San Francisco Federal Reserve Chief was working woke agenda - missed warning signs of bank failures

[multivita-man]

The online retail giant chose Long Island City — along with Arlington, Va. — for the HQ2 and said it plans to deliver the Big Apple 25,000 permanent jobs with an average $150,000 salary, along with an East River waterfront office complex totalling up to 8 million square feet.

All of that is fine, but there's more than just new jobs to consider.

The state enticed Amazon with $1.525 billion in tax credits and construction grants, while the city is giving $1.28 billion in tax breaks, officials said.

The state’s Excelsior Jobs Program will comprise most of its gift to Amazon.

The company will receive “performance-based direct incentives” of $1.2 billion from the program if it creates all of the 25,000 jobs it promised by 2028, according to an agreement signed by the city, state and Amazon.

Cuomo: $3B giveaway to Amazon ‘costs us nothing’

Gov. Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio on Tuesday rolled out the green carpet for Amazon — while claiming that $2.5 billion in taxpayer subsidies to lure the e-commerce juggernaut here won’t actually cost …

nypost.com

Amazon just cut 18,000 jobs in the last month or so, and just today announced another 9,000 cuts. Granted, that's their global workforce, which is massive. But it goes to show how companies can lose when betting on the future.

Can the city take the $1.28 billion in tax breaks and hire new teachers instead?

It could do a lot with $1.28 bln, and the $3 bln in combined resources allocated to Amazon.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

All of that is fine, but there's more than just new jobs to consider.



Amazon just cut 18,000 jobs in the last month or so, and just today announced another 9,000 cuts. Granted, that's their global workforce, which is massive. But it goes to show how companies can lose when betting on the future.



It could do a lot with $1.28 bln, and the $3 bln in combined resources allocated to Amazon.

Resources allocated?
Sounds like you believe, as AOC did, that the city and state were handing Amazon a check.

 

[multivita-man]

Resources allocated?
Sounds like you believe, as AOC did, that the city and state were handing Amazon a check.

They were given construction grants -- looks like a check to me. And one company gets the benefit of tax breaks and other incentives that could have gone to smaller local businesses.

In the short term (the first few years), maybe a new Amazon HQ is a net benefit to the local economy, but over time, not so much.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

They were given construction grants -- looks like a check to me. And one company gets the benefit of tax breaks and other incentives that could have gone to smaller local businesses.

In the short term (the first few years), maybe a new Amazon HQ is a net benefit to the local economy, but over time, not so much.

And one company gets the benefit of tax breaks and other incentives that could have gone to smaller local businesses.

How could the $1.28 billion tax break have gone to another business?

 

[multivita-man]

And one company gets the benefit of tax breaks and other incentives that could have gone to smaller local businesses.

How could the $1.28 billion tax break have gone to another business?

Tax breaks (and other incentives) are lost revenue for the government. Moreover, these types of incentive agreements are a long-term commitment over the course of many years. The tax revenue that is lost to Amazon could be used for job training programs or to fund local business development initiatives -- and of course schools, infrastructure, and other things.

Bear in mind that when a massive new employer brings its workforce and facilities with it, that is going to have impacts as well. Initially, these impacts are positive. New job opportunities for local talent. An income tax base. Spending customers -- those are all good things.

But there are negatives, too. Increased traffic, be it pedestrian or automobile, which may require investments in infrastructure that may or may not have been accounted for. Construction can create disruptions to traffic and residential living, which could also led to competition for living space. Anyone in a community with rapid jobs growth knows that rents rise with new jobs. No problem for the 6-figure employees who get hired by Amazon, but not so good for working class folk who get priced out of neighborhoods they've lived in for some time.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Tax breaks (and other incentives) are lost revenue for the government. Moreover, these types of incentive agreements are a long-term commitment over the course of many years. The tax revenue that is lost to Amazon could be used for job training programs or to fund local business development initiatives -- and of course schools, infrastructure, and other things.

Bear in mind that when a massive new employer brings its workforce and facilities with it, that is going to have impacts as well. Initially, these impacts are positive. New job opportunities for local talent. An income tax base. Spending customers -- those are all good things.

But there are negatives, too. Increased traffic, be it pedestrian or automobile, which may require investments in infrastructure that may or may not have been accounted for. Construction can create disruptions to traffic and residential living, which could also led to competition for living space. Anyone in a community with rapid jobs growth knows that rents rise with new jobs. No problem for the 6-figure employees who get hired by Amazon, but not so good for working class folk who get priced out of neighborhoods they've lived in for some time.

Tax breaks (and other incentives) are lost revenue for the government.

If Amazon, over a 10-year period, paid $10 billion, instead of $11.28 billion, how is that a loss of revenue?

The tax revenue that is lost to Amazon could be used for job training programs or to fund local business development initiatives -- and of course schools, infrastructure, and other things.

Of course. How much tax revenue from Amazon will now be available for job training programs or to fund local business development initiatives -- and of course schools, infrastructure, and other things?

 

[multivita-man]

Tax breaks (and other incentives) are lost revenue for the government.

If Amazon, over a 10-year period, paid $10 billion, instead of $11.28 billion, how is that a loss of revenue?

That would be a marginal difference. The issue is that these deals get baked in for years at a time and they're not so marginal.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That would be a marginal difference. The issue is that these deals get baked in for years at a time and they're not so marginal.

That would be a marginal difference.

I'd say $0 versus $10 billion is a very large difference.

 

[multivita-man]

That would be a marginal difference.

I'd say $0 versus $10 billion is a very large difference.

Maybe so, but I think the real economic impact is up for debate. As I said at the outset, I'd need to see an economic impact study or two before having an opinion on whether AOC was right to oppose Amazon HQ NY.

At the same time, however, I already linked you one article explaining that deals like the one struck with Amazon turn out to be losing propositions over the longer term (i.e., after 10-15 years). So for that reason, I share her skepticism.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Maybe so, but I think the real economic impact is up for debate. As I said at the outset, I'd need to see an economic impact study or two before having an opinion on whether AOC was right to oppose Amazon HQ NY.

At the same time, however, I already linked you one article explaining that deals like the one struck with Amazon turn out to be losing propositions over the longer term (i.e., after 10-15 years). So for that reason, I share her skepticism.

Maybe so, but I think the real economic impact is up for debate.

There is no debate that $10 billion in tax revenue is better than $0 in tax revenue.

At the same time, however, I already linked you one article explaining that deals like the one struck with Amazon turn out to be losing propositions over the longer term

The Bloomberg article? That was funny.


Those undersized (and eventually, waning) benefits could easily be dwarfed by the cuts cities have to make to afford incentive costs. Bartik says the most drastic cuts often come out of K-12 education—and skimping on schooling causes the worst damage to communities later. Every 10 percent siphoned from K-12 spending results in a long-term wage decrease in the community of 8 percent.

How does collecting 90% of the property taxes siphon any money from education?

 

[multivita-man]

Maybe so, but I think the real economic impact is up for debate.

There is no debate that $10 billion in tax revenue is better than $0 in tax revenue.

That's obviously true, but without an impact study and without Amazon actually ever having landed in NY, we don't have the real data to work with. You're just selectively spit-balling.

Those undersized (and eventually, waning) benefits could easily be dwarfed by the cuts cities have to make to afford incentive costs. Bartik says the most drastic cuts often come out of K-12 education—and skimping on schooling causes the worst damage to communities later. Every 10 percent siphoned from K-12 spending results in a long-term wage decrease in the community of 8 percent.

How does collecting 90% of the property taxes siphon any money from education?

From your NYPost article, property tax collection won't begin until after 10 years:

Cuomo: $3B giveaway to Amazon ‘costs us nothing’

Gov. Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio on Tuesday rolled out the green carpet for Amazon — while claiming that $2.5 billion in taxpayer subsidies to lure the e-commerce juggernaut here won’t actually cost …

nypost.com

The city won’t begin collecting property taxes until 11 years into the 15-year abatement, meaning the Infrastructure Fund will go unfunded for more than a decade.

So if their reporting is accurate, it seems that AOC's suspicions are founded.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That's obviously true, but without an impact study and without Amazon actually ever having landed in NY, we don't have the real data to work with. You're just selectively spit-balling.



From your NYPost article, property tax collection won't begin until after 10 years:

Cuomo: $3B giveaway to Amazon ‘costs us nothing’

Gov. Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio on Tuesday rolled out the green carpet for Amazon — while claiming that $2.5 billion in taxpayer subsidies to lure the e-commerce juggernaut here won’t actually cost …

nypost.com

So if their reporting is accurate, it seems that AOC's suspicions are founded.

That's obviously true, but without an impact study and without Amazon actually ever having landed in NY, we don't have the real data to work with. You're just selectively spit-balling.

Yes, I'm spit balling.
I don't know for sure that $10 billion is better than zero.
I have a strong feeling though.

From your NYPost article, property tax collection won't begin until after 10 years:

Ok. I'm pretty sure income tax collection will be immediate.

So if their reporting is accurate, it seems that AOC's suspicions are founded.

You're funny. Not real bright.

Cuomo promised that the city and state will reap a collective $27.5 billion in taxes from Amazon over the next two decades — with $14 billion going to the state and $13.5 billion to the city. He noted the figure would be a 9-to-1 return on investment.

 

[multivita-man]

Cuomo promised that the city and state will reap a collective $27.5 billion in taxes from Amazon over the next two decades — with $14 billion going to the state and $13.5 billion to the city. He noted the figure would be a 9-to-1 return on investment.

I say this as someone who would probably vote for Cuomo if I lived in NY, but Cuomo's not an economist. He's a politician, and it was his job to get his pompoms to attract corporate power to the state (probably so they could help fund his pervy campaigns). AOC was looking out for people in the city, which is where the real impact was going to be felt.

And as I pointed out to you, economic impacts and other facts support her suspicions.

Oh and uh, nice goalpost shift, by the way...moving from property taxes to individual income taxes, which individuals are gonna pay anyway.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I say this as someone who would probably vote for Cuomo if I lived in NY, but Cuomo's not an economist. He's a politician, and it was his job to get his pompoms to attract corporate power to the state (probably so they could help fund his pervy campaigns). AOC was looking out for people in the city, which is where the real impact was going to be felt.

And as I pointed out to you, economic impacts and other facts support her suspicions.

Oh and uh, nice goalpost shift, by the way...moving from property taxes to individual income taxes, which individuals are gonna pay anyway.

I say this as someone who would probably vote for Cuomo if I lived in NY, but Cuomo's not an economist.

He's not. It does look like he can do simple math.
Unlike AOC who thought keeping Amazon out would free up
$3 billion for more local spending.

AOC was looking out for people in the city, which is where the real impact was going to be felt.

Fewer local jobs, less local tax revenues. Way to look out!!!

And as I pointed out to you, economic impacts and other facts support her suspicions.

$30 billion - $3 billion......very suspicious!

Oh and uh, nice goalpost shift, by the way...moving from property taxes to individual income taxes,

What shift? Amazon never made a deal to cut or defer employee taxes.
Did you think the $27.5 billion in new state and city revenue was all from property taxes?
That's funny.

which individuals are gonna pay anyway.

Not to New York City or state if they don't already live there.
Not if they live there and don't have a job.

 

[odanny]

The SVB Financial Group (former) had a share price of around $700 in November of 2021, not that long ago.

SIVB Interactive Stock Chart | SVB Financial Group Stock - Yahoo Finance

At Yahoo Finance, you get free stock quotes, up-to-date news, portfolio management resources, international market data, social interaction and mortgage rates that help you manage your financial life.

finance.yahoo.com

 

[multivita-man]

I say this as someone who would probably vote for Cuomo if I lived in NY, but Cuomo's not an economist.

He's not. It does look like he can do simple math.
Unlike AOC who thought keeping Amazon out would free up
$3 billion for more local spending.

AOC was looking out for people in the city, which is where the real impact was going to be felt.

Fewer local jobs, less local tax revenues. Way to look out!!!

And as I pointed out to you, economic impacts and other facts support her suspicions.

$30 billion - $3 billion......very suspicious!

Oh and uh, nice goalpost shift, by the way...moving from property taxes to individual income taxes,

What shift? Amazon never made a deal to cut or defer employee taxes.
Did you think the $27.5 billion in new state and city revenue was all from property taxes?
That's funny.

which individuals are gonna pay anyway.

Not to New York City or state if they don't already live there.
Not if they live there and don't have a job.

Yeah, as I said, you're spit-balling. I'm not going to have a debate about things that are produced by your imagination.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yeah, as I said, you're spit-balling. I'm not going to have a debate about things that are produced by your imagination.

What about the things produced by AOC's imagination?

$3 billion more available for local spending. LOL!

 

[multivita-man]

What about the things produced by AOC's imagination?

$3 billion more available for local spending. LOL!

You're just tossing out random shit without context. You win the internetz, I guess.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You're just tossing out random shit without context. You win the internetz, I guess.

I guess, if what she said is random shit, you're right.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You're just tossing out random shit without context. You win the internetz, I guess.

What a fucking moron.