Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez on Amazon's 3 Billion Dollar Tax Break

a reply to: Vector99

Because why engage in debate when you can just yell stupid insults at people. I can see why you like trump.

a reply to: pexx421
Well, now doesn't someone look a fool, I've been very vocal on my opinion of Trump both as an individual, and as a President.

I care about policies, not petty BS, and I happen to agree with many of Trump's policies, and funny enough, so did (D) until Trump won and now they oppose it because Trump.

Even freaking the silly one admitted tonight (D) is only acting the way they are out of spite...is that how you want to be known? The party of children? We didn't get our way WAAAAAAAHHHH!!!

Children do that kinda sh*t, grow the f**k up.

I ain’t a democrat. And I just meant because you emulate his behavior.

By that, similar to many on here, it’s cheap personal attacks, bombastic ALL CAPS mocking and not discussing issues.

a reply to: pexx421

Ok, so then explain to me how running off a corporation that has met every demand of the US worker is a good thing. The tax cut doesn't alleviate them of federal taxes, it is a state tax subsidy. I don't want to read the already debunked info of amazon not paying taxes, don't try that it's not worth it.

You tell me the benefits of NY losing amazon. Tell me ONE benefit.

Fair enough. You’re coming in on page 9 I’m, and this argument has been going back and forth. I stated all my points on 6-8 but honestly a lot of it was sidetrack about taxes in general and not terribly specific to aoc, amazon and ny. But I did state my research on Louisiana on there, one of the largest corporate profit states due to oil and refineries and such, but thanks to tax subsidies it manages to capture almost none of that for the state. So you have a state with massive Corp profit and yet massive poverty, standard of living, education etc. So people make plenty convincing predictions of positive effects even after subsidies, but it doesn’t always work out that way. And all the other points I made in my other posts.

a reply to: Vector99

But benefits of losing it? None. That was never my argument.

originally posted by: pexx421
By that, similar to many on here, it’s cheap personal attacks, bombastic ALL CAPS mocking and not discussing issues.

What's to discuss?

Unless you are going to spin this as a good thing for the citizens of Long Island...even CNN knows it isn'twww.cnn.com... -avlon/index.html

(CNN)This is why we can't have nice things.

Local liberal activists -- championed by Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez -- loudly protested Amazon's decision to move half its eastern hub to Long Island City ever since it was announced.
Amazon just called their bluff and is now pulling the plug on the $2.5 billion deal that would have permanently brought 25,000 high paying jobs to the heart of Queens. This isn't a win for liberal Democrats -- it's a face plant, an epic fail.
The activists were outraged that the incentives given to the world's wealthiest company were too generous. But they just screwed their community by depriving it of a transformational investment. It's a painful reminder that nobody wins when the not-in-my-backyard activist crowd stands in the way of the real progress that comes from investment.

Well to be fair I think corporate subsidies should all be ended. But that’s another discussion, I suppose.

originally posted by: pexx421
Well to be fair I think corporate subsidies should all be ended. But that’s another discussion, I suppose.

All sounds well and good and there is likely need of reform, but in todays global economy, reducing or eliminating subsidies, just sends businesses elsewhere. Either different states or different countries, NYC and LI lost an estimated 27 billion in the next 25 years. Then there is now a need to overcome that stigma that your government is anti-business. LOL no telling how companies would have followed Amazon, without subsidies and also contributed to local and state economy. All because a few politicians wanted to turn it into a hot buzz topic.

It's like in my business we are in a trade center, and yea the big players get lower rent, and other perks, but it works because it brings in other manufacturers and reps so much so, that we get more business for all. After 30 years we have done it a variety of ways, but we are busier than we have been in a long time and are actually consolidating and adding more space.

originally posted by: xuenchen


The new government arithmetic is confusing isn't it 😆...She added that if New York had $3 billion to give away to Amazon as a part of this deal, it should be able to find the money to pay teachers and fix the subway.

Not as confusing as the word "if", it seems.

originally posted by: tabularosa
$3 billion in tax breaks is $3 billion less in revenue for governmental bodies. Why does Amazon need a break? It does not. Period. Not to mention that Amazon paid no federal taxes for $11.2 profits in 2018; rather, it got a tax rebate of $129 million. And for all of you who are okay with this, do you enjoy having to shoulder an even greater burden so Bezos and ilk can add more zeroes to their net worth? Personally, I would rather not. I'm sick of the wealthy taking everything for themselves.

Why is everyone so stuck on the "loss" of 3 billion?? Flip that coin over. New York LOST 25,000 jobs on Long Island, another 15,000 jobs totaling 40,000 jobs in the state of New York and BILLLLLLIONS in revenue. Much much more than the "loss" of a 3B enticement that was spread out over years. Who cares if Amazon or big corporation gets a break?

Because NOW, no break for Amazon from New York, uh, ok. No biggie for Amazon. But the major impact is NO break for New York and the surrounding areas either. Who do you think got hurt here? All business works best if you scratch my back and I scratch yours.

Here's the big picture question that should be pondered: Who REALLY lost here????

Amazon is one of the world's biggest companies. Why do we need to give tax breaks? Amazon is just playing a game to make more money. If nobody gives Amazon tax breaks it will still continue to build new facilities.

Amazon is almost a monopoly and cities shouldn't bow down to their tax cut proposals.

a reply to: StoutBroux

Amazon has alot of wiggle room and will build a facility (creating jobs) somewhere else then. This is not some struggling company...

At least new Yorkers are putting their foot down to corporations who are constantly avoiding fair taxes...

Because amazon can go elsewhere and NYC gets zero. Giving up 3 billion in future tax revenue was peanuts to the billions they would have gotten from 25000 high paying jobs in the area.

It is stepping over dollars to pick up pennies.

Yes, no business should get a tax break but you have to think about the big picture. Amazon had cheaper options and the tax break normalizes it among other competitive alternatives.

IMHO, the fact you have to give tax breaks says your taxes are too high anyway but that is another topic.

a reply to: blueman12

LOL while New York will be fine, lets not act like 27 billion in 10 years can be recouped that quickly, besides the deal was negotiated in good faith with nary a peep, now there is all this squawking. Makes you wonder did NYC think Amazon wouldn't back out over this? approval for this was in the 60-65% range across a variety of demographics. Oh well good for Tennessee and Virginia as they beef up their locations there.

originally posted by: blueman12
a reply to: StoutBroux

Amazon has alot of wiggle room and will build a facility (creating jobs) somewhere else then. This is not some struggling company...

At least new Yorkers are putting their foot down to corporations who are constantly avoiding fair taxes...

You have a couple of problems here.

The first is that you answered your own question. You are absolutely right that Amazon has a lot of wiggle room to go elsewhere, and it did. People have been pointing that one out endlessly in this thread. The stupid part of the equation where this thread is concerned is that AOC seems to think the 3B in question was actual money the state of New York had in hand that it was going to write out to Amazon to pay them to move to New York, and she now says that money can be better spent elsewhere in the state.

*That's* what the thread is about. The 3B is the value of the tax write-offs - money Amazon wasn't going to have to pay to New York - so it isn't actually money New York has or ever will have in hand to pay for anything else now or ever.

After all, as you ably pointed out yourself, Amazon wasn't coming if they had to pay that 3B New York was offering to let them off the hook for.

The second problem is that you assume your tax rate is fair. Is it? If it is, don't you think everyone and their brother at every level of your tax structure would just be dying to move to New York? People generally don't try to escape something they think of as fair.

a reply to: Breakthestreak

Sure they are. Those billionaires, carrying the weight of the rest of us just so we might live on the edge of their utopia.

You know the Social Security tax has a cap, right? You stop paying that tax at a fixed amount and not a fixed percentage. Tie that sort of loophole in with tax havens, deductions and shifting the source of income and you've got millionaires and billionaires paying nearly nothing in taxes.

'But they create jobs which generate taxable income!" Ah...so we should take the money from the employees but not the employers? What does that get us? Income inequality. They get all the money, we get all the work.

Don't even get me started on the joke of the estate tax that doesn't affect anyone inheriting less than $12 million (thanks GOP tax break!), even then you shift the definition to something other than a direct inheritance and the tax rate approaches zero. 'They didn't inherit the company, it was sold to them at 'market value' after the deceased gifted them the cost of the company (which is taxed differently than an inheritance).'

a reply to: links234

Sad one.
If you’re so butt hurt about it, create your own company and earn billions yourself.

Or is ‘the man’ keeping you down?

a reply to: Breakthestreak

Making myself wealthy will only help me.

You really think this is about jealousy? Couldn't possibly be the systemic and generational class-warfare being waged against everyone making less than twice the median household income, no, has to be jealousy.