Amazon HQ2 thread

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

You're crazy. In n out is fantastic

I wouldn't call it "fantatic" but I would call it about the best of the standard grade fast food burger places. And I give them credit for 2 things: (1) taking the quality of their burgers seriously, (2) producing and selling the best T-shirts around which ARE "fantastic".

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by 10023

What on earth is England's "brand" of fish and chips? There are literally tens of thousands of places serving fish and chips of varying quality. I don't doubt you had a bad one.

Waffle House is vomit inducing.

I'm pretty confident if I tried them at one place, I've tried them all.

But again, different strokes for different folks. My point is food snobbery (I.E. putting other people's taste in food down) is silly IMO.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Worth it to whom? Numerous studies have cast doubt on the notion that corporate welfare is a good idea.

Just Google "Is corporate welfare worth it?". First all, the promised jobs may never materialize and those that do may be filled by people not currently residing in the subsidizing geographic area who may not even be qualified for most of them. Then there are the infrastructure and other costs in addition to the subsidies. Also the negative impacts for current residents on trafffic and other quality-of-life factors. The national unemployment rate is already at full employment levels. In my city, it's under 3%. If we got 50,000 new jobs, who'd take them? It we got 50,000 new people over a short period of time to take them, the city could enter gridlock territory. As usual, cue the "San Francisco is different" chorus, but not that different really. Not in this case.

Just to clarify, Amazon has made it very clear that the 50,000 jobs would be created over the course of 10-15 years. It's not like they're just going to dump them all on the city the very next day after a decision is made. That would give the lucky city/state who lands them plenty of time to expand their infrastructure to accommodate the increase in economic activity.

I will also say, there are several cities I can think of that can easily absorb (and desperately need) this shot in the arm without it causing a significantly negative impact for current resident. Detroit is one that immediately comes to mind.

Lastly, even if Amazon can't find all of their talent locally the very next day after making their announcement, I still don't see any downside. For starters, that will mean some of the talent will have to be brought in from outside the city / state, which means you're bringing a ton of people into the region (transplants) who have their own creative ways of addressing issues in the community that natives may otherwise not consider due to provincialism. Furthermore, it would persuade city/states/companies to start seriously considering technical programs and subsidized education for the citizens/employees in their cities/states/companies who don't quite have all of the qualifications today to train them for future job opening (initiatives they wouldn't consider implementing otherwise).

[Jonesy55]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

I'm pretty confident if I tried them at one place, I've tried them all.

No, they vary quite a bit, from the deliciously succulent to the indigestibly greasy.

[M II A II R II K]

Puerto Rico has thrown its hat in the ring.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...o-makes-long-shot-pitch-for-amazon-s-hq2

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by Jonesy55

No, they vary quite a bit, from the deliciously succulent to the indigestibly greasy.

Do they all smell slightly of frying oil and seafood, both past their "used-by" date like Long John Silver's here (forget that they undoubtedly don't have deep-fried Twinkies like LJS)?

As an aside, the first time I went to Greece I noted the entire country smelled of over-dated olive oil and since I love oilve oil I was fine with that. To this day I prefer Greek oil.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

Puerto Rico has thrown its hat in the ring.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...o-makes-long-shot-pitch-for-amazon-s-hq2

So FEMA is providing them with hats because the Mayor of San Juan says it isn't doing anything for them?

[10023]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

I'm pretty confident if I tried them at one place, I've tried them all.

And this conversation is pointless. I don't go crazy for fish and chips, but that's like saying that if you've had one fried chicken you've had them all.

Atlanta isn't really a food town (unless you're only concerned with quantity). That was my point.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by 10023

And this conversation is pointless.

Yes. As I said, food snobbery is silly.

It's fine if you're not a fan of Chick-Fil-A, Chicago-Style Pizza or whatever, but there's no reason to put the taste of others down who do like that type of food.

[Omaharocks]

Originally Posted by 10023

And this conversation is pointless. I don't go crazy for fish and chips, but that's like saying that if you've had one fried chicken you've had them all.

Atlanta isn't really a food town (unless you're only concerned with quantity). That was my point.

10023, I can assure you, as someone who has lived in 8 major cities in the U.S. (including Atlanta), and 2 internationally, Atlanta is definitely a food town. Just like fish and chips in London, or the cheesesteak in Philly, the standard fare of fried chicken, chicken & waffles etc doesn't have much bearing on the overall quality of the foodie scene.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

It's fine if you're not a fan of Chick-Fil-A, Chicago-Style Pizza or whatever, but there's no reason to put the taste of others down who do like that type of food.

Chick-Fil-A is almost always said to have good food (for a chain fast food place). It's their politics that keep some people, including me, from going there.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

I still don't see any downside.

Well, like I said, plenty of other people do and finding their arguments is easy with Google. I'm not going to argue it myself because it's about 99% theoretical. Even after the fact, it's hard to prove how much of an impact these programs had one way or the other. The economy got better (or worse)--what actually was the reason? Usually, nobody can say for sure.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Chick-Fil-A is almost always said to have good food (for a chain fast food place). It's their politics that keep some people, including me, from going there.

Fair enough.

For the most part, I personally don't let politics dictate where I spend my money. My options for food and shopping would be very limited if I took offense at every little bad thing businesses do.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Well, like I said, plenty of other people do and finding their arguments is easy with Google. I'm not going to argue it myself because it's about 99% theoretical. Even after the fact, it's hard to prove how much of an impact these programs had one way or the other. The economy got better (or worse)--what actually was the reason? Usually, nobody can say for sure.

So there's a non-zero risk that Amazon will suddenly close shop tomorrow.

There's also a non-zero chance that none of us will live to see tomorrow. Does that mean we shouldn't still plan for the future and hope for the best?

[Encolpius]

Originally Posted by 10023

And huge "companies" have essentially run cities for as long as they have existed. They haven't always been limited liability companies (that was a 17th century invention), but there have been trade guilds (such as in the City of London) or wealthy families (such as the Medicis) far longer.

Originally Posted by 10023

But to stress the moral aspects of this is to misunderstand what cities are. A city is a concentration of economic activity... they exist for and because of big business interests.

Um, if I understand the point you're making (and I'm not positive I do), you're suggesting it's fine when powerful private actors exert influence on the state to bend markets to their advantage (as did medieval guilds, the Florentine Medici and the Dutch and English East India companies in the 17th century): it's fine because amassing lots of privileges helps them to increase economic activity. But that's bogus: most historians agree that the monopolistic practices of medieval merchant guilds reduced trade and hindered economic development until their power was broken by mercantilist state intervention, while the Medici bank collapsed under Lorenzo the Magnificent (and Florence was soon taken over by the doomsday preacher Savonarola). Using your economic clout to gain special privileges as Amazon and lots of other companies do is called rent-seeking, and no school of economists thinks a society which tolerates it will boost its productivity or economic output.

And of course huge companies haven't run cities 'for as long as they have existed' -- they certainly didn't run things in Rome during the time of Augustus or Athens in the age of Pericles, though those were fine cities, nor in the Madrid of Lope de Vega and Calderón de la Barca nor the Rome of Innocent X, Bernini and Borromini, nor in the Vienna of Mozart and Beethoven, nor in precapitalist Tenochtitlán, Edo or Peking. Huge companies have never, ever run Paris (even if it seems like you have to be a CEO to afford an apartment there today). None of those cities existed for and because of big business interests -- they didn't exist for and because of Beethoven either, but that of course drives home the point that one shouldn't dogmatically reduce cities to one single function. Thankfully they have myriads, which is why we shouldn't hand the running of them over to plutocrats or technocrats.

[dc_denizen]

whereas in the UK they just put 'rocket' in everything. classes up a chicken sandwich like anything.

[BrownTown]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

So there's a non-zero risk that Amazon will suddenly close shop tomorrow.

There's also a non-zero chance that none of us will live to see tomorrow. Does that mean we shouldn't still plan for the future and hope for the best?

Except when you look at instances of corporate welfare the chance that if comes back to bite the city in the ass isn't some existential threat, it's half the cases..

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Chick-Fil-A is almost always said to have good food (for a chain fast food place). It's their politics that keep some people, including me, from going there.

Man, it must be nice to be liberal.

I would have to stop using Google, Apple, Facebook and pretty much any other modern brand.

Liberals only have to avoid Hobby Lobby and Chick-Fil-A. I just wonder why more liberals don't avoid cars and the gas they take.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by BrownTown

Except when you look at instances of corporate welfare the chance that if comes back to bite the city in the ass isn't some existential threat, it's half the cases..

I would generally agree with you as far as corporate welfare, but in this case with Amazon HQ2, it's a once in a century opportunity that one should go all in for. The results speak for themselves given how it has completely transformed Seattle for the better. HQ relocations (and the benefits that come along with them) are already rare in/of themselves, but to have a HQ established with 50,000 good-paying jobs is unprecedented.

This isn't some manufacturing plant that will onl generate several hundred-odd low-paying warehouse jobs, but a corporate office where a ton of R&D will occur for a company that's the leader by a wide margin in R&D investment.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by jtown,man

Man, it must be nice to be liberal.

I would have to stop using Google, Apple, Facebook and pretty much any other modern brand.

Liberals only have to avoid Hobby Lobby and Chick-Fil-A. I just wonder why more liberals don't avoid cars and the gas they take.

I wouldn't paint everyone with such a broad brush.

Speaking only for myself, I'm what you would consider a liberal as well (if I shared my political viewpoints), but I'm also realistic about the way the world works (and agree with the point you're making).