So Amazon turns down NYC -

[Teenwolf]

too bad you lump every criticism into one bucket.
too bad you provide no evidence of her research into the issue, beyond her indisputedly and unrefuted ridiculously ignorant comment.
too bad you ignored my opportunity to actually acknowledge what I posted instead of continuing to mischaracterize it.

I was dumb enough to think that once you reread my comment, you would realize your error.

I don't know why I waste my time.

note to self: posters who begin posts with "Hahahahaha" are a little bit off their rocker.

I've watched AOC speak on these issues in a forum on affordable housing, and I went into detail with the type of critiques that she and Bernie, and progressives were generally arguing. I made the arguments and I posted an intelligent discussion from Michael Brooks about it. Nobody watched or responded. So I gave you all the facts already. You're choosing to make assumptions, and choosing to defend them even after you're shown that those assumptions are wrong.

Your assumption that AOC made her stance without research or supporting evidence is laughable. That's why I responded "hahahaha", because your post literally made me laugh.

[Judge Jude]

"I've watched AOC speak on these issues in a forum on affordable housing"

what are "these issues?" there's only one issue here - the tax break proposal to Amazon.

audio on my computer is not working, or I'd listen to the Brooks video. does he talk about the details of the Amazon tax break, either, or is it just opposing tax breaks in general for businesses? hmm, you just used the word "generally."

there are way too many overly generous corporate tax breaks out there; no reason for disagreement there.

you're on the 1-yard line, according to yourself. show me anywhere that AOC substantively discusses the details of the Amazon tax offer, and do a victory dance in the end zone. maybe somewhere she discusses the estimated annual benefit to the city, and questions specific portions of the projections such as number of jobs created annually and so forth. you know, that sort of thing.

so far all we can go on is her incredibly dumb comment on the deal failing, and her struggles with all kinds of facts (I recall one of her defenses being 'not to get so caught up in facts.' lol)

but if you only offer generalities, then that will be a turnover.

[Judge Jude]

hmm, this one has gone silent for some reason - Teenwolf has shifted his ranting elsewhere.

[Teenwolf]

hmm, this one has gone silent for some reason - Teenwolf has shifted his ranting elsewhere.

Dude, watch the fucking Michael Brooks video about this. Saying you don't have audio on your laptop is an excuse.

I couldn't find the economic forum that aired on Young Turks. But they had 3 of them, I believe, each on different topics. Listen, I watch like 8 hours of progressive news shows a day in the winter. I don't have the ability to find an exact statement that fits your criteria from 5 months ago. But I know that 100% of lefty media were saying that the $3 Bn tax incentive was questionable on its own merits. Specifically, changing the zoning rules to allow a helipad as part of the deal seemed like an unnecessary piece of the deal, but that's a small kernal I recall.

But my point is, if all of the lefty media was saying this deal was sketchy, and AOC, as I'm sure you're aware, relies on a staff of policy experts and such... you don't suppose her team was in her ear, saying "hey AOC... watch this TYT or Michael Brooks video, or read this article from The Intercept"...? They all lay it out clearly. I laid it out clearly. It's about stopping the corruption that creates monopoly, denying the proliferation of slave labour working conditions (try defending their workers peeing in bottles and diapers so they keep their productivity up). She also talked about the struggles created by gentrification and real estate speculation, and the housing instability fostered by that.

So AOC saw a lot to question in the Amazon giveaway package. I mentioned a lot (all?) of these points within the thread months ago. If AOC's specific wording about the Amazon deal sticks in your craw, that's your petty issue, and it's a fuck of a lot more important that she was ultimately correct in her instinct.

[Fresno Bob]

during my pillow talk with AOC, I always try to steer her to TYT....

[The Feral Slasher]

during my pillow talk with AOC, I always try to steer her to TYT....

I can feel the hatred, it's so palpable. so vile

[Sour Masher]

I think all future presidential elections should be decided by a dance off.

[The Feral Slasher]

I think all future presidential elections should be decided by a dance off.

I've got mad dance skillz. let's do it

[GwynnInTheHall]

I can feel the hatred, it's so palpable. so vile

I think that's something else you're feeling--If it lasts more than 4 hours you should see a doctor.

[GwynnInTheHall]

OK, so to fulfil a promise I made to JJ and keep my "honor"as JJ states, intact I'm responding to his query poised poised to me in a PM.

The question was--Why is everyone giving jessie a free pass after JJ had asked him for proof AOC Understood that the 3B in tax incentives weren't real money.

As someone who lives on the West Coast, what happens in NYC really doesn't impact me nor is of any interest to me. I have passing knowledge of those kinds of business transactions and even of AOC herself. I am familiar with Amazon and it's track record of how it treats (or doesn;t treat) it's employees. It's ability to avoid paying federal taxes (legal but is it ethical?) So I had to do some research, starting with re reading this thread (good god Feral and BG get a room! You can use the one Chancellor and I abandoned years ago) So here goes:

I believe AOC knew more about the deal than JJ gives her credit for in this thread, though he did give her credit for knowing something about it in him PM to me.

I believe she conflated the Capital advance money of 500 million with the entire 3B of incentives, 2.5 billion of which weren't tangible in hand money at this moment (but eventually could be if paid)

She SHOULD have been clear and corrected herself to state that she was #1 Unaware it wasn't all advanced subsidies #2 admitted she conflated the amount and own it. She's a target and when you do put yourself in the limelight, you need to be extra careful.

I also believe that her stance as an anti big corporation, anti uber wealthy makes her take a moral high ground as in--no amount of good that comes from a bad source is good at all. That's a totally different debate.

To Jessie's take--he did state on more than one occasion that AOC made a misstatement, but minimize it. then did the pickle dance when an article was published that semi vindicated AOCs position.

JJ think's he should have been called out for not taking the time to respond to his request for documentation AOC didn't just get lucky with the run out of events after Amazon pulled the plug.

JJ also thinks we, who ask the conservatives to take the moral high ground on Trump, to hold ourselves and Jessie to the same level of backing up statements with verifiable facts.

I find that both guys were talking somewhat past each other about this, neither one budging from their position.

To Jessie--I flag you for excessive celebration and ask that you take the time to provide verification of your statements when requested (It makes the pickle dance so much more gratifying)

To JJ I'd ask that you acknowledge Jessie's admission that she misspoke (in one of his earlier posts) and admit--NOTHING and NOONE is Trump level Stupid.

Not that my answer or this post has any relevance whatsoever in the grand scheme of things on RJ or in NYC. but there you go.

The BIGGEST thing I took away from this thread was that after watching the video Fresno posted starring AOC............I wish that I had Jessie's Girl.

[The Feral Slasher]

OK, so to fulfil a promise I made to JJ and keep my "honor"as JJ states, intact I'm responding to his query poised poised to me in a PM.

The question was--Why is everyone giving jessie a free pass after JJ had asked him for proof AOC Understood that the 3B in tax incentives weren't real money.

Maybe it's because I was the only one stupid enough to keep posting in this thread, and I didn't care about that part of the discussion ?

[Teenwolf]

Maybe it's because I was the only one stupid enough to keep posting in this thread, and I didn't care about that part of the discussion ?

I found your dismantling of BG and nots highly entertaining. Thank you!

[Sour Masher]

As I have said before, I get AOC fans, because of her energy, passion, and positions. But it does seem biased not to acknowledged, based on some things she has said, that she is inexperienced and not as knowledgeable as you would hope an elected official would be, especially when it comes to finances. She has made embarrassing factually inaccurate claims. But she is very young and new at this, and I am sure she will learn and grow and continue to be a voice for change in the party. She has been thrust into a leadership role as the face of the party just a little too soon. She needs to study up more. But a lot of that is not her fault. She sees problems and wants changes a lot of people want. It isn't like she claims to be the smartest ever and have the best words and knows better than generals and intelligence agencies. And taking sides of murdering dictators over the American people, all while saying the dumbest things imaginable. Who would say and do all that?!

[Teenwolf]

I don't have believe I stated anywhere that AOC was correct about the $3 Bn investment being a cash transfer. I'm quite certain that she misunderstood the exact mechanism that Amazon was using to steal $3 Bn of taxpayer money.

Aside from her misunderstanding of exactly how Amazon was to receive the $3 Bn, she understood that giving away money to a monopoly would create more problems than the investment was worth. On that theory, she was proven right so fucking quickly... 4 months! Multiple tech companies lining up to invest. So she nailed it. Now that all of that money is pouring in, it gives her leverage to say "Hey, remember when I said we should spend the $3 Bn on infrastructure and you said 'Amazon needs to invest first before we have that $3 Bn.' Well, Amazon and the other big tech guys are here, so... let's talk infrastructure."

At the beginning of the thread, JJ was smarter than BG and nots, stating that he needed to see some more in depth analysis to determine the merits of the deal. I think that's a fair assessment. Personally, I watch a ton of progressive political commentary shows. I had heard a ton about this deal, and all of the negative impacts it would have, and the questionable nature of the tax incentive offer. So I've already been informed by the type of people who are on AOC's staff, going over policy ramifications and strategy, etc. So I had faith that she was generally informed of all the reasons not to support the deal. But I believe JJ gets his news from much more questionable sources than I do, because without seeing any evidence, he suddenly flipped and decided AOC was an idiot for not supporting the deal. I called him out exactly as I felt his commentary justified. He started out reasonable and then flipped to a snap judgment, proven incorrect in 4 months. That's how I see it.

JJ, please find a way to watch the video I posted. Honestly, Michael Brooks is way more coherent than I am. I trust my media sources. I do have some concerns about AOC as well, but on this issue she is simply right. Looking back on the amount of rage and vitriol spewed by BG on here just made me wanna pickle dance my little heart out. JJ just caught up in the eye of the hurricane of my most furious pickle dancing. He wasn't a total douche like BG shouting "idiot", but I thought he would appreciate the evidence he sought at the beginning of the thread.

[Judge Jude]

your reading comprehension continues to fail you

"without seeing any evidence, he suddenly flipped and decided AOC was an idiot for not supporting the deal."

anyone who reads through the thread can see that this is demonstrably false. I said she was an idiot not for "not supporting the deal" - but for not doing her homework on a multi-billion dollar mega-deal in her neighboring district. she made a specific comment that seems to show that she had no clue - as you sort of admit.

and I don't believe she understood THAT DEAL at all - only that she and other progressives seem to hate every single tax incentive plan ever offered. which is dumb, obviously.

it so happens that I agree with progressives that very often these are terrible deals - repeatedly citing the almost universally corrupt stadium and arena deals around the country. I don't need to be convinced. and contrary to your inaccurate statement above, I never endorsed the Amazon deal.

but broken clocks are still right twice a day. my issue about her in this case goes to what Sour Masher recognizes - as do many others.

I don't know why you struggle to understand this.