U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Where?
New York City 16 3.10%
Greater Boston 32 6.20%
Philly 38 7.36%
DC/N. Virginia 50 9.69%
Raleigh/NC Research Triangle 32 6.20%
Austin 48 9.30%
San Francisco/Bay Area/Silicon Valley 13 2.52%
Baltimore 11 2.13%
Toronto 33 6.40%
Pittsburgh 35 6.78%
Chicago 99 19.19%
Atlanta 109 21.12%
Voters: 516. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 09-21-2017, 03:06 PM
 
2,517 posts, read 2,279,425 times
Reputation: 1851

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by KodeBlue View Post
Baltimore has the land and the infrastructure for the Amazon campus, right now. It will take away from Port Covingtons acrage, but Under Amour's development company is fine with that.

It would benefit the Baltimore region greatly.
I'm really rooting for Bmore. Hopefully the city leaders will create a convincing package.

 
Old 09-21-2017, 03:32 PM
 
499 posts, read 541,168 times
Reputation: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ebck120 View Post
I think people mention Nova more then the MD side because it has the largest amount of fortune 500 companies and also is the largest employment base in the region. There's no animosity between the two sides of DC like the way you're portraying it.
I believe DC proper as single, official jurisdiction, has the largest employment base and office space, it might be even larger than nova, since federal government facilities aren't counted.
 
Old 09-21-2017, 03:57 PM
 
7,743 posts, read 4,584,665 times
Reputation: 8450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Facts Kill Rhetoric View Post
My choice is Boston because of;

1. It has the technical talent and the infrastructure in place to optimize Amazon's operations. It meets all the criteria points aside from the supposed "cost of living" thing. Then again, if Amazon employees can afford Seattle and they can, then they can afford Boston.

2. After shelling out nearly $160 million in incentives for General Electric, I think leaders in Boston know they'll have to shell out, at a bare minimum, in excess of $1 Billion to get Amazon. Given the number of cities that are expected to offer over 10 figures in incentive money and packages to Amazon, my guess is that it will take somewhere between $1.5 Billion to $2 Billion to get the job done. Nothing less than that.

Boston is a very competent city with regard to luring corporate headquarters, it is a threat to any and all cities at this sort of thing. It now has the track record for doing as such and has shown that it can and will shell out Massachusetts tax payer money and the big bucks to draw in a corporate headquarters.

This is all around music, absolutely beautiful music to my ears. I want Boston to shell out in excess of $1.5 Billion and to get Amazon, it almost certainly will have to spend huge bucks to get this. I want Boston to do it because I consider Amazon a bland and low quality corporation, the type I wouldn't want any city I'm pulling for to commit heavy tax payer dollars in incentives towards. It's just not worth it, not for Amazon at least. Yes, big and rich but really more like this generation's iteration of Walmart instead of this generations IBM or Google. When Boston commits itself to paying Amazon this huge amount of money to lure them, along with General Electric last year, this will handcuff Boston in future years. Financially it will play itself out of contention for future corporate headquarters because it wont have its savings account to go back to and offer money in incentives. The cupboard will be left bare and you can only offer tax payer money in incentives so much until you run out of it for a period of several years.

So one day in the future, when a true high quality and prestigious company that either provides services or makes products that are both desirable or highly innovative, with industry creating capabilities, goes looking for a new location to put its corporate headquarters, Boston wont be able to lure them because it wont have the money to offer them. The best they'll be able to do is say, "please come here", and expect that to be enough. That only goes so far.

I'd rather have Boston get Amazon than something supremely high quality like Tesla, SpaceX, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Bloomberg Media, Alphabet, Disney, AT&T, Uber, or the like.

Don't take it personally Boston, it's really just a compliment from my end to yours. I like Boston as a city but I want to see it play itself out of contention for these things because one day there will be a truly desirable, prestigious, and highly innovative company looking to move and I would want a city that I am pulling for to get it. That's all, it is nothing personal. I view Boston as a real threat to get any and all corporate headquarter relocations if it so desires to, so if Amazon can weaken it financially by letting the city commit huge bucks to them for a period of several years in the future, all the better for other cities in the future when they try to lure prospective headquarters in the future.

Go Boston, go! Get Amazon!

Aren't I just pure evil?
When did you decide to go full heel? I don't think cities care about the "prestige" of the company. They care about the value that it brings to the city. I know you want Amazon to be Walmart, but it really isn't. In addition to being a retailer, there a television network and a full-scale technology company. AWS is so critical to the internet, Amazon might as well be considered a public utility.
 
Old 09-21-2017, 04:03 PM
 
Location: Tokyo, Japan
6,633 posts, read 8,338,276 times
Reputation: 7594
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
I don't think cities care about the "prestige" of the company.
That's great for those cities but I do.

If given a choice between two corporate headquarters that a city can lure, I would want the more prestigious and more high quality one. Every single time. Even if it is smaller and creates less jobs for the region. I would want the more innovative and more high quality corporation every time.

It is like asking if you were given the choice between Google and Microsoft and could only pick one to have based in your city, which one would you take? I'd take Google everyday. They're constantly reinventing their industry and their importance and influence goes well beyond just the number of jobs they create or the salary they dole out. Whereas Microsoft is on the baseline of obsolete. Yes, once upon a time Microsoft created something that was cutting edge but it went stale and could never adapt to the changing times. It is still a big and rich corporation but not one I would ever want.

In the future when corporate headquarters announce plans to relocate, it becomes easier for a city to lure it when one of its primary competitors for it has played itself out of contention as it cannot financially match offers. That makes it easier for other cities to get things they want when the herd has been thinned like that -- easier for places that I am pulling for like New York to get them without having to worry about Boston all the time, especially if its an amazing and high quality corporation. Boston is a real threat to lure corporate headquarter relocations, a very real threat because it has all the attributes of a high productivity and desirable city, because it is both of those things. Just from a competitor point of view I'd love for this Amazon ordeal to do something about that. To me that would be a win.

Also you consider Amazon a highly innovative and high quality corporation? Not surprised, you and I are nothing alike. We'll agree to disagree. I suppose enjoy your precious Amazon. It is, after all, what you want, right? I want you to have it. Please take them.

Last edited by Trafalgar Law; 09-21-2017 at 04:27 PM..
 
Old 09-21-2017, 04:28 PM
 
Location: Clemson, SC by way of Tyler,TX
4,870 posts, read 2,997,189 times
Reputation: 3403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Facts Kill Rhetoric View Post
My choice is Boston because of;

1. It has the technical talent and the infrastructure in place to optimize Amazon's operations. It meets all the criteria points aside from the supposed "cost of living" thing. Then again, if Amazon employees can afford Seattle and they can, then they can afford Boston.

2. After shelling out nearly $160 million in incentives for General Electric, I think leaders in Boston know they'll have to shell out, at a bare minimum, in excess of $1 Billion to get Amazon. Given the number of cities that are expected to offer over 10 figures in incentive money and packages to Amazon, my guess is that it will take somewhere between $1.5 Billion to $2 Billion to get the job done. Nothing less than that.

Boston is a very competent city with regard to luring corporate headquarters, it is a threat to any and all cities at this sort of thing. It now has the track record for doing as such and has shown that it can and will shell out Massachusetts tax payer money and the big bucks to draw in a corporate headquarters.

This is all around music, absolutely beautiful music to my ears. I want Boston to shell out in excess of $1.5 Billion and to get Amazon, it almost certainly will have to spend huge bucks to get this. I want Boston to do it because I consider Amazon a bland and low quality corporation, the type I wouldn't want any city I'm pulling for to commit heavy tax payer dollars in incentives towards. It's just not worth it, not for Amazon at least. Yes, big and rich but really more like this generation's iteration of Walmart instead of this generations SpaceX, Twitter, or Google. When Boston commits itself to paying Amazon this huge amount of money to lure them, along with General Electric last year, this will handcuff Boston in future years. Financially it will play itself out of contention for future corporate headquarter relocations because it wont have its savings account to go back to and offer money in incentives. The cupboard will be left bare and you can only offer tax payer money in incentives so much until you run out of it for a period of several years.

So one day in the future, when a true high quality and prestigious company that either provides services or makes products that are both desirable or highly innovative, with industry creating capabilities, goes looking for a new location to put its corporate headquarters, Boston wont be able to lure them because it wont have the money to offer them. The best they'll be able to do is say, "please come here", and expect that to be enough. That only goes so far.

I'd rather have Boston get Amazon than something supremely high quality like Tesla, SpaceX, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Bloomberg Media, Alphabet, Disney, AT&T, Uber, or the like.

Don't take it personally Boston, it's really just a compliment from my end to yours. I like Boston as a city but I want to see it play itself out of contention for these things because one day there will be a truly desirable, prestigious, and highly innovative company looking to move and I would want a city that I am pulling for to get it. That's all, it is nothing personal. I view Boston as one of the world's great cities and I like the place. It is just that I also view Boston as a real threat to get any and all corporate headquarter relocations if it so desires to, so if Amazon can weaken it financially by letting the city commit huge bucks to them for a period of several years in the future, all the better for other cities in the future when they try to lure prospective (high quality and prestigious) headquarters in the future.

Go Boston, go! Get Amazon!

Aren't I just pure evil?
Thanks for the effort, but disagree. Whoever gets Amazon won at minimum a 5 billion dollar lottery. They won't be handcuffed at all. Also, Amazon is about innovation, they're not bland. Wal Mart is about price.
 
Old 09-21-2017, 04:38 PM
 
Location: Tokyo, Japan
6,633 posts, read 8,338,276 times
Reputation: 7594
That's cool. Enjoy your lottery.
 
Old 09-21-2017, 05:16 PM
 
Location: Tokyo, Japan
6,633 posts, read 8,338,276 times
Reputation: 7594
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
I know you want Amazon to be Walmart, but it really isn't. In addition to being a retailer, there a television network and a full-scale technology company. AWS is so critical to the internet, Amazon might as well be considered a public utility.
Wow! A television network...

All sarcasm aside, I missed this little piece by you earlier. Yes, Cloud Computing made a concept that already existed better. You realize storing data on servers existed well before Amazon touched it, right? Amazon just enhanced a concept that already was there -- that's what Amazon specializes in doing. It allowed people to store their data and information on the Internet on remote servers instead of private and restricted use servers before it. Amazon also has a drone delivery system too, I guess.

Last edited by JMT; 09-22-2017 at 09:18 PM.. Reason: removed off topic comments
 
Old 09-21-2017, 07:06 PM
 
9,839 posts, read 11,448,153 times
Reputation: 2358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pine to Vine View Post
And guesss what! Here’s what the DC government webiste says its income tax rates are:

4% on the first $10,000 of taxable income
6% on taxable income between $10,001 and $40,000
6.5% on taxable income between $40,001 and $60,000
8.5% on taxable income between $60,001 and $350,000
8.75% on taxable income of $350,001 and above

https://cfo.dc.gov/page/district-col...ranchise-taxes

Looks like you live in the suburbs but if not, perhaps you’ve been underpaying?
No, that's only 25% of the tax burden. You didn't include property, car, or sales tax.
 
Old 09-21-2017, 07:18 PM
 
9,839 posts, read 11,448,153 times
Reputation: 2358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlajos View Post
The numbers in there make no sense. How does someone making $25K pay RE taxes in most of those cities?
Are you implying nobody can own a home making $25k? That depends on when they bought it. There are condos in the $30K range in 20019, 20020, and 20032.
 
Old 09-21-2017, 07:41 PM
 
Location: Tokyo, Japan
6,633 posts, read 8,338,276 times
Reputation: 7594
Either way, what got lost with the innovation comparison between Amazon and Tesla (as well as other corporations) was this:

I think ultimately it would be Boston IMO. The cost of living in my opinion is the only thing that realistically could hinder Boston from getting it but given how expensive Seattle, the location of HQ1 is, why would Boston's cost of living be such a detriment? Amazon employees can quite obviously afford Seattle, so they can Boston too. If cost of living is a true hinderance as people say and they truly want a large market, then it will end up in Chicago and if they want easier access to a global labor pool without immigration restrictions then Toronto IMO.

If they go with a smaller market, then either Austin or Denver but that's only if they go smaller than Seattle. Which may not be a feasible idea for Amazon, given how they're anticipating for big bucks when it comes to incentives and that alone could strain a smaller market city.

Last edited by Trafalgar Law; 09-21-2017 at 08:31 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top