AOC

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,262
    113
    Gtown-ish
    I saw AOC talking about it. Apparently, she thought the 3 billion was actually going to be paid by the city to Amazon, and that the money would be better spent elsewhere! You can't make this **** up.

    .

    About 30 seconds into the video.

    [video=youtube;L8Oel5lVQAE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8Oel5lVQAE[/video]

    Actually, I hate to say it, but she's right. I really wanted to believe she said something that dumb. But then I looked into the deal actually made with Amazon, and though the subsidies aren't all from the city (some of it comes from state grants), the total subsidies directly to be paid to Amazon was ~$3 billion. Cash money. NYC writes the check. Amazon cashes the check. That amounts to NYC paying Amazon $48,000 per job created. There are also tax exemptions in the deal as well, and zoning laws ignored, and environmental impact studies dropped, and expedited permits and whatnot.

    As far as her claims, it's not a matter of fact which you can dispute, because she actually has those correct. But, it's a judgement call whether that money would be better used somewhere else. It's not in question that the money was to be paid to Amazon. Her point about the jobs brought to the city is also plausible. There isn't a guarantee that all the jobs created will be for New Yorkers. It's very likely that the highest paying jobs, the executive jobs, will be filled from outside of NYC, either from Amazon or through an executive search firm from a pool of candidates nationwide. Again it's a judgement call whether or not one thinks that's good or bad.

    My judgement is that it's unfair to the smaller businesses, which have to pay the taxes, and have to follow the zoning laws, and have to do the environmental impact studies, and have to wade through the bureaucracy to get their permits. I'd be fine with dropping that stuff for everyone. But not selected elite corporations. That just ****s over the smaller businesses. Blasio thinks he's being a great wheeler/dealer. All he's doing is wrapping his lips around...well, you know. It basically makes Blasio a crony **********.

    I still think AOC is bat**** crazy though. It's just that this isn't the slam dunk we might have wanted.
     

    mmpsteve

    Real CZ's have a long barrel!!
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Nov 14, 2016
    6,112
    113
    ..... formerly near the Wild Turkey
    Actually, I hate to say it, but she's right. I really wanted to believe she said something that dumb. But then I looked into the deal actually made with Amazon, and though the subsidies aren't all from the city (some of it comes from state grants), the total subsidies directly to be paid to Amazon was ~$3 billion. Cash money. NYC writes the check. Amazon cashes the check. That amounts to NYC paying Amazon $48,000 per job created. There are also tax exemptions in the deal as well, and zoning laws ignored, and environmental impact studies dropped, and expedited permits and whatnot.

    As far as her claims, it's not a matter of fact which you can dispute, because she actually has those correct. But, it's a judgement call whether that money would be better used somewhere else. It's not in question that the money was to be paid to Amazon. Her point about the jobs brought to the city is also plausible. There isn't a guarantee that all the jobs created will be for New Yorkers. It's very likely that the highest paying jobs, the executive jobs, will be filled from outside of NYC, either from Amazon or through an executive search firm from a pool of candidates nationwide. Again it's a judgement call whether or not one thinks that's good or bad.

    My judgement is that it's unfair to the smaller businesses, which have to pay the taxes, and have to follow the zoning laws, and have to do the environmental impact studies, and have to wade through the bureaucracy to get their permits. I'd be fine with dropping that stuff for everyone. But not selected elite corporations. That just ****s over the smaller businesses. Blasio thinks he's being a great wheeler/dealer. All he's doing is wrapping his lips around...well, you know. It basically makes Blasio a crony **********.

    I still think AOC is bat**** crazy though. It's just that this isn't the slam dunk we might have wanted.

    Guess I didn't do my homework. Never imagined any city would directly pay for this, as opposed to tax incentives. Will have to study this more, obviously.

    .
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,262
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Amazon to the press after the deal was originally struck. Eh, they REALLY blew it.

    Media: You mean you didn't reach a deal?

    Amazon: no, we reached a good deal. I'm just saying the the extents to which they went to make that deal was, wow. Mindblowing. Excellent technique, by the way. Of all the cronies who have blown deals like that, Blasio is the best ********** crony ever.
     

    Brad69

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 16, 2016
    5,576
    77
    Perry county
    The money is still set aside for economic development it will not be used to fix the subway it will go to incoming and existing business. The lost city tax revenue from local businesses and real estate deals ect. not to mention the additional business that would have sprung up is lost. The money for Amazon offered by New York wasn’t the best deal other states offered more they picked NY,NY in part because of the IT talent available. So many of the jobs would have been New Yorkers but all of them would have paid city and state tax to fix the subway.

    A 9 to 1 return on a investment is good even to a Socialist
     

    ArcadiaGP

    Wanderer
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Jun 15, 2009
    31,729
    113
    Indianapolis
    She's adapting to the swamp pretty quick, put her boyfriend on staff to suck on the taxpayer teet.

    DzacPurWsAAJ5n-.jpg:small

    The twitter account that shared this has now been banned. I'm guessing "personal information" will be the reason, even though house.gov addresses are public.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,262
    113
    Gtown-ish
    The money is still set aside for economic development it will not be used to fix the subway it will go to incoming and existing business. The lost city tax revenue from local businesses and real estate deals ect. not to mention the additional business that would have sprung up is lost. The money for Amazon offered by New York wasn’t the best deal other states offered more they picked NY,NY in part because of the IT talent available. So many of the jobs would have been New Yorkers but all of them would have paid city and state tax to fix the subway.

    A 9 to 1 return on a investment is good even to a Socialist

    True. That money is already earmarked for that stuff. They could change the law to re-appropriate it though. But it's true enough that the money offered to Amazon will be offered to other businesses, and not be spent on all the things she listed.

    It's also true enough that the income tax revenue from all the people working there will go to the state and local governments, and that their "investment" would be recouped.

    It seems that AOC's reasons for opposing it is mostly based on "capitalism is evil". I think there's a capitalist case for opposing it. I disagree that government should be making these special deals, which favor some companies over others. The companies local and state governments are wooing will have some competitive advantage over smaller companies, which aren't getting these special sweetheart deals. They don't get the cash. They don't get the land deals. They have to pay the high taxes, and they still have to compete with the businesses that do get the sweetheart deals. It's crony **********y.
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    Could be a fake pic, too.

    While there is a lag in updates, a couple different Congress staff lookup sites don't list him by name, nor is that phone number at all listed that is associated with congressional staff.

    In my experience, a phone number like that would still be associated with whoever had it last.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,262
    113
    Gtown-ish
    The twitter account that shared this has now been banned. I'm guessing "personal information" will be the reason, even though house.gov addresses are public.

    This kinda gets into the weeds. As long as social media companies apply the rules consistently, and without favoritism, I don't mind if they have rules against using their platforms to dox people. Even if the doxxing is repeating information that is already public, the doxxing can be seen as a call to action, to urge followers to to fill the person's mailbox with hateful crap, or make malicious phone calls. I'm okay with them banning that. Just do it across the board and consistently.

    This doesn't appear to me that the purpose was doxxing. The intent appears to expose AOC's nepotism. Didn't need the contact information to make that point. If the person who posted that would have blurred or blocked out the contact information maybe they wouldn't have been banned. Hard to say because Twitter is biased and doesn't always ban people for legitimate reasons. But I can see where they could claim this was against their use policy.
     

    2A_Tom

    Crotchety old member!
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Sep 27, 2010
    26,340
    113
    NWI
    Commie, but pretty damn hot.

    I am not saying that other features do not attract my attention, but I have always been a face man.

    A pretty face or even just a cheerful countenance is what I notice mostly.

    AOC does NOTHING for me.
     
    Top Bottom