Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 41
Thanks Tree7Thanks

Thread: Amazon halts Seattle expansion over city tax proposal

  1. #11
    Dick with my Buzz...Try DebateDrone's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    37,016
    Thanks
    31968

    From
    SWUSA
    Quote Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
    Amazon isn't very profitable, so there isn't much income to pay taxes on. The Seattle tax wasn't based on income.
    profit is opinion but cash is a fact

  2. #12
    Dick with my Buzz...Try DebateDrone's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    37,016
    Thanks
    31968

    From
    SWUSA
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    It's not just this tax, in my opinion, it's an ongoing display of extremely hostile anti-business rhetoric from the City Council.

    It may finally be backfiring. Workers of the world, unite — against Kshama Sawant
    Sawant, Trump are equally wrong on Amazon

    Or get this:
    Cities used to give tax dollars away to attract businesses and sports teams.

    ...with very little direct impact to the city.

    That is why no city wants to shell out the 70 million real tax dollars to host the RNC convention for the promise of millions of dollars in revenue to the city.

    Why should a city spend millions to benefit private companies and defer city taxes for 25 years?

    Cites are saying NO MAS.

  3. #13
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    15,332
    Thanks
    4091

    From
    Boise, ID
    Quote Originally Posted by DebateDrone View Post
    Cities used to give tax dollars away to attract businesses and sports teams.

    ...with very little direct impact to the city.

    That is why no city wants to shell out the 70 million real tax dollars to host the RNC convention for the promise of millions of dollars in revenue to the city.
    The RNC convention? Why are we talking about that now? What does that have to do with anything? Is there something particular about the RNC convention that makes it remotely relevant to this topic?

    Why should a city spend millions to benefit private companies and defer city taxes for 25 years?
    No one is proposing the City spend millions to benefit private companies. What are you talking about?

  4. #14
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,286
    Thanks
    28303

    From
    New Hampshire
    Overcoming weeks of extortionist threats and other forms of "corporate bullying" from the world's largest retailer, Seattle's City Council on Monday unanimously approved a new tax on Amazon—which paid nothing in federal income taxes last year—and other major companies in an effort to provide essential services for the homeless and combat the local housing crisis.

    Noting that the so-called "head tax" is quite modest relative to Amazon's annual revenue and the pay of its CEO Jeff Bezos—the world's richest man—socialist Seattle City Councilmember Kshama Sawant argued on Monday that "even a smaller tax is a huge victory," given the "Goliath-like clout of Amazon." A far more progressive and bold approach is possible, Sawant urged, if politicians refuse to limit "themselves to what's acceptable to big biz."

    Despite the fact that the measure passed by the Seattle city council on Monday is significantly smaller than the original $75 million a year tax proposal, Amazon continued its "howls of protest" in a statement on Monday, decrying the new tax as "disappointing" and "anti-business."

    Amazon paused construction of a major expansion of its headquarters in Seattle pending the outcome of the tax vote and has repeatedly threatened to leave the city if it dares to demand more in taxes to fund badly needed affordable housing projects.

    https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...t-homelessness

  5. #15
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    15,332
    Thanks
    4091

    From
    Boise, ID
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    Overcoming weeks of extortionist threats and other forms of "corporate bullying" from the world's largest retailer, Seattle's City Council on Monday unanimously approved a new tax on Amazon—which paid nothing in federal income taxes last year—and other major companies in an effort to provide essential services for the homeless and combat the local housing crisis.

    Noting that the so-called "head tax" is quite modest relative to Amazon's annual revenue and the pay of its CEO Jeff Bezos—the world's richest man—socialist Seattle City Councilmember Kshama Sawant argued on Monday that "even a smaller tax is a huge victory," given the "Goliath-like clout of Amazon." A far more progressive and bold approach is possible, Sawant urged, if politicians refuse to limit "themselves to what's acceptable to big biz."

    Despite the fact that the measure passed by the Seattle city council on Monday is significantly smaller than the original $75 million a year tax proposal, Amazon continued its "howls of protest" in a statement on Monday, decrying the new tax as "disappointing" and "anti-business."

    Amazon paused construction of a major expansion of its headquarters in Seattle pending the outcome of the tax vote and has repeatedly threatened to leave the city if it dares to demand more in taxes to fund badly needed affordable housing projects.

    https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...t-homelessness
    It is not a “howl of protest” to look at Seattle city Council and say “disappointing” and “anti-business.” Seattle’s leadership has been completely disappointing and indisputably, even proudly, anti-business. Amazon is not being a bully. It is extremely dishonest to characterize this whole story as corporate bullying and a poor little city council fighting back. Not unexpected from a shit source like commondreams.org though. Lying, fake news.

    Most city councils decide to raise taxes because they need to raise revenue to provide basic services. Most of the time they say they don’t like raising taxes, but know that they have to to provide the funds to do what they are supposed to do. Most city councils approach this like a responsibility and a difficult decision that they understand will upset some people, but they keep the focus on the budget and the things that need to be funded.

    This is clearly not Seattle’s approach. Seattle, led by its bat shit crazy Indian communist, is approaching taxes the way someone goes to war, With nothing but conspiracy theorist-like vitriol for all of the city’s largest employers. If it were my life goal to destroy the city of Seattle, I would try to get on the council and I would do and say the things that Kshama Sawant is.

    If Amazon and others don’t evacuate Seattle in response to the absolutely blind rage fueled policy decisions the Seattle city council has been making, then it will signal to radicals elsewhere that there is virtually no real consequence for going after large employers like they are the nation’s sworn enemies that need to be eradicated. This radicalization is the ultimate goal for communists like Sawant, and she is merely using the city of Seattle.

    Amazon is not the bully in this scenario.
    Thanks from publius3

  6. #16
    Southern Strategy Liberal OldGaffer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    41,942
    Thanks
    44130

    From
    Nashville, TN
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    It is not a “howl of protest” to look at Seattle city Council and say “disappointing” and “anti-business.” Seattle’s leadership has been completely disappointing and indisputably, even proudly, anti-business. Amazon is not being a bully. It is extremely dishonest to characterize this whole story as corporate bullying and a poor little city council fighting back. Not unexpected from a shit source like commondreams.org though. Lying, fake news.

    Most city councils decide to raise taxes because they need to raise revenue to provide basic services. Most of the time they say they don’t like raising taxes, but know that they have to to provide the funds to do what they are supposed to do. Most city councils approach this like a responsibility and a difficult decision that they understand will upset some people, but they keep the focus on the budget and the things that need to be funded.

    This is clearly not Seattle’s approach. Seattle, led by its bat shit crazy Indian communist, is approaching taxes the way someone goes to war, With nothing but conspiracy theorist-like vitriol for all of the city’s largest employers. If it were my life goal to destroy the city of Seattle, I would try to get on the council and I would do and say the things that Kshama Sawant is.

    If Amazon and others don’t evacuate Seattle in response to the absolutely blind rage fueled policy decisions the Seattle city council has been making, then it will signal to radicals elsewhere that there is virtually no real consequence for going after large employers like they are the nation’s sworn enemies that need to be eradicated. This radicalization is the ultimate goal for communists like Sawant, and she is merely using the city of Seattle.

    Amazon is not the bully in this scenario.
    How should cities pay for these objectives if not for taxes? The alternative is to go full Rio and surround the city with massive slums full of tent cities and homeless. Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society......

  7. #17
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    15,332
    Thanks
    4091

    From
    Boise, ID
    Quote Originally Posted by OldGaffer View Post
    How should cities pay for these objectives if not for taxes? The alternative is to go full Rio and surround the city with massive slums full of tent cities and homeless. Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society......
    Why did you click Reply With Quote when you obviously didn't (or maybe can't) read the actual post you're quoting?

  8. #18
    Southern Strategy Liberal OldGaffer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    41,942
    Thanks
    44130

    From
    Nashville, TN
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Why did you click Reply With Quote when you obviously didn't (or maybe can't) read the actual post you're quoting?
    I read it, your usual Objectivist bullshit.


    Objectivism's central tenets are that reality exists independently of consciousness, that human beings have direct contact with reality through sense perception, that one can attain objective knowledge from perception through the process of concept formation and inductive logic, that the proper moral purpose of one's life is the pursuit of one's own happiness (rational self-interest), that the only social system consistent with this morality is one that displays full respect for individual rights embodied in laissez-faire capitalism, and that the role of art in human life is to transform humans' metaphysical ideas by selective reproduction of reality into a physical form—a work of art—that one can comprehend and to which one can respond emotionally.
    Academic philosophers have mostly ignored or rejected Rand's philosophy.[4] Nonetheless, Objectivism has been a significant influence among libertarians and American conservatives.[5] The Objectivist movement, which Rand founded, attempts to spread her ideas to the public and in academic settings.[6]
    Last edited by OldGaffer; 15th May 2018 at 12:49 PM.

  9. #19
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,286
    Thanks
    28303

    From
    New Hampshire
    Small companies are now slamming this tax in Seattle. Some are going to move outside the city and others are refusing to hire new people. Several governors and mayors are now saying "come here instead."

    https://www.king5.com/video/news/loc...ax/281-8128439
    Starbucks slams Seattle's new big business tax

  10. #20
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,286
    Thanks
    28303

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by OldGaffer View Post
    How should cities pay for these objectives if not for taxes? The alternative is to go full Rio and surround the city with massive slums full of tent cities and homeless. Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society......
    A head tax is probably one of the worst ways to do this. I would rather see a tax on the wealthy or an overall increase in income taxes. Some cities use city taxes based on money the company makes. A head tax is just going to make companies keep headcount low or move them elsewhere. Mayor of Boston now is saying Amazon can come there and make it their new HQ instead of an East coast one over this. Its horribly unpopular.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 5th October 2017, 11:14 AM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 28th October 2014, 09:39 AM
  3. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 14th October 2014, 12:32 PM
  4. Replies: 66
    Last Post: 16th November 2013, 07:09 PM
  5. Judge Halts New York City Soda Ban
    By lka in forum Current Events
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 11th March 2013, 10:33 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed