[beer belly]

Originally Posted by MrGompers

Unfortunately, our elected officials and most of the general public can't see beyond the statement that I bolded above. I'm sure I can show that a deal like the one Amazon is seeking will be a net loser for the cities and state it chooses.

However, like I said in a different thread regarding GE - if Amazon wants to exchange stock and/or stock options for those tax breaks I'm all for it. That way the taxpayers have an opportunity to participate in the income and capital gains just like Jeff Bezos, other executives and shareholders do.

I don't think that is possible as the state is considered a non profit.....I believe

[Mike 75]

Originally Posted by MrGompers

Unfortunately, our elected officials and most of the general public can't see beyond the statement that I bolded above. I'm sure I can show that a deal like the one Amazon is seeking will be a net loser for the cities and state it chooses.

However, like I said in a different thread regarding GE - if Amazon wants to exchange stock and/or stock options for those tax breaks I'm all for it. That way the taxpayers have an opportunity to participate in the income and capital gains just like Jeff Bezos, other executives and shareholders do.

Then please do. Because it seems to me that 50,000 new taxpayers with high paying jobs is a win for the state. Not to mention the knock on effect for the economy from 50,000 new residents with disposable income. But if there are reasons why the deal would be a loser for the state, I think everyone here would love to hear them.

[JGBigGreen]

It may not be fake news but it is nothing more than a PR puff piece. I love the city of New Haven but there are very few reasons to suggest or believe that it is becoming a center for startups. The article mentions Yale but Yale lags far behind most other institutions of its' caliber in commercializing research. I'd be interested to see any credible publication that might make the same argument this piece does.

Originally Posted by JayCT

Your comments could apply to many of the articles and opinion pieces posters point to on this forum that criticize our state yet you do not seem to be so critical of them. I am not sure why you are so concerned with the reference to Louis Lunch where it is believed that the American hamburger was first made. It is an American institution that has stood the test of time. You may not like it but it is obvious that you are in the minority. So again who cares if the piece does not meet your strict criteria for journalism structure. It presents facts and the writers opinions which is what matters. It is not misinformation or fake news whether you like it or not. Jay

[ads94]

I work for a high-tech firm in the New Haven metro area in a suburban setting. Most of our talent comes from out of state. The only local folks we get are from Wesleyan. We do chemistry modeling software, and there is no indication that New Haven is some sort of burgeoning centre for a tech startup.

[westender]

Originally Posted by AntonioR

As far as Connecticut is concerned, the best area for Amazon is the Stamford-Norwalk area. Stamford probably has more office space available (I'm thinking of the old UBS headquarters and the old Pitney Bowes headquarters.) If I was Dan Malloy, I would try to sweeten the pot to make it easy for Amazon to pick Connecticut as the place for its next headquarters.

Connecticut should of course submit a proposal in response to the Amazon RFP. But I wonder if Hartford is it -- it's somewhat pie-in-the-sky compared to Stamford or Bridgeport.

For Hartford, the city and state would need to propose significant eminent domain to meet the acreage Bezos requires.

If it's Parkville/ Frog Hollow, everything between the train tracks (which would need a dedicated stop) and Park Place would need to be demolished or otherwise e-d, including a significant chunk of Pope Park. They would probably also need to bury that section of I-84. This would be at least a few billion in prep work. There would be intense pushback.

If it's the North Downtown area, it's going to need acreage from the North Meadows car dealerships plus a good chunk of residential. Might be cheaper, but it's not as attractive of a site.

Either of these sites developed as a 50-acre HQ2 "phase one" with 50,000 employees would of course provide enormous vitality to Hartford. Game changing revitalization, in fact. But the fighting over eminent domain would be epic.

[East of the River]

Originally Posted by westender

Connecticut should of course submit a proposal in response to the Amazon RFP. But I wonder if Hartford is it -- it's somewhat pie-in-the-sky compared to Stamford or Bridgeport.

For Hartford, the city and state would need to propose significant eminent domain to meet the acreage Bezos requires.

If it's Parkville/ Frog Hollow, everything between the train tracks (which would need a dedicated stop) and Park Place would need to be demolished or otherwise e-d, including a significant chunk of Pope Park. They would probably also need to bury that section of I-84. This would be at least a few billion in prep work. There would be intense pushback.

If it's the North Downtown area, it's going to need acreage from the North Meadows car dealerships plus a good chunk of residential. Might be cheaper, but it's not as attractive of a site.

Either of these sites developed as a 50-acre HQ2 "phase one" with 50,000 employees would of course provide enormous vitality to Hartford. Game changing revitalization, in fact. But the fighting over eminent domain would be epic.

Looking at the RFP it does not have to be continuous acreage. They seem to B ok with half a block here half a block there as they have done in Seattle.

[ayoskillz]

Again ct has no chance of getting amazon. One of the main things is They want tax breaks and that's something ct can't give right now. It's going to go to the city/state that can dish out the most money, tax breaks and have the most available workforce already close along with a cheap cost of living to bring new comers in

[MrGompers]

Originally Posted by beer belly

I don't think that is possible as the state is considered a non profit.....I believe

I'm not aware of any rules or laws that would prevent a Govt from holding securities. I could see a potential for conflict of interests, however i think a bunch of smart lawyers and accountants can overcome that.

The point is these corporations want to socialize their expenses (and in some cases losses) but when it comes to the income/gains they want to privatize it. Giving the taxpayers stocks or stock options in Amazon would effectively socialize the income/gains too.

I'm sure Jeff Bezos is smart enough to keep enough shares himself so he can maintain control of Amazon.

[HumpDay]

https://www.google.com/amp/www.coura...story,amp.html

Will Alexion be next? Moving to Boston?

This is not good. Another company moving out, if it ends up being true. It's saying in the article that it will be clarified tomorrow morning. The state plans to give them $26 million to keep them staying put. When will the state learn that it has nothing to do with taxes, and everything to do with where the new workforce wants to be. Suburbs aren't cutting it if many of the attractive suburbs aren't affordable to millenials with mounting debt. The funny thing is that they literally just finished their building in New Haven, and now theyre thinking of leaving LOL.

[Henry10]

Originally Posted by MrGompers

The point is these corporations want to socialize their expenses...

Not just corporations, but politicians want to socialize corporations' expenses too. And corporations wouldn't be able to socialize their expenses if the political class didn't allow or encourage it. That's why govt needs to be small and the professional political class needs to be dismantled. It's them really who socialize the pain, but not the gain.

Originally Posted by MrGompers

Giving the taxpayers stocks or stock options in Amazon would effectively socialize the income/gains too.

What's missing here is that taxpayers can become stockholders of Amazon via some Govt action, mandate, dictate, force. Without Govt, anybody can buy Amazon stocks, but that's not what we are talking about here.

Govt indirectly invest in a million ways into corporations. What you are calling here is plain nationalization, and Govt take-over of private enterprise. Good, bad, or indifferent you are calling for Amazon to turn into a state-owned company. That's where this would go.

Let's just call it spade-to-spade.