Jump to content

Amazon scraps NY plans


Bobcat1

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Mission accomplished, liberals.

 

Ok. So Jeff Bozo, owner of the liberal fake news Washington Post walks and you blame liberals? How about a billion and a half or so of corporate welfare? Do you realize what kind of a strain on local infrastructure 25000 jobs would bring? Streets, utilities, schools - all stuff taxpayers fund - and the company goes scott free from paying for any of that? If I were a taxpayer there I’d be to’d. 

Plus, what I’ve read Amazon didn’t even try to negotiate, they just walked away. Virginia only had to give away $750,000,000 to get their prize. That’s one place conservatives kick liberals’ butts - they fight.

Tax abatement is a scourge on property owners everywhere. I guess it’s okay for makers to be takers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, UT alum said:

Ok. So Jeff Bozo, owner of the liberal fake news Washington Post walks and you blame liberals? How about a billion and a half or so of corporate welfare? Do you realize what kind of a strain on local infrastructure 25000 jobs would bring? Streets, utilities, schools - all stuff taxpayers fund - and the company goes scott free from paying for any of that? If I were a taxpayer there I’d be to’d. 

Plus, what I’ve read Amazon didn’t even try to negotiate, they just walked away. Virginia only had to give away $750,000,000 to get their prize. That’s one place conservatives kick liberals’ butts - they fight.

Tax abatement is a scourge on property owners everywhere. I guess it’s okay for makers to be takers.

Sure wasn’t conservatives that drove them out of New York.

You should be in charge of economic development in New York...you would be great.

I agree with Bobcat, bring it to Texas...we’ll figure out how to handle all those issues that puzzle libs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, UT alum said:

Ok. So Jeff Bozo, owner of the liberal fake news Washington Post walks and you blame liberals? How about a billion and a half or so of corporate welfare? Do you realize what kind of a strain on local infrastructure 25000 jobs would bring? Streets, utilities, schools - all stuff taxpayers fund - and the company goes scott free from paying for any of that? If I were a taxpayer there I’d be to’d. 

Plus, what I’ve read Amazon didn’t even try to negotiate, they just walked away. Virginia only had to give away $750,000,000 to get their prize. That’s one place conservatives kick liberals’ butts - they fight.

Tax abatement is a scourge on property owners everywhere. I guess it’s okay for makers to be takers.

If this was such a bad deal for New York, how did it ever get this far?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, UT alum said:

Ok. So Jeff Bozo, owner of the liberal fake news Washington Post walks and you blame liberals? How about a billion and a half or so of corporate welfare? Do you realize what kind of a strain on local infrastructure 25000 jobs would bring? Streets, utilities, schools - all stuff taxpayers fund - and the company goes scott free from paying for any of that? If I were a taxpayer there I’d be to’d. 

Plus, what I’ve read Amazon didn’t even try to negotiate, they just walked away. Virginia only had to give away $750,000,000 to get their prize. That’s one place conservatives kick liberals’ butts - they fight.

Tax abatement is a scourge on property owners everywhere. I guess it’s okay for makers to be takers.

 Never knew adding 25000 jobs to local economies was a bad thing.  Can't understand the liberal mindset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Agree, but all they see is the big bad company getting tax breaks, never mind the taxes and local spending that 25,000 workers and their families provide.

 

How about this? Wouldn’t it be better if all states and communities competed for who could provide the best services at the lowest cost? Best tax rate wins, not who gives away the most money?

I was part of a group who negotiated Hardin County’s first  tax abatement agreement with LP back in the late eighties or early nineties. Ten years they paid either no or reduced local taxes. What’s sitting out there now? They did operate a few years after the abatement expired, but I still question the return our community got out of that giveaway.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, UT alum said:

How about this? Wouldn’t it be better if all states and communities competed for who could provide the best services at the lowest cost? Best tax rate wins, not who gives away the most money?

I was part of a group who negotiated Hardin County’s first  tax abatement agreement with LP back in the late eighties or early nineties. Ten years they paid either no or reduced local taxes. What’s sitting out there now? They did operate a few years after the abatement expired, but I still question the return our community got out of that giveaway.

 

How about let states and communities work their own deal as they see fit...you know, the free market.

Sounds like you were involved in negotiating a bad deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LumRaiderFan said:

How about let states and communities work their own deal as they see fit...you know, the free market.

Sounds like you were involved in negotiating a bad deal.

How is tax giveaway part of your free market? A facility is either going to be profitable or not. You're suggesting that the government be involved in economic development.

I was not involved in negotiating a bad deal. If I remember correctly, 10 years is the max that could be forgiven.  I don't know if LP would've not reopened had we done no deal.  Our tax burden is not that great. No one wanted to call their bluff. There's a gas plant in North Dakota that got 10 years no taxes if they built the plant, ten years were up, they closed the plant. Never paid a dime of tax, jobs went away.  Tax abatements are bad deals in and of themselves.

I know you're going to disagree with almost anything I say, but competition between cities and states to provide the best infrastructure at the lowest cost  sounds a lot closer to free market than let's see which state will give away the most money to get the deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UT alum said:

How is tax giveaway part of your free market? A facility is either going to be profitable or not. You're suggesting that the government be involved in economic development.

I was not involved in negotiating a bad deal. If I remember correctly, 10 years is the max that could be forgiven.  I don't know if LP would've not reopened had we done no deal.  Our tax burden is not that great. No one wanted to call their bluff. There's a gas plant in North Dakota that got 10 years no taxes if they built the plant, ten years were up, they closed the plant. Never paid a dime of tax, jobs went away.  Tax abatements are bad deals in and of themselves.

I know you're going to disagree with almost anything I say, but competition between cities and states to provide the best infrastructure at the lowest cost  sounds a lot closer to free market than let's see which state will give away the most money to get the deal.

Socialist policies caused this, pure and simple!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UT alum said:

How is tax giveaway part of your free market? A facility is either going to be profitable or not. You're suggesting that the government be involved in economic development.

I was not involved in negotiating a bad deal. If I remember correctly, 10 years is the max that could be forgiven.  I don't know if LP would've not reopened had we done no deal.  Our tax burden is not that great. No one wanted to call their bluff. There's a gas plant in North Dakota that got 10 years no taxes if they built the plant, ten years were up, they closed the plant. Never paid a dime of tax, jobs went away.  Tax abatements are bad deals in and of themselves.

I know you're going to disagree with almost anything I say, but competition between cities and states to provide the best infrastructure at the lowest cost  sounds a lot closer to free market than let's see which state will give away the most money to get the deal.

Local/State government should be able to provide any incentive they choose.

Are you saying a city shouldn't be able to provide tax incentives to bring in business?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Mission accomplished, liberals.

 

 

18 hours ago, UT alum said:

Ok. So Jeff Bozo, owner of the liberal fake news Washington Post walks and you blame liberals? How about a billion and a half or so of corporate welfare? Do you realize what kind of a strain on local infrastructure 25000 jobs would bring? Streets, utilities, schools - all stuff taxpayers fund - and the company goes scott free from paying for any of that? If I were a taxpayer there I’d be to’d. 

Plus, what I’ve read Amazon didn’t even try to negotiate, they just walked away. Virginia only had to give away $750,000,000 to get their prize. That’s one place conservatives kick liberals’ butts - they fight.

Tax abatement is a scourge on property owners everywhere. I guess it’s okay for makers to be takers.

This is the hidden content, please

Amazon seems to blame liberals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Local/State government should be able to provide any incentive they choose.

Are you saying a city shouldn't be able to provide tax incentives to bring in business?

So if the tax reduction produces an overall gain, then give it away, right?  Then chew on this one.  Food stamps increase GDP by around $1.50 for every dollar spent.  Good investment, or not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, UT alum said:

So if the tax reduction produces an overall gain, then give it away, right?  Then chew on this one.  Food stamps increase GDP by around $1.50 for every dollar spent.  Good investment, or not?

Federal gov should have no role in food stamps or any other entitlement, whether it's a good or bad investment...not in the Constitution. 

States and communities have the right to provide whatever incentives or entitlements they want, whether it's a good or bad investment...it's THEIR right.

Let me ask you this, who should have the power to keep a state or city from providing tax incentives?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Federal gov should have no role in food stamps or any other entitlement, whether it's a good or bad investment...not in the Constitution. 

States and communities have the right to provide whatever incentives or entitlements they want, whether it's a good or bad investment...it's THEIR right.

Let me ask you this, who should have the power to keep a state or city from providing tax incentives?

I knew it.  So what about tariffs?

Answer to your question: Voters

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

You knew what?

By the way, have you ever read the Constitution?

You’d tie it back to the Constitution or states’ rights.

A tariff is a tax aimed at influencing free market movement of goods in and/or out of the country. That’s an ok tax, I take it.

Oh, and Supreme Court doesn’t agree with you as to constitutionality of food stamps.

This is the hidden content, please

 

And yes, I have read the Constitution, but I don’t claim to be a scholar. I’ll leave interpretation to the courts, where it belongs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, UT alum said:

You’d tie it back to the Constitution or states’ rights.

A tariff is a tax aimed at influencing free market movement of goods in and/or out of the country. That’s an ok tax, I take it.

Oh, and Supreme Court doesn’t agree with you as to constitutionality of food stamps.

This is the hidden content, please

 

And yes, I have read the Constitution, but I don’t claim to be a scholar. I’ll leave interpretation to the courts, where it belongs.

Of course I would...that's our rulebook.  

The SC also says it's OK to kill babies...unlike you, I don't agree with anything they spew out just because they are "scholars".

I guess if the SC ruled that slavery was OK you would go along with it?

The interpretation of any case is based solely on whether the SC is tilted conservative or liberal...if these folks were all experts and knew it all, the vote would always be 9-0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, UT alum said:

How is tax giveaway part of your free market? A facility is either going to be profitable or not. You're suggesting that the government be involved in economic development.

I was not involved in negotiating a bad deal. If I remember correctly, 10 years is the max that could be forgiven.  I don't know if LP would've not reopened had we done no deal.  Our tax burden is not that great. No one wanted to call their bluff. There's a gas plant in North Dakota that got 10 years no taxes if they built the plant, ten years were up, they closed the plant. Never paid a dime of tax, jobs went away.  Tax abatements are bad deals in and of themselves.

I know you're going to disagree with almost anything I say, but competition between cities and states to provide the best infrastructure at the lowest cost  sounds a lot closer to free market than let's see which state will give away the most money to get the deal.

You're entitled to your opinion, but in this case you're wrong. That place is still on the tax roll up there in Silsbee.  LP paid just over $180k in property taxes on land and equipment for 2018 alone.  

Property tax abatements can be a fantastic blessing.  Nobody remembers when they moved the Walmart in Groves and the Nederland Walmart about 15 years ago... both went into Port Arthur City Limits when they rebuilt because PAT was willing to play ball with property tax abatements.  

Nederland and Groves got to keep their property taxes for future years on the old years, but PAT abated property taxes and gained 100% of the sales tax revenue generated by two super Walmarts.  Advantage PA, especially when the abatement period ends.  And by my math, it probably already has.

Sometimes people (like AOC in this case) get a little caught up in their beliefs and lose sight of the big picture.  25k good paying jobs, plus who knows how many more supporting jobs in the community, and she celebrates killing the project because of inherent corporate greed?  Some other place will happily step up and accept Amazon coming to town, and the locals in her district can stagnate.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Of course I would...that's our rulebook.  

The SC also says it's OK to kill babies...unlike you, I don't agree with anything they spew out just because they are "scholars".

I guess if the SC ruled that slavery was OK you would go along with it?

The interpretation of any case is based solely on whether the SC is tilted conservative or liberal...if these folks were all experts and knew it all, the vote would always be 9-0.

It’s the freakin’ law of the land. I don’t agree with all their decisions, but I don’t turn around and say what they decide is unconstitutional. What Constitution you reading?

The 1973 decision I cited was 7-2, by the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

You're entitled to your opinion, but in this case you're wrong. That place is still on the tax roll up there in Silsbee.  LP paid just over $180k in property taxes on land and equipment for 2018 alone.  

Property tax abatements can be a fantastic blessing.  Nobody remembers when they moved the Walmart in Groves and the Nederland Walmart about 15 years ago... both went into Port Arthur City Limits when they rebuilt because PAT was willing to play ball with property tax abatements.  

Nederland and Groves got to keep their property taxes for future years on the old years, but PAT abated property taxes and gained 100% of the sales tax revenue generated by two super Walmarts.  Advantage PA, especially when the abatement period ends.  And by my math, it probably already has.

Sometimes people (like AOC in this case) get a little caught up in their beliefs and lose sight of the big picture.  25k good paying jobs, plus who knows how many more supporting jobs in the community, and she celebrates killing the project because of inherent corporate greed?  Some other place will happily step up and accept Amazon coming to town, and the locals in her district can stagnate.

 

 

 

 

Thank you for the clarification. Still, no jobs there since ‘ 07, I think. 

I still think abatements are bad policy. Again, compete on the basis of who provides best infrastructure at the lowest cost. 

What do you think about the .5% economic development tax?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,935
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined


×
×
  • Create New...