
'All humanity has left the area': paying for Tesla's Gigafactory - kimsk112
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/jul/03/all-humanity-has-left-the-area-the-cities-paying-for-tesla-gigafactory
======
AdamJacobMuller
> tax credits given to Tesla – and to a lesser extent other tech companies –
> deplete public services, resulting in potholed roads, overcrowded schools
> and insufficient affordable housing

I don't get this.

Firstly, aren't most of the taxes they were exempted from at the state level,
not the local level?

Secondly, don't the new Tesla employees live in the local communities, pay
property taxes on their homes (or by proxy via rentals) and shop and pay sales
tax at local merchants?

Finally, while you can for sure say that the tax breaks mean that Nevada is
bringing in less tax revenue than they would have if Tesla had built the
gigafactory there with 0 tax incentives, I don't see how they are making the
case that there are fewer tax dollars coming in.

The one thing I can see is the argument that there are lots of new people
living in these communities, and the fact that revenue hasn't increased
proportionally is an issue. That seems thin to me as they say Sparks is a
community with 100k+ residents and perhaps 1,000 new Tesla/Tesla-adjacent
people have moved to the area. A 1% population change should not create a
measurable crisis for the public works infrastructure of a city that was
already well run.

Ultimately, this reads to me as a hit-piece against Tesla with a thin core of
truth: Because Tesla moved in the cost of living has been driven up in the
form of higher rents (and perhaps other ancillary things, but, mostly
rent/housing). Ultimately, this is entirely disconnected from the premise of
the article that the tax breaks are to blame and therefore the entire article
comes across as completely disingenuous to me.

~~~
jexah
In addition to paying tax, the Tesla employees probably have a relatively high
salary and are feeding money directly to the locals through general
consumerism.

~~~
extralego
Maybe a few decades ago, but I don’t think that computes in 2018.

The employees raise rent and make locals homeless. Landlords often don’t live
in the small towns where they own property these days. The employees buy gas
and groceries from corporate outlets and shop online. The locals, desperate
for low prices, do the same.

Your vision sounds like something my parents would say. I don’t know where you
people come from but it sounds incredible.

~~~
AdamJacobMuller
> The employees raise rent and make locals homeless.

That's not inherently true. I will concede that it may force people to move to
other accommodations that they can afford, but, they're not forcing anyone to
be homeless.

> Landlords often don’t live in the small towns where they own property these
> days.

Maybe not, but, those landlords are paying property taxes locally. The guy who
mows the lawns and the guy who unplugs the toilets all live locally. They are
creating jobs inside that community and raising the standard of living for
everyone.

> The employees buy gas and groceries from corporate outlets and shop online.

Why do you say corporate stores like its a bad thing? Keep in mind, even if
you contend that they're moving profit out of the community they are still
creating jobs inside that community. Someone needs to stock the shelves, bag
the groceries and pump the gas.

~~~
xg15
> _I will concede that it may force people to move to other accommodations
> that they can afford [...]_

Like trailer parks.

> _Maybe not, but, those landlords are paying property taxes locally. The guy
> who mows the lawns and the guy who unplugs the toilets all live locally.
> They are creating jobs inside that community and raising the standard of
> living for everyone.

[...]

Why do you say corporate stores like its a bad thing? Keep in mind, even if
you contend that they're moving profit out of the community they are still
creating jobs inside that community. Someone needs to stock the shelves, bag
the groceries and pump the gas._

That seems like a contradiction. Creating jobs is not the ultimate goal, the
ultimate goal should be to provide usable public infrastructure.

If you create jobs all you want but at the same time move the profit from
those jobs away (because the company stores don't have to pay taxes either)
then what exactly is won?

~~~
jexah
> If you create jobs all you want but at the same time move the profit from
> those jobs away (because the company stores don't have to pay taxes either)
> then what exactly is won?

Well, more jobs means more job options, which means better quality of life.
Not to imply that it is a net gain, but it is a factor to consider.

------
proee
This comes across as a total "hit-piece" against Tesla. In looking closely at
the article, it is supported by "The Rockefeller Foundation" , which for those
who don't know - is linked to history's biggest oil man.

The Rockefeller foundation would like nothing more than to see Tesla fail.

~~~
jacobwilliamroy
The Rockefeller Brothers fund divested from fossil fuels in 2014. The
Rockefeller family fund began a process of divestment from fossil fuels in
2016 [1] starting with an immediate divestment from ExxonMobil for "their
morally reprehensible conduct."[1]

[1][https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/12/08/the-
rockefeller-...](https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/12/08/the-rockefeller-
family-fund-vs-exxon/)

[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rockefeller-family-feud-with-
ex...](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rockefeller-family-feud-with-exxon-mobil-
fossil-fuels-global-warming-climate-change/)

~~~
proee
This may be true of the family's fund, but the Rockefeller Foundation, which
this article is sponsored by, is opposed.

"However, the much wealthier Rockefeller Foundation, whose endowment tops
$4bn, is understood to be opposed to divestment for now."

[https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/23/rockefel...](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/23/rockefeller-
fund-divestment-fossil-fuel-companies-oil-coal-climate-change)

------
dokein
It sounds like the article is asserting that tax breaks result in decreased
public services per capita, but most of the people interviewed were priced out
from a housing perspective.

Also, while touching, it is not clear that a few anecdotes is evidence of a
town going downhill due to tax cuts; finding 4-5 people to talk about how
great or how miserable things are is always possible no matter in which
direction ground conditions have actually changed.

~~~
xg15
> _Schools in Washoe county, which includes Sparks, are overcrowded and deeply
> in debt, so much so that voters in 2016 approved a sales tax hike to help
> plug the gap. Even so, fresh budget cuts could eliminate bus routes for
> nearly 4,000 elementary and middle school students in an effort to save
> $550,000._

------
petermcneeley
Tesla is not responsible for the 4 decades long destruction of the american
working class.

~~~
kbenson
This feels like one of those liberally overreaching articles that I'm coming
to associate with the Guardian.

It may just be me getting more sensitive to it, but as someone that views
themselves as a liberally leaning moderate, there's a distinct feeling that
both ends of the political spectrum have become steaming dumpster fires in
their attempts to push their perspectives. Sure, I think one side is a bigger
fire, but that doesn't change the fact that the stink is pervasive and coming
_both directions_.

I sincerely hope it's mostly me being over-sensitive, as otherwise it's yet
another thing to lament the loss of and fear the future for. :/

------
aplummer
If the article was trying to say that the “low tax low service” government
model is terrible for low income people it did it well. Not really related to
Tesla.

------
blacksmith_tb
I can see how Tesla's tax credits are a minus for public services, but you'd
think the influx of workers would be paying taxes, which should at least have
some positive impact.

------
ajross
WTF kind of writing is this:

> These days many residents in Sparks – a sunbaked, low-rise city of 100,000
> people located 20 miles from the factory – express humbler dreams: food,
> shelter, health care.

 _Sparks, Nevada is a Reno suburb_. The clear implication of the text is that
this awful megacorp backed by sneering politicians in the Big City is
squeezing The Suffering Rural Poor just to fill their pockets. And the truth
is they went to some random restaurant and interviewed a bunch of perfectly
normal, very urban Nevadans until they got quotes they liked.

The whole article drips with this. Even the core thesis: that the tax breaks
were too large (with which I agree!) is completely unsubstantiated. It just
asserts without evidence that it's already being felt, which is unlikely. And
it even implies that it came alongside infrastructure budget cuts, which I
strongly suspect not to be the case.

Awful clickbait writing.

------
qubax
Ah, the petty media attack on elon musk continues after elon musk called out
the biased media.

[https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/05/25/business/tesla-...](https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/05/25/business/tesla-
boss-elon-musk-bashes-media-proposes-credibility-check-gains-vast-twitter-
fans/)

The atlantic and others already attacked him. Expect the attacks to pick up.
It's embarrassing how thin skinned, petty and biased journalists are. I'm not
much of a musk fanboy, but it's obvious what these journalists ( if we can
really call them that ) are doing.

Also what is theguardian, a british newspaper's and other british newspapers'
fascination with america? It seems like I read more "news" about america from
british newspapers than american newspapers online.

------
mmt
> his annual budget had increased from $65m to $70m in the past two years –
> about the level of inflation. “So I’m at net zero.”

Now _there 's_ some creative spin, describing five megabucks as "net zero".

Even accepting the premise that the budget needs to be adjusted for inflation
(some of which is, after all, increasing costs of such things as land and
labor) over such a short time period, that's a rate of nearly 3.8% annually,
which strikes me as remarkably high.

------
koosnel
How many tax credits do oil companies get? Why not do an article about that as
well.

------
canada_dry
> Tesla, meanwhile, has sold $131m in tax credits to casinos thanks to
> transferable tax credits

I'm curious why a company would sell off its tax credits. Present value vs
future value, or ? I assume they sell them for a discount, or else why would
anyone buy them?

