Amazon Water and AOC Oil Don't Mix

rickyb

Well-Known Member
3 billion in tax incentives. Which is less than 1 years salary for all of those jobs. 3.75 billion in income per year that will almost all be either taxed or spent locally.
cant recall how many economists i listened to were outraged that the richest man in the world is getting 3 billion in corporate welfare when the 3rd world subways in new york are left to hell.

its not really a free market is it when we give corporations money to come into town?

they have to go somewhere.
 

rod

Retired 22 years
Are you in favor of publicly financed sports stadiums?

It don't matter if Clyde Suckfinger is against it or not. If a few powerful people want it they get it. Look at Minnesota's new $1.3 + BILLION dollar stadium. Nobody outside of the Twin Cities wanted it--especially if it was going to be built right downtown where there is NO parking available to begin with (exactly where they built it). And let us not forget the argument that we could play better football if we had a new stadium. We all saw how that is working out..
 
Last edited:

vantexan

Well-Known Member
no and they made it worse giving it away to amazon.

jeff bezos doesnt believe in free markets, hes in bed with the deep state, and plays cities of each other for corporate welfare.
But they haven't given anything to Amazon. Amazon isn't coming.
 
Last edited:

oldngray

nowhere special
It don't matter if Clyde Suckfinger is against it or not. If a few powerful people want it they get it. Look at Minnesota's new $1.3 + BILLION dollar stadium. Nobody outside of the Twin Cities wanted it--especially if was going to be built right downtown where there is NO parking available to begin with (exactly where they built it). And let us not forget the argument that we could play better football is we had a new stadium. We all saw how that is working out..
Fast forward 10-15 years and the team will move when someone else offers them a newer and fancier stadium.
 

rickyb

Well-Known Member
It don't matter if Clyde Suckfinger is against it or not. If a few powerful people want it they get it. Look at Minnesota's new $1.3 + BILLION dollar stadium. Nobody outside of the Twin Cities wanted it--especially if was going to be built right downtown where there is NO parking available to begin with (exactly where they built it). And let us not forget the argument that we could play better football is we had a new stadium. We all saw how that is working out..
exactly and meanwhile the bottom 70% of the population has no influence over their politicians.
 

Turdferguson

Just a turd
It don't matter if Clyde Suckfinger is against it or not. If a few powerful people want it they get it. Look at Minnesota's new $1.3 + BILLION dollar stadium. Nobody outside of the Twin Cities wanted it--especially if it was going to be built right downtown where there is NO parking available to begin with (exactly where they built it). And let us not forget the argument that we could play better football if we had a new stadium. We all saw how that is working out..

Worst thing the Vikings did was get an indoor stadium.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
Then how come it let you down? In fact to the point you had yo leave.
If I hadn't quit after 11 years and gotten rehired it would have gone better. Doesn't excuse what they did, and they hurt a lot of people. But I made a mistake quitting. A lot of people do fine in our system getting the right education and skills to do better. There's no easy way out for most of us, only hard work and perseverance. Guaranteeing everyone a good life will ultimately insure most a miserable life.
 

rod

Retired 22 years
Fast forward 10-15 years and the team will move when someone else offers them a newer and fancier stadium.

Ziggy the owner would move them over night if he was offered enough. It wouldn't be the first time a Mn. sports team left town practically in the middle of the night. (Lakers-North Stars)
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
Try explaining that to @bacha29 ... he seems to want to understand but he’s struggling.
Like others on here you seem to think of yourself as a "conservative". You know, low taxes,deregulation non government interference free enterprise etc. But you seem completely willing to put public dollars at risk in order to back a capitalist venture whose outcome is in no way certain or guaranteed. A more complex but still a form of socialism where the losses are socialized but the profits privatized which is exactly what we did with the investment banks, merchant banks, the car makers, etc.
 
Top