POLITICS AOC Election Chances

Touché. But I’d still argue it was an invention. It wasn’t just sitting around capable of being used medicinally.

 

Amazon said it was her pushback on the final planning guy that lead them to pull out.

 

The State Comptroller (?) said exactly this in his letter of explanation.

 

State Comptroller? So it isn't AOC who is Queen of Brooklyn? There's a State Comptroller who defied the will of the "overwhelming majority" of his constituents because of twitter?

 

I hear what you’re saying. Growth & prosperity are not without very many and real challenges, IP. But sizable and difficult as it surely is, it’s still infinitely preferred to the absence, or even the hope, of any opportunity.

It’s precisely why municipalities offer these tax-based incentives, and why people risk illegally entering a country to have a chance at participating in a softer and more economical version of slavery.

It’s wrong, and shouldn’t be this way - no one can otherwise argue against you on those points - but this is the stark reality, and one which you can’t simply ignore, because you don’t prefer or wish it to be untrue. I get the making a sort of moral stand in celebrating the refusal to hand out these tax-based incentives, but so long as any other municipality is willing to do so, it’s a near-sighted fool’s errand.

While you and those other and similarly socialist-minded others celebrate this refusal, the people of NY - the same who so many on your side claim a strong desire to support and champion - are worse off for having lost the chance at landing Amazon.

Worse. Much worse, and certainly not better.

Surely, you must see this, even if you don’t like it.

 

Here, the New York State Budget Director lays it out, and in remarkably straightforward terms:

The Opportunity in Rarity & Size:

Just Unions, Doing Union Things:

RWDSU (Retail, Warehouse & Dept. Store Union)

One Lone Bureaucrat Rides Away...

This, from the right-wing nut jobs at Politico:

Her direct involvement:

Her political allies / former staffers certainly seem engaged:

Oh.

Or this, from AOC herself:








Written in my best (read: most racistly pandering) fake black accent:
This is what organizing looks like.

This is what building power looks like.

This is what changing the country looks like.



Link Storm:
https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/op...udget-director-robert-mujica-regarding-amazon

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/22/amazon-hq-2-new-york-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-1012546

 

I don't celebrate the refusal. I question the analysis of it. I can see both sides and find it to be a murky issue for cities like NY or places like Arlington.

I would have no concerns for it in East Tennessee, West Virginia, eastern Ohio, etc etc etc.

 

I’d love nothing more than to see a large plant like this land in Appalachia, given both it’s desperate need and that it’s been largely forgotten.

 

The difficulty obviously is population density and skills to actually fill such an operation with 30,000 qualified workers. Now, people would drive hours to get there but that’s a massive operation.

 

they are bringing in most of the workers either way. it is the infrastructure that they based their decision on. they want the utilities/networks ready immediately.

It is really part of a self-perpetuation of the stagnation of some places and the growth of the megalopolis. The taxpayers who already invested in infrastructure are to give access to it for free, but are the dumb ones if they don't. No. pay like everyone else, or go somewhere and invest in their infrastructure.

Again, many of these jobs are filled, but located in Seattle or somewhere else.

 

30,000 people is fairly normal flux for New York. Not the case for Wheeling, WV.

 

if New York is offering something competitively unique, why are they offering tax breaks and such? This is the issue. It is a double dip for amazon, and not a fair evaluation of what NYC is worth as a home.

 

The lack of tax-based incentives prevents NYC from being able to provide a “competitively unique” offer, unless every other area did the same, and without a singular exception.

Some in NY didn’t want - and frankly, were terrified at the prospect of - a non-unionized workforce, and particularly one with that much money and clout of Amazon, being plopped down in Queens, NY.

They’d rather have no jobs than non-union jobs, and that’s what they got.

 

Agree. But I’d love to see it start somewhere, because there’s nothing now, and no real hope for it.

 

if that wasn't the will of the majority, they should make their displeasure known via elections.

 

Here’s where you get slippery.

The point you’re making is obviously, inarguably and ultimately true. But that’s not the point, because that’s not how things work - their re-election is not necessarily an endorsement of these policies.

If that was the case, Congress’ approval ratings wouldn’t hover in the low teens, while their re-election percentages hover around 85%+.

This was nothing more than the radical / union-worshipping segment of the Democratic Party who prefer that no jobs be had, and no money to be made, if such doesn’t directly benefit and enrich the unions. I’m sure that there are many other and real concerns with this deal, too - but let’s at least be as honest about where the opposition to the deal came from, and why.

Unions. Hard stop.

Which is fine, IP, but they can’t continue to say that these are the same people who you’re trying to help and champion...because clearly, it isn’t. What they should say is that we’re only willing and wanting to do something for you if it also and directly benefits our political cronies and donors.

If this was the GOP, and groups of lobbyists ensuring for the same, but for big business instead, you’d be railing against this, and rightfully so.

 

I have not heard the union angle on this anywhere but here. I know it had nothing to do with the arguments against amazon where I live. Virginia is not a hotbed for unions so far as I know.

If it was primarily a union issue, it was a strategic blunder because they could have had more leverage in pressuring unionization once the company had already committed resources to the move.

 

They aren’t the only place that can meet Amazon’s criteria - particularly economically when others are going to also offer incentives.

They can still win even with the breaks. So why wouldn’t they shoot for the win instead of letting another location get the benefits?

 

I thought I read something about some of the tax incentives were based on creating an X amount of jobs, and filling them locally.

 

what does filling them locally look like? Lets say you need a systems architect with specific experience with large data centers... okay, who here in Queens has experience working in Silicon Valley?

It would be low level jobs that would mostly be filled locally anyway.