How Much Government Support Does Amazon Need…Wait🧐…Really Want?
Amazon no longer wants to put its second headquarters in NYC
If I had a large corporation making that much money and having that much potential growth to warrant a second headquarters to be shared between Virginia and New York City, surely, I am not wanting for any special handouts to get it done. What major corporations like Amazon do is essentially play politicians like fiddles in a rent-seeking move to extract some exponential benefit of further wealth creation by taking advantage of confused citizens.
Yes, 25k jobs is a lot to pass up but at what sociopolitical costs? Congresswoman Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, ¡ay, bendito!, is right that this really amounts to corporate welfare, and Amazon has sought to publicize it in a way that is reality tv show worthy to watch unfold.
What kind of bootstrapping is this for corporations?
Some nonsensical pundit on Morning Joe claimed that the freshman congresswoman was lacking in overall understanding of how normal corporate greed works in the U.S.
“The protests that we saw were to get on AOC’s bandwagon. And what’s shocking to me is yet once again she shows how little she understands, about not just economics, but even unemployment,” show mainstay Susan Del Percio said. “Just because she has a progressive agenda, which some people like, does not mean she has the city’s best interests. What she showed me today, or yesterday, is that she only cares about herself.”
That’s not economics, and unemployment is merely a subtopic of economics. What this is is corporatism and this apologists reasoning or reach for the status quo and its plutocratic reasonings is what confuses people.
It is easy to argue this by appeal to authority on this matter and proclaim what Ocasio-Cortez doesn’t understand, however what she does understand is that this has long been a model for the plutocracy to exploit. If the number of proposed jobs that average out to $100k don’t pan out — the politicians would be the blame. If the communities become disaffected by the presence of the construction and the influx of commuting in an already tight populated locale with a decaying infrastructure — the politicians would be the blame.
Now why Amazon hasn’t sought to allay those concerns primarily, among others, one should already know — that they would be doing what is in their best interest.
These so called subsidies are not a high priority item for businesses when choosing a location, the fact that zero sum fallacies are reflexively relied upon as a negotiation tactic obfuscates this dilemma. The NationalReview reports this finding to my point here.
Government finance expert Natalie Cohen interviewed site selection consultants and economic development experts in research conducted for the Brookings Institution, finding that [“]While corporate decision-makers’ top location concern is the availability of education and training, policymakers and lay people often think that tax incentives matter most. Tax incentives and tax packages are uniformly viewed as low priorities by location consultants, relatively unimportant to the basic decision.”
Tax incentives are generally considered only after the primary location analysis is conducted, and at that point the decision is between different municipalities in the same region.
Then there is this apparent favortism among companies already trying to sustainably exist where Amazon would likey disrupt. They are not receiving these kinds of subsidies and incentives to conduct business in the way that is being thrown at Amazon.
Competition is good and keeps businesses honest, however Amazon is privilege seeking in this case and would most likely crush the competition and would just as well end up costing jobs serving to cause as a net effect when you comprehensively take in job loss and growth. There would essentially be a lopsided trade-off due to the tax incentives, while the infrastructure is further strained without proper investment.
In a statement by Amazon on its blog site they scapegoated politicians for the decision while leaving out how their proposed relationship sans jobs would benefit the community sought to invest in.
After much thought and deliberation, we’ve decided not to move forward with our plans to build a headquarters for Amazon in Long Island City, Queens. For Amazon, the commitment to build a new headquarters requires positive, collaborative relationships with state and local elected officials who will be supportive over the long-term. While polls show that 70% of New Yorkers support our plans and investment, a number of state and local politicians have made it clear that they oppose our presence and will not work with us to build the type of relationships that are required to go forward with the project we and many others envisioned in Long Island City.
Instead of blaming the politicians in this scenario it is worth wondering what the intent of Amazon was and why they conveniently blamed politicians for their decision to forgo the location of the NYC headquarters hub. They played their game but members of the community wanted more in terms of sustainable assurances and protections, as well as jobs, and that it appeared was non negotiable.