Slashdot Mirror
Facing Opposition, Amazon Reconsiders NY Headquarters Site: Report (washingtonpost.com)
Amazon.com is reconsidering its plan to bring 25,000 jobs to a new campus in New York City following a wave of opposition from local politicians, The Washington Post reported Friday [Editor's note: the link may be paywalled; alternative source], citing two people familiar with the company's thinking. From the report: The company has not leased or purchased office space for the project, making it easy to withdraw its commitment. Unlike in Virginia -- where elected leaders quickly passed an incentive package for a separate headquarters facility -- final approval from New York state is not expected until 2020. Tennessee officials have also embraced Amazon's plans to bring 5,000 jobs to Nashville, which this week approved $15.2 million in road, sewer and other improvements related to that project. Amazon executives have had internal discussions recently to reassess the situation in New York and explore alternatives, said the two people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak candidly about the company's perspective.
2.3 billion looks big and scary until you realize that NY State's total population is 20 million. That's about $115 per person. Total state budget is $168 billion, so that's about 1.3% of total budget.
The real problem downstate is that Albany controls NYC's purse strings. The subways would run much better if they were run by the NYC Department of Transportation directly, not subject to authority of clueless bureaucrats from Albany.
The people that Amazon employs are likely to earn more than the people they displace, which means the state will collect additional income tax simply due to the higher wages, but also because Amazon workers will fall into a higher tax bracket. Those workers also have more disposable income which means more money being spent into the local economy. If people are being pushed out at a 1:1 ratio with every person Amazon brings in, there's no net change in road utilization (unless Amazon workers are more likely to drive) or other utilization. If it displaces other types of labor, it just means that value of what remains increases due to more limited supply, so it would raise wages for those jobs. There's also plenty of housing available, but some of it needs to be reclaimed but idiotic development laws typically mean that no one wants to spend the time or money dealing with it.
It may still be that the net effect doesn't result in much additional revenue for the state or city, but I'm not sure if I agree with the reasoning that you've used to arrive at that conclusion.