Officials lured Amazon to New York with an extensive pitch, complete with four suggested neighborhoods. In exchange for 25,000 new jobs, Gov. Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio are offering Amazon nearly $3 billion in incentives. And while Amazon selected the Queens neighborhood of Long Island City as its new home, officials had proposed bringing Amazon’s campus to the Farley Building, 3 World Trade Center, Brooklyn Height’s Watchtower building, Bjarke Ingels’ The Spiral, and even Governors Island. — 6sqft
Jesus Fucking Christ. Usually I can kinda see a narrative thread and start to understand someone's point of view. jla-x, your word salad seems to meander all of the map and end up with a tacit support of the status quo, with enough lip service to people who want to change it to keep them interacting with your meaningless drivel.
You lost me at libertarian. If there ever was a crackpot label for politics, that one takes the cake.
All 10 Comments
$3 billion in corporate welfare to the world's richest man. Cuomo's should be sent to prison for this. Bezos could pay for the whole thing out of petty cash. Instead citizens will underwrite this debacle.
Shut this deal down. It was made in secret because the governor and mayor knew that the public would oppose it. It's a money grab by a corporation and a gift to real estate developers that will almost certainly hurt residents currently living in Queens and North Brooklyn. The jobs aren't going to go to working class families. These will be jobs that a young recent grad would eagerly move across the country or across the world for.
Real estate developers own Cuomo.
the USA is now Europe, minus the design culture. It’s the aristocracy who gets special rules, deals and a red carpet while the small businesses and citizens live in a gig economy like serfs. Small biz doesn’t get any benefits — just getting to be serfs to the larger banks and tech companies.
NYC itself is collapsing under the weight of bureaucratic urbanism, tearing down civic-friendly skyscrapers to build opaque faux-urbanist skyscrapers.
You can see how these urbanazis view architecture in this proposal —just random skyscrapers plopped down anywhich way, sans any design consideration
fucking bullshit. This is Why we need a complete separation between markets and the state. The welfare state needs to be abolished...but first the corporate welfare state.
Yeah! ..no....NO!
I have no problem with amazon...but the government should not be incentivizing anything. In absence of that 3 bil, the cost would likely have allowed other cheaper cities to be competitive. NYC is leveling the field for their own inflated Costs...and in turn likely further inflating their costs down the road.
that’s what you get when you have high taxes and still need to stay competitive with low tax states...European socialism indeed...
Special breaks for the big wigs who can go wherever they want.
This is an odd analysis of the problem. We have politicians in both parties serving corporate bosses, real estate interests, a wealthy donors. All of those rich pricks have benefited from neoliberal policy (deregulation, tax cuts, privatization, etc). The latest evolution of that scam has come in the form of tax incentives to corporations. It's not socialism AT ALL. It isn't "power to the people". It is "power to the super wealthy via corporations". If you think this is socialism, you need to talk to some socialists.
reminds me of the great bail-out of 2008, not a socialist measure by any means
Lol. David the ones in France are busy at the moment :). Which ones can I talk to? You are right, this isn’t socialism...it never is...that’s the point
It’s a fleeting ideal that never works.
Why are Ny and CA so unlivable and elite despite years of Democrats in charge? High taxes with special breaks for the poor and super rich.
And yes, the bailouts where the same. Corporatism.
Oligarchy manifests under big gov market economies as well as socialism
The only way to quell it is through a complete separation between markets and governments. And I’ll add between urbanism and government
problem arises when companies become sooo mobile that they can exist anywhere...then the expensive high tax countries and states have to offer incentives to compete. It’s the European way at the state level.
What are they competing for? More Taxes!!! Lol.
jla-x, I think part of the problem is that the ways that we talk about politics in the US fail to actually describe the real complexity of it. If we look at the world in terms of "liberal" and "conservative", it doesn't make much sense. NY and CA might have reputations for being liberal states, but these are still thoroughly capitalistic places. What we need more of is democratic socialism. We need more power to be in the hands of average people. And we need more working class people running for public office. You're not going to reverse the trend toward oligarchy and wealth consolidation with more capitalism.
jla-x, that bloody European socialism with their affordable healthcare, education, public transport etc. boo!
I’m not scared of all the goodies you get with such a system....I’m scared of the dystopia it WILL become under the stresses of the automation revolution where the value of labor is driven down to nada. It’s also an oxymoron. Democratic socialism cannot be democratic
Dude. You need to dig a littler deeper. Automation is one of the forces driving us toward socialism. The idea that capitalism is about creating jobs is being revealed to be a myth. And yes, socialism can be democratic. And yes, capitalism can be a dystopian nightmare because it naturally leads to exploitation, the exhaustion of natural resources, and the destruction of the planet.
Lol. Capitalism doesn’t create jobs? Who employs all these Americans?
What’s the force driving innovation and the arts for the last century? More importantly, What measures do you put in place to limit wealth? How do you keep “good people” only in a central govt with greater expanded power?
The devils in the details.
The goal of automation is to reduce the number of human jobs. As it develops, and as AI systems improve, it will continue to put more and more "safe" white collar jobs at risk. It will drive labor costs down, as you know, which will crush the lives of most people unless something gives.
jla-x, The goal of capitalism is not to create jobs. The goal is to make profit.
Because humans are inherently power hungry as they will continue to be under socialism...
Or at least enough of them to fuck it up for everyone else.
Automation will lead us into a totalitarian state of some kind. Left or right, what’s the difference. They both suck. We are screwed either way imo. Add climate change to the mix...the future is very very unstable right now.
It sounds like you don't know anything about democratic socialism.
The only hope I see is some kind of adaptive decentralized market economy.
It sounds like you don’t know anything about capitalism or history.
Ah history. Lets see what happened the last time we were on the cusp of irreversible climate change, artificial intelligence, and trillionaires. What happened the last time an American socialist organization had 55K dues paying members? When was the last time that an American socialist received 14.2 million votes? We are in completely new territory. The assumption that capitalism will lead to a better standard of living in the future is no longer convincing a large part of American society.
Ha. Like we would let some skinny jeans wearing assholes to take our property. Lol. Good luck
We the people that is...
Constitution prevents anything close to your socialist utopia from materializing.
"jla-x, that bloody European socialism with their affordable healthcare, education, public transport etc. boo!"
Oops, was typing so many things that my reply edit expired :) Things like paid maternity/paternity leave, subsidised daycare, state pensions, affordable social housing, indefinite social income assistance for those unable to work, and subsidies for the creative industries such as arts and architecture that allows young talent to start-up offices and research and experiment, etc.
jla-x, it's not a Utopia by the way, That's How I'm Livin'...
Which country?
Holland/The Netherlands, but same goes probably for lots of European countries like Denmark, Sweden, Germany, Belgium, etc.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2018/07/08/sorry-bernie-bros-but-nordic-countries-are-not-socialist/amp/
Those are market economies with generous safety nets. Stop rebranding the term socialism. It’s just as dangerous as trumps rebranding of the word nationalist.
If you want to talk about expanding safety nets, fine, but demonizing the system that has led to greater prosperity, innovation, creativity, mobility, and liberty than any other ever known, and then fetishizing a system/ideology that has proven to devolve into authoritarian murderous states is dangerous and disingenuous.
And let’s not forget the limits on safety nets, taxes, etc....for every Netherlands we have a Spain, Greece, France...
jla-x, Everyone is aware that there will probably be a mixed economy into the foreseeable future. This is the US, after all. But that doesn’t change Marxist theory, and it certainly doesn’t stop people from pushing in a socialist direction on small and large issues. Amazon, it’s effects on cities, and it’s treatement of workers are some of those issues make up the current “battlefield”. We learned this week that Amazon workers in the distribution warehouse on Staten Island are organizing a union. And just this morning, workers at the Tesla factory in Buffalo (another neoliberal tech boondoggle) were out in the cold organizing to become a union. These are all steps in the right direction.
“Pushing in socialist direction” is the same as pushing in an authoritarian direction in the absence of an ever shrinking government.
Its possible that a shared economy can exist within a capitalist nation so long as that shared economy is isolated from government. For example, companies with profit sharing structures, but that can be pushed further possibly. That’s fine and desirable...I’m all for decentralized pockets of libertarian socialism within a capitalist nation...communes, unions, etc. There is a way out it becomes oppressive. The problems arise when we centralize socialism and put it into the hands of the state, because it no longer becomes voluntary, creative, or resilient, and rights and liberties have to be infringed upon for it to work, and government must back the system with the threat of violence against non-conformity. It also undermines heirachies based on competence, merit, and leads to a population of entitlement.
jla-x, Why are you not talking about democratic participation? You seem to be lamenting the current condition, but you don't have a solution. High voter participation with an informed electorate is the way out, in my opinion.
And my theory is that if voters turned out in very high numbers, and if they were informed on the issues, they wouldn't tolerate poverty, war, mass surveillance, exploitation of workers, the degradation of the environment, inequality, abuse and harassment, corruption, monopolies, etc.
All laudable goals, the question is how much authority you are willing to accept to achieve it.
Democracy is not an economic system, and mob rule is not a good goal. Rights are/must be guaranteed at the individual.
"mob rule" ... You go from complaining about authoritarians and too much power being in the hands of a few to referring to the public as a "mob".
You have a Trump-like knack for contradicting yourself.
And, popular bad ideas are still bad ideas. Taco Bell, Nickleback, and Trump prove that true.
The public can be “a mob” if 99.99% vote to oppress 0.01%. Yes, mobs can be tyrannical. This is why individuals have rights, not groups. Basic stuff
Who said that individual rights are incompatible with high voter participation and having an informed electorate?
“And my theory is that if voters turned out in very high numbers, and if they were informed on the issues, they wouldn't tolerate poverty, war, mass surveillance, exploitation of workers, the degradation of the environment, inequality, abuse and harassment, corruption, monopolies, etc.”
How would voters stop poverty and inequality? Let’s start there...
In a democratic system, you would have to work through a political process of debating various ideas, fact-finding, and voting. I could propose an idea, but it would require a political process of persuasion to get people to support it. Personally, I think the fastest and least wasteful way to eliminate poverty in our current system would probably be to simply give money to people in poverty. For example, in Buffalo, NY, $750 million in public funds was spent to build a factory that Tesla rents for a dollar. Around 1/3 of Buffalo residents live in poverty (approx. 77,000 people). If that money were divided among the poor ($750,000,000/77,000 poor people = $9740.25 per poor person.) this would be an additional $26 a day for a person in need in Buffalo, NY.
Giving people money won’t end poverty, and it certainly won't end the depression it causes. People need purpose + money + a path to upward mobility. Native American reservations and LBJs great society clearly show this.
Furthermore, direct democracy may work in some cases, but most issues are too complicated, and the public can’t be expected to know about every detail and every unintentional consequence of a decision.
Especially in this emotionally driven political atmosphere.
There is a theory....I forget the source...it says make a system efficient to a point, say 95%, while remaining stable, but to get to 100% requires an exponential amount of control...totalitarianism....so the goal of 0 poverty or 100% equality requires an enormous amount of dystopian control.
We have to find that threshold...and never cross it...which means we have to accept a certain degree of the given problem
"Those are market economies with generous safety nets. Stop rebranding the term socialism. It’s just as dangerous as trumps rebranding of the word nationalist."
I'm not rebranding them as socialist, I didn't start with that "bloody European socialism" stuff, I just ran with it. It's actually even more painful to realise we have all of those positives over here AND a market economy too to pay for it all :-) So, it is perfectly possible to have the best of both...if you weren't so obsessed with labels.
Capitalism and socialism are different aspects of human nature. We are born to compete and cooperate, and the balance between the two is a large part of who we are as individuals. I happen to prefer the American model as long as it's somewhat fair,. Unfortunately, most Republicans have waged a 30+ year war on government which has undermined the rule of law, and created an imbalance of wealth which needs to be tempered. Hopefully after this orgy of Fox News madness, of which Trump is the apotheosis, we'll turn away from the extremes and recognize people are on a spectrum of human nature. Then we might get something done, despite the politics.
It seems a little more complicated than that. Bezos isn’t part of the “Fox News orgy”. He owns the Washington Post. And I don’t think many of the people at risk of being gentrified out of Queens or Brooklyn are in a position to choose to compete. Their elected official are on the side of the richest man on the planet. And the people at risk of being arrested and deported (or killed) by ICE because Amazon designed technology to make it possible, are in no position to compete. And the workers who are being expoited by Amazon in the US or elsewhere don’t have the option to compete. The options for these people are to unite in opposition and work through the channels of government or (let’s be honest) put their own bodies and safety at risk by physically disrupting or resisting. The theory that we all have the option to compete or cooperate ignores the reality of class, power structure, racism, sexism, etc. that put power in the hands of certain people and not others. Uniting, as Marx recommended, is the only option for most people on the planet.
I have zero problem with people uniting and resisting. I don’t have a problem with them protesting and disrupting. My problem is with a govt that caters to groups, be it via class, or the corporate entities. The govts loyalty should be towards individual rights and liberties. You are essentially promoting a slightly different flavor of trumps populism...no?
No offense, but Marx didn't have a clue about human nature or history. You make America sound like a dystopian mess when historically, it's one of the best places of opportunity for all. That being said, we are in serious need of reform as the capitalist system is always in need of. But your riff about getting gentrified out of a neighborhood is an inescapable aspect of a free market, which is an essential component of freedom in general. People seem to forget another essential lesson from history (besides beautiful traditional looking architecture;)... that it was market liberalism that brought about personal freedom. What's needed is enforcing our laws and putting all the crooks in jail, whether they are bankers, thugs, or presidents... and put them in the same jail. Free markets shouldn't trample the rights of the poor.
No offense taken. I think Americans typically struggle with the exceptionalist narrative that we are fed from birth that we are the greatest country ever in every way, and that God is on our side in everything we do. As we become educated (particularly in philosophy) and as we travel and meet people from other countries, it becomes very difficult to reconcile the very real achievements with things like US imperialism, the Iraq War, white supremacy, environmental degradation, etc. In the US, challenging the primacy of capitalism seems to be even more taboo than challenging the existence and primacy of God.
You're right about American exceptionalism in terms of being marketed to us by economic, political, or religious interests. And you're are absolutely right about the injustices perpetrated by our country. But it's not how a country fails, but how it responds which makes something exceptional. This argument doesn't hold water with those who have higher expectations of humanity, and I don't fault yours or Marx's, but I'd rather adjust my expectations based on empirical data to secure some good, be it imperfect. (I learned that from my Imperialist White ancestors;) That's why the Checks and Balances system has outperformed the Marxist Ideology. Let's hope it can handle the current stresses because the "Marxist" countries out there don't play nice.
SMH, glad Atlanta didn't win. Also really hope it doesn't look like the first image.....come on...
Lol. That building already exists.
bahaha
One thing that was not considered in selecting the locations was the quality of life of the employees on the salary Bezos intends to pay. Two incomes per family will still be required with the extremely high cost of living in both places. It is about as insane as the imminent bankrupt General Electric moving to Boston to attract younger workers.
Bezos is the personification of capitalism. He undermines businesses, underpays employees, skips out on taxes, has CIA contracts, owns mass media, has a seat on a Pentagon board, etc.
In short, he is the personification of everything that is wrong with this country. Which is why Cumuo is kissing his ass.
He’s kissing their ass because Cities operate like businesses. I’m sure they’ve calculated their ROI.
Cities shouldn’t operate like businesses.
Government shouldn't operate like business. Or should I say for business.
Exactly
jla-x, you're all over the place.
No, it’s really simple. A Government/states only job should be to guarantee your rights and liberties and provide basic infrastructure. They should not be in the financial or central planning business. This happens by proxy when taxes and overhead are very very high like in nyc. The governments financial burden becomes so great they turn to prostitution.
bureaucracy is expensive
Jla-x, Your side already won in the 80s and 90s. We're experiencing what happens after the forces of small government, deregulation, and privatization win. We ended up with corporate dominance of nearly every aspect of our lives. And those corporations turned workers into freelancers. Every person is now treated like a business, and trained to treat themselves like a business. We now have a condition of mass precarity.
“Turned workers into freelancers”. No one turned you into anything. If you choose to be a freelancer you turn yourself into one. Lol. This is the major problem with our world, everyone feels their lives are someone else’s responsibility. Jeff Bezos doesn’t owe you shit, and the tax payers don’t owe him shit either. Your beef seems to be with corporatism. I agree with that, but recognize that is a result of big govt getting in bed with big business. Keep govt small, and corporate subsidies go bye bye. Keep taxes low and war machine stops turning....etc.
No one is stopping you from starting a company that is equally owned by all employees. Problem is, as you would find, hierarchies based on skill and competence are necessary and productive, and that must be incentivized or it won’t work. Inequality is good. Imagine an architecture firm without any company structure based on competence. Imagine sports based on equality of outcomes rather then talent, skill, and hard work. It would be highly stagnant, boring, and unsustainable.
Equality of opportunity is a great goal. And we mostly have that..,Equality of outcome is hellish.
What makes capitalism better is I can choose to not use amazon...a Venezuelan cannot choose to not use Venezuela
Freedom Of Choice (Devo)
Freedom of choice
Is what you got
Freedom from choice
Is what you want
"If you choose to be a freelancer you turn yourself into one."
^yes no one is forcing you to work as a freelancer. And it’s not necessarily a bad thing. Who’s responsible for your life? You, Jeff Bezos, Soviet
*society not Soviet lol...
Removing responsibilities
is a form of oppression.
Which is the real reason the left wants to abolish the 2nd amendment...it represents self reliance...
AND, while I dislike the tone of Paris Hilton’s shirt, the message isn’t really bad. No one ever lifted themselves out of poverty by thinking the opposite-“keep being poor.”
And you missed the irony. Not surprising.
[redacted]
"a Venezuelan cannot choose to not use Venezuela"
This is unwittingly an argument for open borders.
I am 100% for open borders.
The only true free market is one that allows for the maximum amount of movement, competition, and diversity possible. Open borders is actually a very libertarian ideal.
It's one of the few libertarian ideals I agree with.
It’s the only way to achieve open borders. A socialist systems will always become nationalist or at the very least instigate a nationalist movement
Jesus Fucking Christ. Usually I can kinda see a narrative thread and start to understand someone's point of view. jla-x, your word salad seems to meander all of the map and end up with a tacit support of the status quo, with enough lip service to people who want to change it to keep them interacting with your meaningless drivel.
You lost me at libertarian. If there ever was a crackpot label for politics, that one takes the cake.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing
Sneaky Pete, refer to the libertarian thread from a while back. Libertarian is the opposite of authoritarian.
Neither extreme is good.
For some people self-interest means stepping on others to get ahead.
For intelligent people self-interest means taking care of everyone so that we all do better. This is known as enlightened self-interest.
It's pretty clear which camp some people belong to.
I agree, but it is only enlightened if it is a product of ones free will.
Free will doesn't exist.
Free will may not exist. Depends on what level you are referring to. On a physical level, time and space may be infinite forward and backwards, meaning that free will is an illusion, and the present is like the page of the book you happen to be on. On a nature nurture level, you may be so heavily influenced by your makeup that any choice is almost predictable. Nonetheless, the illusion of free will or actual free will if the later is wrong, seems necessary for living a happy life and maintaining a functioning society.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.