Also looks like Amazon is now predatory pricing to kill UPS and Fedex. Classic monopolizing technique. cnbc.com/2018/11/09/ama…
This is my favorite subsidy for Amazon. Small, but humiliating. "The company will also receive a cash grant from Arlington of $23 million over 15 years based on the incremental growth of the existing local Transient Occupancy Tax, a tax on hotel rooms."
Also, Amazon isn't splitting this between two cities, but three cities. Nashville is getting an Amazon "Operations Center of Excellence." Even the press release of 'splitting between two cities' is a lie.
These aren't just subsidies to Amazon, they are also weapons aimed at every one of Amazon's competitors. Which at this point includes basically everyone.
De Blasio and Cuomo throwing themselves all over Bezos to pay him for what he would have done anyway is classic Democratic powerlessness. The voters picked Cuomo, even though he had challengers in 2014 and 2018.
These $150,000 a year jobs are about transferring wealth from regional cities with retail HQs and moving it to NYC. And New York City is already too expensive, so this will drive a housing shortage and killing working class neighborhoods.
This is all so stupid. They don't need to offer incentives. New York City is a monopoly provider of New York City. Northern Virginia is a monopoly provider of the Pentagon. The offer could be zero dollars plus we'll put a special tax on Amazon and Bezos might take it.
This is why the whole 'we didn't lose we pushed the politician left' argument is stupid. When voters pick Amazon Cuomo, voters get Amazon Cuomo. Plutocrat friendly politicians will make whatever noise they need to win, it's the governing that matters.
Looking at the backlash against Amazon's #HQ2 award, I'm heartened. This is the first time I've seen genuine across the board anger at the power of Bezos. Usually it's 'yeah but I love two day shipping.' This time people are mad. Politicians are mad. And good on @Ocasio2018!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1. This is an interesting piece by pollster Stan Greenberg, who coined the term 'Reagan Democrat' in the 1980s. It's all about Obama and his legacy, and not in a positive sense. Dems are losing black and hispanic working class voters now. prospect.org/politics/democ…
2. Greenberg sees the same trend lines for black and Hispanic working class voters as he did for white working class voters in the 1980s. And this all happened under Obama, who voters see as prioritizing Wall Street and big business.
3. While he's respected, Obama was insanely out of touch on what mattered to voters, and won reelection only because Mitt Romney was more out of touch. Obama is liked but the Obama political project is perceived of as disastrous. Obama is why Hillary Clinton lost in 2016.
Anyone who thinks the U.S. should defend Ukraine needs to explain why letting China waltz into Taiwan as our forces are bogged down in Europe is a good idea.
If Putin wants to invade Ukraine, there's nothing we can or should do. There is no rules-based international order, we saw to that with the invasion of Iraq. And Putin's fear of NATO expansion is legitimate. There is simply no reason to be involved in the defense of Ukraine.
Taiwan is actually strategically vital to the U.S., Ukraine is mostly not. This isn't complex, but the Army is embarrassed about Afghanistan and they have no role in the Pacific. And our bureaucracies know how to hate Russia but don't want to deal with the Wall Street-China axis.
It's common to ask 'well weren't firms greedy in 2019?!?'
Well, there has been a record merger wave from 2019-2021, accelerated by the pandemic and the Federal Reserve.
So yes, market power has increased.
No one is saying there's more greed, or that market power is the only cause of inflation. These are straw-men designed to police the boundaries of elite discourse. Keep doing it, economists, keep discrediting yourselves.
Listening now, man the judge is angry at Facebook. Asks plaintiffs to call for sanctioning them over their bad behavior in discovery. Also calls for the lawyers to also be sanctioned. Wow.
Judge Chhabria: "I want to invite the plaintiffs to invite to file motions for sanctions if they agree with me, and in any other areas where Facebook has engaged in sanctionable conduct. The partners in the pleading and Facebook should be jointly liable in the sanctions."
Judge Chhabria is saying the associates perhaps should not be sanctioned, but the partners should be. Perhaps to pay attorney costs for the other side. He's holding #BigLaw accountable.
1. Ok, this is kind of interesting. NBER's industrial organization section, which is the gathering of economists who study antitrust, just did something that seems a bit odd with regards to its annual conference. nber.org/conferences/in…
2. On day one of their conference, Friday, there was a panel with a bunch of antitrust economists who very much dislike Lina Khan and the new anti-monopoly movement. It was a lively panel, and I watched it.
3. Economist @florianederer live-tweeted the panel, and it kicked up something of a storm among those of us who care about the politics of antitrust economics. You can read his thread here.
I am no MMTer but I'm struck by how the basic critique by @Noahpinion of MMT - 'they always claim they are right' - apply to failed mainstream models of economics. None of them got the financial crisis or free trade or shortages.
Price controls are a good idea sometimes and a bad one sometimes. We are imposing controls for shipping right now, which no one in this debate seems to understand. We cannot impose broad price controls because we lack the capacity, which no one in this debate seems to understand.
The point of economics is not to be right or wrong, that's entirely incidental. The point is to develop a political language that excludes normal people from discussing political economy. That is it. mattstoller.substack.com/p/what-is-the-…