhaps we won't have to provide companies like Amazon with a $3 billion bribe to come here.
Yo, Amazon. Philly is open for business. Come on down.
this was never about jobs, housing, infrastructure, greedy capitalists vs. compassionate progressives or any of that stuff... this was about the massive, bloated, Olympic-gold-medal egos that are born in and then float effortlessly and endlessly from New York City, alighting in such unwelcoming places as the White House, Congress and Big Media... the rest of us look on in flabbergasted amusement and awe
Incompetent politicians are ruining this city.
1
“The only thing worse than being blind is having sight but no vision.” Helen Keller. So sorry for LIC and devastated for those who elected such inexperienced and short sighted officials. Anger blinds them to possibility.
New York City, my hometown got exactly what it deserved. If NY didn't want to woo AMZN, then why go through the whole song and dance?
It has been 4 years since I left and with each visit I recognize less and less of it. A lot of newsprint has gone into describing the crumbling infrastructure, trash on the streets, the proud label of being a sanctuary city - which does absolutely NOTHING for the citizens unless you play in the underground economy. And it slowly seems to be slipping into disrepair and pessimism . That slogan of if you can make it here.... is now old, tired and frankly out of date.
You vote for the likes of this Governor and Mayor and the other group of clowns and this is exactly what you get.
For all you NYers who are crying in your drink tonight. Vote for change or vote with your feet - just as I did. It took two terms of Rudy and three of Hizzoner B'berg to make it the envy of the world. Who knows if such leaders are around to make it better.
Maybe Foxconn will step in...
It’s ironic that the link at the bottom of this article is a piece from three months ago where the Editorial Board called this a bad deal. Even this article is a laundry list of reasons that the deal was awful for New York, with a few hasty “we should have taken it anyway though”s thrown in. Looks like the Board isn’t even sure how they feel about this one.
The critics of Amazon seem to think that NYC is somehow owed something by them rooted in an arrogant N.Y. exceptionalism. There are many other options as Amazon knows too well and in the face of hostility they left, wisely. It is as if a highly talented but hostile job candidate came to your office, while the skills would attract you the headache they represent would make you show them the door. Local politicians are amateurs at business and fools for not seeing clearly that all their progressive dreamssaid need the tax revenue this deal would have bought. You want to fix the subway, build more housing, provide healthcare to undocumented people? That requires MONEY — if you think the answer is just to tax and demand more of the wealthy they too can “Amazon” — let’s pray for the sake of our city that does not become a verb.
2
Amazon needs a new site for HQ2? We've got an old Foxconn site we're willing to part with on the cheap.
Sincerely,
Wisconsin
I know this is 'off target', but I think the New York Times is as wrong-headed in this editorial as it was on the WMD (weapons of mass destruction) in Iraq, and called for war in 2003. This is the editorial opinion of the Nation's Newspaper of Record?
The people of the world are literally at war with colossal capitalist multi-nationals, a singular example of which is Amazon, for god's sake. The principal negotiating points of their contract here, requiring colossal tax breaks for the company while "supplying" 25,000 lousy, punishing jobs, no less represents war against the citizens of New York State in particular, and the US citizens generally.
I applaud the stamina of the 'activists' and others who made it clear to Amazon, and to their reluctant politicians, that they would not accept the draconian demands of this rampant company in exchange for - what, one may ask?
- And for heavens sake, I shop Amazon and use other multi-nationals products daily - why? because Bezos understood the pitfalls of on-line shopping from the start and created a company that reassured shoppers: what they saw on the screen would be delivered to them as portrayed, promptly, intact, and with the necessary paperwork to guarantee its return if dissatisfied. What more could we ask for?
- And Chevron's gas always works well in my cars.
However I draw the line, and cities like LIC should too, when - in addition to my patronage, Bezos wants me to pay his taxes too.
2
The Board comes down on the wrong side. NYC doesn’t need to take part in these corporate welfare “beauty contests!”
Increase affordable housing and fix mass transit and the city will prosper!
Consultants import their strip mall Whole Foods and Starbucks, "culture" to New York while real culture withers, upscale restaurants don't count. Greenwich Village, Meatpacking and Chelsea become Disneyland to tourists. NY real estate caters to foreign oligarchs in Manhattan and Australian investors in Brooklyn, who buy up properties, pay minimal taxes.
All of these changes were encouraged by the NY Times. The last thing we need is a horde of tech bros, for whom we don't even have the proper infrastructure.
My, how far we have drifted. This deal was for a company that was anti-union. This editorial shows how effete and corporate the NYT is from on high. And how far our expectations for workers has drifted rightward.
Apparently the NYT believes in the old trickle down effect. How do you expect for the middle class to rebound if workplaces are not unionized? This was a lynchpin of the New Deal that built the greatest middle class we ever knew.
One has only to look at the luxury ads in their papers and Sunday magazine to realize that the NYT is not the least concerned with shared prosperity for those that create the wealth elites enjoy, but instead with defending services like housing, health insurance, etc that mitigate the pain.
Let people earn prosperity through the sweat of their brow and acquire a middle class class lifestyle through their labor.
1
It sounds childish for Gianaris not to have met with the company, but he was representing his neighborhood. The people there were notified without any discussion that they were receiving this wonderful boon and there was nothing to do about it and it was crazy if they didn't want it. It reminds me of the lady whose house was taken by the government in the Kelo case: she just wanted her house. They just wanted their neighborhood, no matter what a bunch of manhattanites who have never been there are saying about it on these boards (a lot of quasi-racist falsehoods about it being crime-ridden). But the board was also on the wrong side here, it was hailing the mayor then and shaming the mayor now. Should have been the opposite: Amazon shouldn't be allowed to move into somebody's backyard without their say-so, and they left because they didn't want accountability, de Blasio is right to give them the fig on their way out.
How deluded do you have to be to think anyone was "paying" Amazon $3 billion? They received a modest income tax reduction.
It’s called a “tax expenditure.”
And if a $3b tax expenditure is such a modest expense, why not offer it to all NY tax payers? I’d happily take a tax reduction.
1
I think all those complaining gave amazon time to reconsider that area, which isn’t that great really, and gave them the excuse to say you know what, we can do better.
Those cheering are pretty funny “yay we got nothing!”
1
Large corporations should come to town as good citizens, giving more to the community than they will take, not as vultures seeking to pull one over on the rubes. Try that, and the dreaded "liberal activists" will be at the front of the crowd welcoming you. How many billions do you billionaires need anyway? You're entitled to be as greedy and grubby as you wish, but if that's what you want, you're on your own.
Now, on to the next victim city.
1
Shameless and embarrassing bribery was proffered to Amazon—
And Cuomo and de Blasio should be held politically accountable.
1
I would not want an Amazon in my town, and neither would, I believe, any sane responsible citizen. We have enough crowds, gentrification, and strife here as it is. Good riddance, Amazon.
Amazon did not come to this as a partner. They came as a dictator. And that was never going to work.
1