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.
It's relatively recent research that states this, but is it really that ridiculous? Go through the sources on the article and keep in mind that the Richter scale we use is logarithmic and not a straight linear slope.
That New Yorker article has generally been debunked.
The article you posted has their quoted expert saying, "the article was “a little Hollywood” but otherwise pretty accurate." doesn't sound great. That's more about the depth of destruction in regards to the New Yorker article, but if you're talking about the probabilities game, the New Yorker article also mentioned it though with less emphasis than this followup.
Your article was more of a commentary than a rebuttal. It's interesting and perhaps more context and information might be assuring, but even in that, the article you posted explicitly makes clear that the threat is real. This is very different from the New York being "debunked", but if you have other reputable sources, I'm certainly interested in reading them.
Let's look at the poll above commentators. Los Angeles is THE LOWEST VOTED CITY out of the 20. Amazon is not moving there.
Miami is the 2nd lowest ranked city in the poll above. And Amazon is also INDEED in no way shape or form moving there.
So I much rather compare probable site locations from the top 9 cities. Which most commentators agree cohesively, then to even think of these outliers.
Miami and LA have their own commerce departments. They need no attention from this board. Both are great places to visit. LA has TONS of industry and economically is quite profound. But anyone with a BRAIN would recognize. AMAZON does not want another HQ on the WESTERN COAST. THANK YOU. They already have a HQ in Seattle. I think analytical thinking has been missed for many
With that moving forward I would like to look at and compare each cities package they presented to Amazon. Those in the top 9. Anything regarding Miami and 'babes' really talks of the maturity level of the poster. TBH.
Also I will be frank. L.A is not getting it. So I rather talk about Denver's package than anything about. L.A. If you think L.A is getting it. Again look at a map. THANK YOU.
It would make sense for HQ2 to be geographically distinct from HQ1 but amazon has not stated that as a criteria. To say that is their preference is speculation.
It would make sense for HQ2 to be geographically distinct from HQ1 but amazon has not stated that as a criteria. To say that is their preference is speculation.
the only related thing they did list was easy access to DC and NYC, which is sort of geographic
but does that mean an hour, a 5 hour flight etc who knows...
Though I believe they did call out a major airport for access to Seattle which was different then the access to DC/NYC statements
A discussion about a contending city's vulnerability to natural disasters is certainly worthy of conversation within this thread.
Amazon may or may not want to move to a city that is prone to a severe natural disaster in the coming years unless they feel confident that their host city has proper procedures in place to ensure safety for their workers and to minimize any down time they'd have as a result of the disaster. To be quite honest one of the many reasons they may be looking for a second headquarters is because despite Seattle assuring residents its prepared for "The Big One" (which will, in fact, be a big quake), Amazon may not want to take the risk of being out of operation for an extended period of time if and when the earthquake happens, and Seattle's leaders were wrong about their supposed preparations.
Miami was very nearly devastated only several months ago by a hurricane that thankfully weakened a bit and took a slight dogleg to spare it the worst of the storm. Is Miami equipped to get back onto its feet quickly IF a Category 5 storm with a strong storm surge takes direct aim at it? New Orleans assured its residents it was prepared for anything, too, pre-Katrina, and that city still hasn't fully recovered from the storm so many years later. Last I heard the Lower Ninth Ward was still a mess, which is embarrassing for a supposedly "prepared" city in a supposedly "wealthy" country.
Cities like Nashville, Columbus, and Pittsburgh, while small, offer a reasonable cost-of-living, convenient locations, AND also have the added advantage of rarely having to worry about natural disasters. Now I believe I heard somewhere that if the New Madrid Fault ever has "The Big One" that Memphis would be devastated, but I'm not sure if Nashville would also be affected. Perhaps a Nashvillian can comment on whether or not they have to worry about any seismic activities related to the New Madrid Fault. I know as a Pittsburgher not only do we not worry about hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, or floods, but most regional blizzards also seem to miss us (early-2010 "Snowmageddon" notwithstanding). I'm sure Columbus can say the same. The Columbus "boosters" here will certainly argue otherwise (the way a certain Clevelander on here always brings up their superior high culture for about 10 paragraphs to gloat); however, I feel like Pittsburgh is a more "urban"-feeling city than Columbus overall.
I'd love to see Nashville, Pittsburgh, or Columbus get this, but I do believe it will likely end up in Atlanta (fine choice), Metro DC (hopefully not the sprawling mess that is NoVA), or Philadelphia (fine choice).
I don't think so. The risk of natural disasters to Amazon would surely be a consideration for them. Seattle is "overdue" for an earthquake as-is the mid Mississippi Valley. The Gulf Coast seems to take Hurricanes in stride (New Orleans' rebuilt hurricane protection system is now the best in the US, including the "Great Wall of Louisiana") https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xOWEbq6WRM
and a lot of the Midwest is prone to tornadoes. To be honest, Pittsburgh is probably least prone to natural disasters.
Found this interesting. Not sure how some of the cities in the 20 final could be included.
"John Schoettler, who oversees Amazon’s real estate, provided a few clues while speaking at an event Friday in Seattle. The comments could be interpreted to mean Amazon prefers a more condensed, urban setting similar to what it has in its ever-expanding Seattle offices.
Amazon envisions “a combination of buildings and facilities probably within walking proximity to one another,” Schoettler said at the event, according to a Jan. 19 story in the Puget Sound Business Journal. Schoettler also expressed an aversion to bids that propose spreading 8 million square feet of offices onto several sites, unless those sites can be expanded or somehow connected.
He also indicated Amazon would heavily weigh factors such as availability and cost of housing and proximity to public transportation. “We look forward to cities that are also progressive and are thinking forward and long-term in terms of affordable housing and mass transportation and being able to move people around,” Schoettler said, according to the business journal."
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.
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.
