Should Amazon Have Negotiated With Scoundrels?

Posted by mshupe 1 month ago to Economics
30 comments | Share | Flag

Amazon did the pro-capitalists a great favor by exiting their NYC deal when the progressives threatened more economic extraction. The company demonstrated belief in their own purpose of economic betterment, and adherence to the principles of contract based on property rights. Let’s cheer them on.
SOURCE URL: https://www.centerforindividualism.org/amazons-nyc-exit-is-a-big-win-for-private-enterprise-and-property-rights-against-progressive-government/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by ProfChuck 1 month ago
    "When you dine with the devil..." Witness the inevitable clash between crony capitalism and socialism. Each side should have known that the other side would put their own interests ahead of the people. I am inclined to favor Amazon but only slightly. A pox on both their houses.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 1 month ago
    Amazon's problem was to even CONSIDER moving to NYC, the heart of leftist thinking. I thought their decision was stupid, in that in the end, new laws would be passed in the future which took away their "benefits". That said, the owner of amazon is a leftist idiot, so he deserves whatever he gets.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 1 month ago
      Yes, a leftist idiot, or more specifically, a crony corporatist. A huge volume of large corporate executives are OK doing business with the government because "that's where the money is." A private equity firm CEO told me this 14 years ago over lunch.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  puzzlelady 1 month ago
    I have always been puzzled why businesses should get tax "incentives" to relocate in a certain state. Sounds more like a bribe. All businesses should be treated equally: laissez faire. Giving special benefits to some at the expense of others and making favoritism-led deals is patently wrong and unethical, no matter what twisted logic is used to justify it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  AJAshinoff 1 month ago
      The opportunity zones are designed to encourage businesses to invest long term in areas where 20% or more of the population are below the poverty level.

      States competing for business that bring jobs to such areas is not a bad thing. Intensives, tax breaks, to morph ghettos into goldmines for tax revenue is the intention and that is not twisted logic. What was lost by Amazon not locating to Queens? Nothing. What was lost by NY when Amazon walked away were 20K jobs, ancillary goods and services sold/rented to the amazon facility, and income taxes from many thousands of (previously unemployed) people estimated at 20B.

      This is the free market at work on a macro level, state competing with state and intensives (tax breaks, cheaper land and cheap labor) are the currency paid for an area revitalization and a boost in income tax for the state. The zero tax gained from Amazon directly would have been dwarfed by the Amount of revenue generated in income tax and simply constructing and operating the new facility.

      Cortez and her leftist cronies should have a curse word attached to them....NY is hemorrhaging money and they really needed this type of business to stem the leak, thats why the lib elite are pissed (their chickens are coming home).
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  25n56il4 1 month ago
      Let me offer an explanation for 'incentives'. We have an 8-1/2% state sales tax. Mid-sized cities with lots of businesses hardly need or sometimes don't even need ad valorem taxes. Sales tax revenue is so great they give their property owners a break. Other cities, like mine, are raising taxes so high people are unable to pay their taxes. I think sales tax is a fair tax. We don't have a state income tax either.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 1 month ago
    The way for capitalism to prosper and spread is to treat the confrontation with socialism as a war. The socialists know that and have been using every dishonest trick available to them to win that war. The free market is essential to individual liberty and the minds of the young are a vital battleground. Those minds must be trained in how to think instead of how to complain about non-existent "rights" to equal outcomes.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 1 month ago
      I don't think capitalists are well served by engaging anyone except as respected employees, suppliers, customers, or investors. Only in the political realm do we need principled capitalists.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by chad 1 month ago
    The greatest method for illustrating the difference between capitalism and socialism would be to allow free markets to exist and those who want socialism can choose to try it if they wish as long as their participation is voluntary and they cannot force others to join them, and those who choose to leave are allowed to do so. It wouldn't take long to discover that if you want to be able to save your earnings, plan a future, if you don't want your currency to be devalued while you hold it you would not participate in the fiat currency scheme.
    If an individual had private property once then surrendered it to participate in the commune it wouldn't take long to realize your mistake. While the indolent often praise the communist idea as they go in because they expect to get more than they produced when it can be contrasted against those who live in the free market it won't take long for them to decide to get out.
    Socialism, communism and any form of tyranny can only survive (it never flourishes) as long as violence can be employed to keep people within the system. There are always people who are willing to 'sell' the lie, use violence to enforce it, and slaves who will subject themselves to horrific conditions, brutal treatment and mass murder as long as someone continues to promise them that this is better than the alternative of being free.
    Amazon negotiating with a government to get a better deal under socialism, preferential treatment by a governing body threatening the use of violence proves they are socialists also. They just didn't get the deal they wanted. They want the populace to pay more in taxes to have them there. Amazon should be demanding that the government stay out of their business and leave people alone. If you enter into a deal with the devil then you are on his side.
    I don't see this as a good deal for capitalism, Amazon will go somewhere else they can demand protectionism and favoritism over what any small mom and pop operation could demand for themselves.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  edweaver 1 month ago
    Amazon getting a tax deal that everyone else is not getting is capitalism? Hmm.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  25n56il4 1 month ago
      Does this mean our cities can't offer 'incentives' to attract business? I thought this was a good idea. Why would a business choose to go to a city for any other reason? I think the traffic in New York City is awful! And Los Angeles is 'off the map'. I live 25 miles from southwest Houston, and I made it to the Northeast side of Houston in 45 minutes on Christmas Eve. 'Course in Texas you better have a ramp on the back of your car if you're not doing 70 on the beltway! (Toll road). But I wasn't on the Tollroad!
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  edweaver 1 month ago
        Absolutely NOT! As a small business owner, I find it very frustrating that they take money from me and give it to someone to come to my state. It puts me at a disadvantage. If I received an equal amount, I could hire more employees and maintain my profit. This is simply wealth redistribution and it is wrong.

        If instead of giving incentives to companies to bring jobs, we get states competing with each other to see who can be the best run, lowest taxed states we would have capitalism, not cronyism.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 1 month ago
        In my view, the more government entities the better. That way they are competing with each other for talent and capital. The way to do that is with a simple tax structure that provides for morally defensible government services only. The elegance of free markets is that businesses will find them. Objectivists are capitalists that understand that the only natural resource that matters is the human mind. If local governments stop worrying about increasing their tax base, their tax base will expand as a force of free markets.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  edweaver 1 month ago
          I think you are more or less correct but missing 1 important item. Those government entities must be run with the idea of being a limited government.

          I was an elected county supervisor for 4 years. I cannot tell you the number of times other elected people would state, "lets see what other counties are doing and do that" or if the other counties are spending this much on xyz service, we can too". I never saw a tax go down and there's plenty of waste.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Lucky 1 month ago
    The article is quite right but I make a few extra comments.
    Why should there be a deal?

    Anything with a deal should arouse suspicions across the political spectrum, who is getting what out of it that they would not otherwise, and who is losing what?
    Why are not existing current rules applied across the board? If current rules are bad, then improve (or abolish?) them so they are impartial.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  25n56il4 1 month ago
    You and I would gladly accept $25 billion and pay back $3 billion, but AOC is one smart girl! She better quit celebrating, I would think even her constituents could figure this out! This will probably not be one of her better goals! She needs to take Goldie's advice and 'shut up and sit down!'
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 1 month ago
    Amazon just needs to focus on its own interests. It seems reasonable they wouldn't want to build in a place where people are protesting the tax deal they're getting. I would gladly support tax abatement to get them move to to my city. The critics think tax abatement is a free ride paid for by smaller less politically connected, often more locally owned businesses. They say we should not pay for the infrastructure for a company most of whose shareholders don't live here I think we should, though. Just as businesses produce external costs like greenhouse gases and other pollution, they also produce positive externalities.

    To sell it, though, you need both parties to be able to take credit for it. In WI, Democrats criticized the Foxconn deal. Democrats said we were betrayed because they were going to open innovation centers to design products instead of factories. President Trump called them and supposedly convinced them to change their plans and hire lower-paying jobs instead of the high-tech innovation stuff that pays more and provides the ecosystem for the modern economy to grow. I actually don't believe they changed their plans. I've worked at a major global CM. They don't just go from a greenfield R&D center to a greenfield factory after a phone call. So who knows. But I'm happy Gov Walker helped get them the tax abatement deal, and I'd love to see them do it with Amazon. I don't care if they don't follow through with exact plans.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 1 month ago
      Yes, all businesses should be left alone to focus on their business. Unfortunately, every level of government inserts itself into economic matters. The proliferation of tax abatements only means that the tax structure is horribly complex and abusive. Not only should church and state be independent, so should the economy and state.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo