
Cuomo Speaks With Bezos, Hints of ‘Other Ways’ to Clear Path for Amazon’s Return - TuringNYC
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/28/nyregion/amazon-hq2-nyc.html
======
Alex3917
If LIC doesn't want it then they should should deck over the Inwood rail yard
and put it there instead. There's plenty of space to build the entire campus,
as many residential buildings, parks, schools, and restaurants as are needed,
and it's already within walking distance of some of the nicest places in the
city.

~~~
nerdponx
Let's be clear: there's nothing wrong with Amazon building a campus in LIC. In
fact it's a good location for it.

The problem is that Amazon's end of the deal involved a lot of ill-defined
promises, and their obvious unwillingness to negotiate was a sign of intent to
strongarm the city into further concessions. Even if, on paper, it was a
financial loss to have Amazon pull out, it sets a strong and positive
precedent for New York and other cities across the country.

~~~
smokeyj
> The problem is that Amazon's end of the deal involved a lot of ill-defined
> promises

For example?

~~~
nerdponx
1\. The $27 billion number assumes no other development in the land under
consideration, which just makes no sense. Nobody to my knowledge has
calculated the opportunity cost, and therefore the _net_ benefit, of this
deal.

2\. We don't know actual the distribution of salaries

3\. Beyond the existing Future Engineer program, there is no specific
commitment to training and hiring from within NYC (instead of importing
talent), beyond a $5 million promise to do.. something? in the Queensbridge
Houses.

4\. We don't have any specific commitments to infrastructure development,
again, beyond than a rough dollar amount.

5\. Absolutely no word on handling externalities and market distortions
imposed on housing markets in nearby neighborhoods.

~~~
wdewind
> 1\. The $27 billion number assumes no other development in the land under
> consideration, which just makes no sense. Nobody to my knowledge has
> calculated the opportunity cost, and therefore the net benefit, of this
> deal.

There is no other deal even approximating this one in scale, and so there is
no way to do this analysis. The alternative is much, much slower jobs, and
thus tax revenue, growth.

"In my 23 years in the State Capitol, three as Budget Director, Amazon was the
single greatest economic development opportunity we have had...For a sense of
scale, the next largest economic development project the state has completed
was for approximately 1,000 jobs."

> 2\. We don't know actual the distribution of salaries

Honestly, I don't really think this is a legitimate issue. We know that they
are overwhelmingly white collar technology jobs at an average of $150,000. It
is extremely unlikely we'd get any surprises here and it's hard to understand
what they'd even look like (5000 managers and 20,000 janitors?).

> 3\. Beyond the existing Future Engineer program, there is no specific
> commitment to training and hiring from within NYC (instead of importing
> talent), beyond a $5 million promise to do.. something? in the Queensbridge
> Houses.

These aren't requirements we put on any other company going through the
Excelsior Jobs Program. New York City is a melting pot city. What makes us
great is that we have people from all around the world here. One of the prime
things we want to do as a city to make it a great place to live is make it a
place people want to move to work. If people aren't moving here to work than
New York City is in bad shape.

> 4\. We don't have any specific commitments to infrastructure development,
> again, beyond than a rough dollar amount.

Beyond $27 billion dollars in additional tax revenue. If we can't deploy that
money to adequately fix our infrastructure problems it's difficult to see how
that is Amazon's fault, or how any other company would do better. In fact:
assuming we were able to get anything close to the level of scale we'd get
from the Amazon deal from smaller companies we wouldn't be able to get any
additional commitments from them beyond the discounted tax revenue, so it's
difficult to understand where this expectation comes from. They make no
contribution to infrastructure other than the massive one that the law already
says they have to make.

> 5\. Absolutely no word on handling externalities and market distortions
> imposed on housing markets in nearby neighborhoods.

Again, it's difficult to imagine the alternate reality you want to live in
here, but it seems to be not growing the city.

------
Traster
This just seems like such a messy clusterfuck for Amazon. Their stupid
competition did a great job of raising awareness of sweatheart corporate
deals, and they gave the left a great stalking horse in the run up to 2020,
and they failed to even get the capacity they wanted!

The outcome of this process is incredibly bad for Amazon. Seemingly what they
achieved was a deal with Virginia. Virginia didn't offer the best incentives
but Amazon needed to be there for the lobbying opportunities. Their second HQ
plan has collapsed in NY and now they have to re-plan their expansion.
Meanwhile the process seems to have been tailor made to damage their corporate
image and create a movement against corporate welfare. Now this drags on with
it being obvious that Amazon can't go to NY now, but they're still getting
headlines to remind everyone of how badly they mismanaged this process.

~~~
refurb
Really? I'd say this reflects more poorly on NYC and their politicians than
Amazon. Every other city that bid for HQ2 would have likely received them with
open arms.

~~~
ijpoijpoihpiuoh
Companies kinda need to be in NYC if they want access to the talent pool
there. So if NYC gains a reputation of being hostile to big tax breaks for
companies, that's not going to really change corporate behavior, except in the
desired direction.

And as for what individual people who don't live in NYC think about the city,
it really doesn't matter. It is and will for the foreseeable future remain the
preeminent metropolis in the United States. What someone who lives in St.
Louis or Atlanta thinks about it is of no importance.

~~~
basch
NY has access to Boston, NYC, Phili, Baltamore, Washington DC, and Richmond
talent. At what point does something like Huston, which has access to Austin,
Dallas, San Antonio, Baton Rouge, and New Orleans talent become "good enough."
Same argument can be made for Chicago or Indianapolis with Cincinnati,
Cleveland, Detroit, , Kansas City, Louisville, Milwaukee, Minneapolis,
Pittsburgh, St. Louis, and Toronto.

Is the Northeast talent really worth that much more than the Texas
Triangle+Gulf Coast or the Great Lakes?

Choosing NYC has to be more than JUST talent pool. It's about being close to
other businesses, close to wall street, close to trade and immigration. It's
about joining a community that dictates a lot onto the rest of the country.

------
lancesells
This is such a weird thing. Amazon gets the tax gifts that they desired and
then pull out of NYC because of bad PR. Now business leaders, the governor,
and the mayor, are trying to get them to come back? You want a company back
that leaves because of hurt feelings? Maybe I'm missing something.

~~~
wdewind
[https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/open-letter-new-york-
state-...](https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/open-letter-new-york-state-budget-
director-robert-mujica-regarding-amazon)

~~~
tomnipotent
I lost a lot of respect for AOC from this fiasco, she demonstrated nothing but
intense ignorance and silly rhetoric despite an otherwise decent early track
record.

~~~
iscrewyou
A company that made boatloads of profit, not revenue, profit, wanted tax
breaks was opposed by someone who cares for the average joe. Not the software
developer. The guy working at the deli. Don’t be surprised.

It really sucks how amazon played the game. If they agreed to no tax breaks,
all that is mentioned in the link above would be headlines instead. But no.
They never wanted to commit to that. Both sides are at fault and the general
public suffered because of politics.

~~~
wdewind
"Incredibly, I have heard city and state elected officials who were opponents
of the project claim that Amazon was getting $3 billion in government
subsidies that could have been better spent on housing or transportation. This
is either a blatant untruth or fundamental ignorance of basic math by a group
of elected officials. The city and state 'gave' Amazon nothing. Amazon was to
build their headquarters with union jobs and pay the city and state $27
billion in revenues. The city, through existing as-of-right tax credits, and
the state through Excelsior Tax credits - a program approved by the same
legislators railing against it - would provide up to $3 billion in tax relief,
IF Amazon created the 25,000-40,000 jobs and thus generated $27 billion in
revenue. You don't need to be the State's Budget Director to know that a nine
to one return on your investment is a winner."

~~~
nerdponx
Yes, it's wrong to say "we can spend that $3bn elsewhere".

That said, the $3 billion is not the full price tag (externalities, etc.) and
the $27 billion is not the whole story (can we see your raw data please?).

~~~
wdewind
What are the other externalities that are not already addressed by taxes?
Would they be more adequately addressed by other companies paying the same
taxes?

I'm not sure which raw data you'd like, but if you can be more specific I'll
do my best to find it.

------
writepub
It is refreshing to see Cuomo actively woo Amazon back, despite direct
opposition and PR blitzkrieg-ing from the likes of Alexandira Ocasio Cortez.
The state of NY & NYC could use the projected 25,000 jobs (at an average of
$150K), $4 billion wages, and $12 billion in new economic activity which will
directly feed the state tax coffers.

~~~
nerdponx
The city, no. The state, sure.

Let's also set some things straight.

First, those numbers only make sense if you assume the land in LIC would
remain undeveloped, and the city's $3 bn left unspent over 10 years. Obviously
there will be other development in the area. LIC is already white-collar
yuppie colony and tech companies are still coming to NYC in search of talent.
Heck, Amazon already had plans to move to the city.

Second, "average of $150K" is meaningless. Does that include or exclude Bezos'
salary? What's the median number? What's the 25th percentile?

Third, how many of those jobs will go to New Yorkers, versus be imported from
other cities? What is the cost to other residents? Who, if anyone, will need
to be compensated? Nobody has done any of those calculations, to my knowledge.

Fourth, has Amazon made any concrete commitments to transit development on
paper?

The list goes on. There's a lot more at play here than the "sticker price".

Also leave AOC out of it. Blocking this deal wasn't her idea, she's just the
one who posts on Twitter too much. Look to more reasonable (and powerful)
politicians like Michael Gianaris.

~~~
writepub
> Second, "average of $150K" is meaningless. Does that include or exclude
> Bezos' salary?

Why would anyone include Bezos' salary _among_ the freshly minted 25,000 jobs!
This is such a straw-man!

> Third, how many of those jobs will go to New Yorkers

Who says there's an agenda to _not_ employ qualified New Yorkers? Why is it
criminal for other Americans to get those jobs, if qualified? Is there some NY
jingoism at play here that Amazon and the US are unawares of? It is a federal
crime to discriminate employment against state/city residency!

> Fourth, has Amazon made any concrete commitments to transit development on
> paper?

That is _expressly_ the job of elected officials, the sensible of which are
actively wooing Amazon for the increased tax income, that can then go towards
transit, and other public programs.

> Also leave AOC out of it.

Is AOC some protected class among politicians, whose demagoguery is apparently
off limits for criticism? She has actively pitchforked outrage on the matter,
and is absolutely a part of the discussion.

~~~
nerdponx
1\. I was being hyperbolic, but I hope you understand the point.

2\. Call it jingoism if you like, but there are good reasons to be skeptical
of what happens when you import labor en masse without employing the local
population first.

3\. You can't trust an elected official any further than you can throw them.
If something hasn't been signed it's as good as worthless. There is a good
reason we put so much weight on contracts in our legal system. Most other
businesses operate on those terms; I don't see why I should trust my elected
official any more than I trust my employees, my employer, etc.

4\. No, but her embarrassing ignorance is irrelevant to the discussion.

------
dmode
It seems to me that Amazon doesn't really need a HQ2.5. That's the primary
reason they pulled out. You don't really pull out because of a vocal minority.
Has there been a project that doesn't have vocal opposition ?

~~~
nerfhammer
supposedly someone who was stridently anti-Amazon was nominated to some key
position on some zoning board where he would be able to block anything.

[https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/04/nyregion/amazon-
hq2-board...](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/04/nyregion/amazon-hq2-board-
veto.html)

------
m0zg
"Sometimes you have to walk away" (tm). That $3B in tax breaks is about to
turn into $4B, much to the chagrin of one Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

------
zxcvvcxz
I just need one person to explain to me: why should Amazon get better tax
breaks and deals than the existing local businesses?

Someone just tell me.

~~~
xxxanony
"Incredibly, I have heard city and state elected officials who were opponents
of the project claim that Amazon was getting $3 billion in government
subsidies that could have been better spent on housing or transportation. This
is either a blatant untruth or fundamental ignorance of basic math by a group
of elected officials. The city and state 'gave' Amazon nothing. Amazon was to
build their headquarters with union jobs and pay the city and state $27
billion in revenues. The city, through existing as-of-right tax credits, and
the state through Excelsior Tax credits - a program approved by the same
legislators railing against it - would provide up to $3 billion in tax relief,
IF Amazon created the 25,000-40,000 jobs and thus generated $27 billion in
revenue. You don't need to be the State's Budget Director to know that a nine
to one return on your investment is a winner."

~~~
drugme
Sorry, but this is just spin.

Of course the city was giving them something - that's what the $3b in "tax
relief" was about.

------
turtlegrids
I wish NY the best here.

~~~
komali2
But it's New York City lol, it _has_ jobs

~~~
jimmy1
It has yuppie jobs and banker jobs. The middle class is deserting the place,
and has been for quite some time. You need a healthy middle class. That HQ
would have had quite a few tech jobs naturally, but also admin jobs, support
jobs, and all the other middle class jobs and small businesses that will
benefit around it. You would need construction, infrastructure, and facilities
jobs for years to come to support such a large project. So on and so forth.

~~~
eli_gottlieb
Kendall Square here in the Boston area doesn't seem to have a whole lot of
middle-class anything. Even the pizzeria is bougie.

~~~
emmelaich
I thought the middle-claas _was_ the bourgoisie. (I had to look-up what
"bougie" meant)

~~~
throwaway2048
These kind of conversations are definitely what make topics like this
exasperating in HN, if people have to litigate the meaning of "middle class"
from scratch (including requisite visits to the dictionary) it makes talking
about complex social issues completely impossible.

~~~
emmelaich
Huh? I wasn't litigating. And I merely looked up slang term I hadn't heard
before.

But while I'm here ... bourgoisie to me conveys the sense of traditional
morals as well. In contrast to the purported morals of the lower and higher
classes.

