SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Employees at Amazon's headquarters in Seattle. (Photo: Elaine Thompson / AP)
Amazon's Billion-Dollar Shakedown of America's Cities
If these corporate behemoths are loyal only to their shareholders, what is to prevent this same travesty from repeating itself in cities across the country?
Nov 13, 2018
If one required reminding of the Democratic Party's complete capitulation to corporate interests, to say nothing of the country's as a whole, he or she need only have listened to New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio's address on Tuesday. "One of the biggest companies on earth next to the biggest public housing development in the United States," he told reporters during a joint press conference with Gov. Andrew Cuomo. "The synergy is going to be extraordinary."
The company in question is Amazon, which confirmed earlier that morning that Long Island City, Queens, will become the site of its second headquarters (a third headquarters will be located in northern Virginia). The announcement ends a 13-month pageant that saw 238 cities and their elected officials prostrate themselves to CEO Jeff Bezos, only for the multibillionaire to move his company into two of the wealthiest metropolises in the country (New York and Washington, D.C.) and likely displace countless working people. And for this privilege, the state of New York will reward Amazon with more than $1.5 billion in incentives, while the city provides property-tax abatements for the next 25 years--this as it faces public transportation and affordable-housing crises. Amazon, meanwhile, stands to save upward of $1 billion over the next decade.
As Derek Thompson argues in The Atlantic, moves like these are not merely outrageous. They should be outlawed.
"Every year, American cities and states spend up to $90 billion in tax breaks and cash grants to urge companies to move among states," he writes. "That's more than the federal government spends on housing, education, or infrastructure. And since cities and states can't print money or run steep deficits, these deals take scarce resources from everything local governments would otherwise pay for, such as schools, roads, police, and prisons."
Maddeningly, this corporate welfare seldom results in the kind of economic stimulus promised. Thompson points to the $3 billion in subsidies that Gov. Scott Walker used to attract Foxconn to Wisconsin--an investment that was supposed to generate 13,000 manufacturing jobs in Racine. Instead, the Taiwanese multinational has hired a fraction of that number, automating most of its assembly work. Thompson continues: "Even when the incentives aren't redundant, and even when companies do hold up their end of the bargain, it's still ludicrous for Americans to collectively pay tens of billions of dollars for huge corporations to relocate within the United States."
So what is the solution? If these corporate behemoths are loyal only to their shareholders, what is to prevent this same travesty from repeating itself in cities across the country? For Splinter's Hamilton Nolan, the answer is simple: federal regulation.
"The only way for public--you and me and every other taxpayer and city and state government who all have much more pressing things to spend money on than bribes to Fortune 500 companies--to win this game is not to play," he writes. "Nobody can play. The way to accomplish this is simple: We need a federal law banning these sorts of subsidies. Without a federal law, there will always be an incentive for one desperate city or state to start the bidding wars. By banning this insulting robbery of the public till outright, business will continue building, and investing, and locating, and relocating. They do all those things in order to make more money. Companies create jobs because they need work done in order to make money. They are not charitable activities. They do not need a bribe. They are playing on the desperation of desperate places in order to rip us all off. That should not be legal."
Read Thompson's piece at The Atlantic here and Nolan's piece at Splinter here.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
© 2023 TruthDig
Jacob Sugarman
Jacob Sugarman is the acting managing editor at Truthdig. He is a graduate of the Arthur L. Carter Institute of Journalism whose writing has appeared in Salon, AlterNet and Tablet, among other publications.
If one required reminding of the Democratic Party's complete capitulation to corporate interests, to say nothing of the country's as a whole, he or she need only have listened to New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio's address on Tuesday. "One of the biggest companies on earth next to the biggest public housing development in the United States," he told reporters during a joint press conference with Gov. Andrew Cuomo. "The synergy is going to be extraordinary."
The company in question is Amazon, which confirmed earlier that morning that Long Island City, Queens, will become the site of its second headquarters (a third headquarters will be located in northern Virginia). The announcement ends a 13-month pageant that saw 238 cities and their elected officials prostrate themselves to CEO Jeff Bezos, only for the multibillionaire to move his company into two of the wealthiest metropolises in the country (New York and Washington, D.C.) and likely displace countless working people. And for this privilege, the state of New York will reward Amazon with more than $1.5 billion in incentives, while the city provides property-tax abatements for the next 25 years--this as it faces public transportation and affordable-housing crises. Amazon, meanwhile, stands to save upward of $1 billion over the next decade.
As Derek Thompson argues in The Atlantic, moves like these are not merely outrageous. They should be outlawed.
"Every year, American cities and states spend up to $90 billion in tax breaks and cash grants to urge companies to move among states," he writes. "That's more than the federal government spends on housing, education, or infrastructure. And since cities and states can't print money or run steep deficits, these deals take scarce resources from everything local governments would otherwise pay for, such as schools, roads, police, and prisons."
Maddeningly, this corporate welfare seldom results in the kind of economic stimulus promised. Thompson points to the $3 billion in subsidies that Gov. Scott Walker used to attract Foxconn to Wisconsin--an investment that was supposed to generate 13,000 manufacturing jobs in Racine. Instead, the Taiwanese multinational has hired a fraction of that number, automating most of its assembly work. Thompson continues: "Even when the incentives aren't redundant, and even when companies do hold up their end of the bargain, it's still ludicrous for Americans to collectively pay tens of billions of dollars for huge corporations to relocate within the United States."
So what is the solution? If these corporate behemoths are loyal only to their shareholders, what is to prevent this same travesty from repeating itself in cities across the country? For Splinter's Hamilton Nolan, the answer is simple: federal regulation.
"The only way for public--you and me and every other taxpayer and city and state government who all have much more pressing things to spend money on than bribes to Fortune 500 companies--to win this game is not to play," he writes. "Nobody can play. The way to accomplish this is simple: We need a federal law banning these sorts of subsidies. Without a federal law, there will always be an incentive for one desperate city or state to start the bidding wars. By banning this insulting robbery of the public till outright, business will continue building, and investing, and locating, and relocating. They do all those things in order to make more money. Companies create jobs because they need work done in order to make money. They are not charitable activities. They do not need a bribe. They are playing on the desperation of desperate places in order to rip us all off. That should not be legal."
Read Thompson's piece at The Atlantic here and Nolan's piece at Splinter here.
Jacob Sugarman
Jacob Sugarman is the acting managing editor at Truthdig. He is a graduate of the Arthur L. Carter Institute of Journalism whose writing has appeared in Salon, AlterNet and Tablet, among other publications.
If one required reminding of the Democratic Party's complete capitulation to corporate interests, to say nothing of the country's as a whole, he or she need only have listened to New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio's address on Tuesday. "One of the biggest companies on earth next to the biggest public housing development in the United States," he told reporters during a joint press conference with Gov. Andrew Cuomo. "The synergy is going to be extraordinary."
The company in question is Amazon, which confirmed earlier that morning that Long Island City, Queens, will become the site of its second headquarters (a third headquarters will be located in northern Virginia). The announcement ends a 13-month pageant that saw 238 cities and their elected officials prostrate themselves to CEO Jeff Bezos, only for the multibillionaire to move his company into two of the wealthiest metropolises in the country (New York and Washington, D.C.) and likely displace countless working people. And for this privilege, the state of New York will reward Amazon with more than $1.5 billion in incentives, while the city provides property-tax abatements for the next 25 years--this as it faces public transportation and affordable-housing crises. Amazon, meanwhile, stands to save upward of $1 billion over the next decade.
As Derek Thompson argues in The Atlantic, moves like these are not merely outrageous. They should be outlawed.
"Every year, American cities and states spend up to $90 billion in tax breaks and cash grants to urge companies to move among states," he writes. "That's more than the federal government spends on housing, education, or infrastructure. And since cities and states can't print money or run steep deficits, these deals take scarce resources from everything local governments would otherwise pay for, such as schools, roads, police, and prisons."
Maddeningly, this corporate welfare seldom results in the kind of economic stimulus promised. Thompson points to the $3 billion in subsidies that Gov. Scott Walker used to attract Foxconn to Wisconsin--an investment that was supposed to generate 13,000 manufacturing jobs in Racine. Instead, the Taiwanese multinational has hired a fraction of that number, automating most of its assembly work. Thompson continues: "Even when the incentives aren't redundant, and even when companies do hold up their end of the bargain, it's still ludicrous for Americans to collectively pay tens of billions of dollars for huge corporations to relocate within the United States."
So what is the solution? If these corporate behemoths are loyal only to their shareholders, what is to prevent this same travesty from repeating itself in cities across the country? For Splinter's Hamilton Nolan, the answer is simple: federal regulation.
"The only way for public--you and me and every other taxpayer and city and state government who all have much more pressing things to spend money on than bribes to Fortune 500 companies--to win this game is not to play," he writes. "Nobody can play. The way to accomplish this is simple: We need a federal law banning these sorts of subsidies. Without a federal law, there will always be an incentive for one desperate city or state to start the bidding wars. By banning this insulting robbery of the public till outright, business will continue building, and investing, and locating, and relocating. They do all those things in order to make more money. Companies create jobs because they need work done in order to make money. They are not charitable activities. They do not need a bribe. They are playing on the desperation of desperate places in order to rip us all off. That should not be legal."
Read Thompson's piece at The Atlantic here and Nolan's piece at Splinter here.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.