Popsickle

Amazon HQ2

Recommended Posts


cjd5050    353
2 hours ago, kermit said:

 

I have always disliked this mindset.  

Imagine if every local business and entrepreneur contributed back to the economy to an equal % that these massive employers do.   Our arts and culturals, as well as, our charity network would be massive.   I am sure this Garrett is a swell guy but until every startup gives from day one then startups need to understand the business environment is not an army of equals but rather an ecosystem of unequal but in harmony with each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SgtCampsalot    931
30 minutes ago, cjd5050 said:

I have always disliked this mindset.  

Imagine if every local business and entrepreneur contributed back to the economy to an equal % that these massive employers do.   Our arts and culturals, as well as, our charity network would be massive.   I am sure this Garrett is a swell guy but until every startup gives from day one then startups need to understand the business environment is not an army of equals but rather an ecosystem of unequal but in harmony with each other.

Think about what charity, large art institutions, etc, really are, though...
"Charities" are a compensation for the inequities that are inherent in a system that is reliant on large-scale "everything" and leaves people behind. Large entities can't possibly treat employees and citizens subjectively; small entities can. 

Large art institutions are a facade of "culture" that is, 1) propped up by gov't/corporate welfare assistance, and 2) is pretty much exclusively patronized by the upper classes of society (ballets, symphonies?). I've been in the art community, and the idea that you can only survive by either getting grants or working for a major (subsidized) art institution is the general mindset.

In other words, if you actually invested in small-scale, local business and solutions, you could very well eliminate the need for the philanthropic givings of the corporations in the first place.

Edited by SgtCampsalot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kermit    1954
3 hours ago, cjd5050 said:

I have always disliked this mindset.  

Imagine if every local business and entrepreneur contributed back to the economy to an equal % that these massive employers do.   Our arts and culturals, as well as, our charity network would be massive.   I am sure this Garrett is a swell guy but until every startup gives from day one then startups need to understand the business environment is not an army of equals but rather an ecosystem of unequal but in harmony with each other.

Its not really about charity. A solid case can be made that focusing on startups could generate stronger job growth (per dollar of subsidy) over the long-term.

Edited by kermit
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QCxpat    159

A recent headline (09/20/2017) in The Boston Globe reads, "Amazon could find those 50,000 jobs hard to fill in Boston area."  Boston's problem is that while the local schools produce lots of STEM graduates, very few of them hang around Beantown once they've graduated.  Paradoxically, Boston suffers from a very large Brain Drain.   See link: https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2017/09/20/would-amazon-suck-all-tech-talent-boston/quW1jXN0ePqid5gGjdmw0I/story.html

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These U.S. cities have the best chance of being Amazon’s second headquarters

We created a select list of cities with over a million people that have a chance of getting Amazon’s attention. We compared them on a number of criteria, including tech talent, airport travel time, office prices, housing costs and population. Take a look:
https://www.recode.net/2017/9/9/16278136/amazon-jeff-bezos-top-cities-new-second-headquarters
 

Where did they get the price per square foot for Raleigh office from. Sounds extremely wrong


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cjd5050    353
15 hours ago, kermit said:

Its not really about charity. A solid case can be made that focusing on startups could generate stronger job growth (per dollar of subsidy) over the long-term.

You missed the point, entirely.  I understand the benefits of small businesses.  I have one.   But I also understand that I am not the same as BofA or Duke Energy.   And I am not silly enough to suggest mine be treated the same.   This guy Garrett makes his living swimming in the wake from these big companies.  He's not in Asheboro, Greenville or Athens.  He has his coworking space in Charlotte, in the shadows of the big boys.   

Small businesses get to chart a course without many of the burdens imposed on large corporations.    Any honest SBO knows this.  So to suggest that they are being overlooked here is just stupid.

18 hours ago, SgtCampsalot said:

Think about what charity, large art institutions, etc, really are, though...
"Charities" are a compensation for the inequities that are inherent in a system that is reliant on large-scale "everything" and leaves people behind. Large entities can't possibly treat employees and citizens subjectively; small entities can. 

 

That is just inaccurate.   Charity is interwoven into the core of many.  Giving is just something that everyone must do.  It's not from guilt.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ah59396    2912
15 hours ago, QCxpat said:

A recent headline (09/20/2017) in The Boston Globe reads, "Amazon could find those 50,000 jobs hard to fill in Boston area."  Boston's problem is that while the local schools produce lots of STEM graduates, very few of them hang around Beantown once they've graduated.  Paradoxically, Boston suffers from a very large Brain Drain.   See link: https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2017/09/20/would-amazon-suck-all-tech-talent-boston/quW1jXN0ePqid5gGjdmw0I/story.html

 

 

My company has a tough time finding talented analysts in Boston, where it is headquartered.  From what I've heard, while there is a strong and capable talent pool, there is also fierce competition.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cadi40    50

I think we should just go with the flow, If we get Amazon terrific, If we don't Great, Charlotte is predicted to grow tremendously fast either way.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kermit    1954
5 hours ago, cjd5050 said:

You missed the point, entirely. 

No, I was actually making my own point. Taxpayers really ought to be thinking about the ROI on the multi-billion dollar incentives packages they are jumping up and down to pay for. If they engaged their brains they would see that the long-term ROI on fostering entrepreneurship is likely to be higher than the ROI on writing Jeff Bezos a check, and it would have the side benefit of making our economy more diversified rather than less. Unfortunately our political system is not designed to reward long-term thinking.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
elrodvt    273
On 9/22/2017 at 9:27 PM, elrodvt said:

Whether it is positive or not depends so much on the giveaways and long they take to make back (if ever).

Living in a border city like CLT must make that even more problematic given all the SC commuters? I bet some smart person here has numbers on that.

What would happen if Rock Hill became the next Asheville/Greenville and was more desirable to live for urban seekers and of course suburbanites can easily move south as well.

Then we're stuck paying the infra bill and SC gets the cash.

I don't know the history of the Philly city worker tax but imagine it was an attempt to make DE a less desirable option. As hated as that is I wonder if it would ever fly here?

Hate to quote myself but no one has numbers on incentives when border states within an easy commute have lower cost of living? I cant find any that are reputable but you would think this must have been studied?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cjd5050    353
1 hour ago, kermit said:

No, I was actually making my own point. Taxpayers really ought to be thinking about the ROI on the multi-billion dollar incentives packages they are jumping up and down to pay for. If they engaged their brains they would see that the long-term ROI on fostering entrepreneurship is likely to be higher than the ROI on writing Jeff Bezos a check, and it would have the side benefit of making our economy more diversified rather than less. Unfortunately our political system is not designed to reward long-term thinking.

You don't grow the top end of the food chain these days.  You luck into it if it happens organically.  Suggesting cities should invest in startups so that one day one will become something the size of BofA, Duke or Amazon is about as stupid as telling someone to invest in the lotto for their retirement.   

I have worked for multiple startups.  Stating is less than 1% of the journey.  Serial Entrepreneurs are most often serial failures.  I also know that one of the most important things for a small business to succeed is the market it's in.  There is absolutely a trickle down from the likes of BofA, DEC and others this size.  Going out there and landing large companies are actually creating food for small business.  

Unfortunately, there are too many people with envy and there are too many elected cowards that cave to envy.  

Edited by cjd5050

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

kermit    1954
10 minutes ago, cjd5050 said:

 Suggesting cities should invest in startups so that one day one will become something the size of BofA,

where did I say that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.