Seattle Socialists Strangle Golden Goose

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

I am glad we are no longer too concerned with the health of the goose.

As if your ilk were ever concerned. Today you’re victims of Amazon’s success. Tomorrow you’re victims of a weak local job market.

In reality, you’re only victims of your own flawed ideology.

/shrug

Say what? I am not a victim of Amazon's success, nor do I claim to be. I benefit from Amazon's great service every day, and am perfectly willing to pay to keep enjoying it. If paying 85 extra cents a month to continue availing myself of said service means that the rising tide of Amazon buoys more of Seattle's ships, more's the better.
If that 85 cents gets wasted... oh well, nothing ventured, nothing gained.
If Amazon just can't handle the expense, and leaves, my life doesn't change at all, and I doubt it will ruin Seattle either.

I see only good things, no matter what happens, because I am just that sort of sunny, positive person. AKA, not a whiner.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

But you still have money in your wallet so you can obviously give me money..

Clearly it doesn't matter how many times I clarify the argument, but I will try one more time, just because I like you guys so darn much.

I am not saying that: because Amazon has money to fight a law it don't like, it should be required to pay the head tax. I am saying that spending money to fight the tax means that they aren't interested in leaving Seattle, and have the resources needed to stay in their preferred region.

The fact that the head tax was passed, or that it is possible the money will be misspent, is tangential to my argument.

They are interested in what is most profitable. Right now, trying to stave off more specious taxation is in their best interests. At some point, when they decide they can't possibly turn this around and it would be cheaper to move over to Boise, they are going to Idaho.

And I am already on record as thinking it might be best for Seattle to drive out some of these corporations anyway.

We, basically, agree.
I think there are some benefits to focusing on affordable housing policies that could wind up actually being a boon to both Amazon and Seattle, but maybe not, and Amazon sure as shit isn't required by edict to stick around and pay a tax to support those policies.

[Kath]

If that 85 cents gets wasted... oh well, nothing ventured, nothing gained.

And this is the crux of the problem. You think it's fine steal from the rich and waste it. I'm not good with that.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

If that 85 cents gets wasted... oh well, nothing ventured, nothing gained.

And this is the crux of the problem. You think it's fine steal from the rich and waste it. I'm not good with that.

I think we haven't really discussed the possible economic benefits of a successful affordable housing policy in this thread, and have only assumed that any attempts will fail.

And that isn't rich, mean ol' Mr Bezos' money getting stolen, since that cost can easily be passed on to me, the consumer. And then it isn't being stolen, it is simply the cost of the service being provided.

Potentially mutually beneficial, for a very low cost per consumer, for a great service. That smells like capitalism working exactly the way it should, despite the possibility of failure.

[Okeefenokee]

I think the precise boondoggle we're witnessing is, in fact, progressives treating high wage jobs like an external cost. But high paying jobs aren't coal dust that local residents are paying for with their health. High paying jobs aren't paper-mill fumes passing operating costs on to entire neighborhoods by driving down housing prices and quality of life. High paying jobs aren't leaking mercury into the soil and forcing our children to pay the costs with a lifetime on Minamata disease.

They're high paying jobs. They're a benefit, not a loss.

Except to liberals, who are like "High paying jobs force low wage earners off of prime real estate".

WORKING AS INTENDED.
/shrug

There's also a sort of cognitive dissonance working here though. Many Seattlelites love artists, or want to be artists themselves, but there's no real room for artists. Seattle is a working town. It's a town whose identity is changing. Then again New York is a working city, but also retains its artists.

Is there room for art in Seattle or is it just about that high wage? Because it's about that high rent, and high property prices, and that high cost of living.

Look at what happened to the Hugo House.

You tell me, what does Seattle's soul look like? To me it's pushing art out, and becoming just this huge tech thing. Just offices and business casual, as office workers roam around looking for something that matters outside of their jobs.

The absolute state of millennias.

[Kath]

Potentially mutually beneficial, for a very low cost per consumer, for a great service. That smells like capitalism working exactly the way it should, despite the possibility of failure.

Great service? They have already spent millions upon millions to fix their homeless problem and all they accomplished was making their homeless problem worse. What evidence do you have that this time, it will fix the problem, when they have never successfully spent the money before?

[Okeefenokee]

Liberals jack our major employers for “affordable housing”, then act victimized when their hipster house is replaced by 6-story apartments.

It’s a lesson in irony that they never learn, and the rest of us pay the costs for. Progressivism- not even once.

I wish artists charged more for their work. The cost of having to remind tech workers that they're human is going up.

Then again there is heroin, cocaine and other drugs. Probably cheaper than retaining/maintaining a city's artistic soul.

Sad.

[TheReal_ND]

SWIPPLE NATIONALISM NOW
NO MORE BROTHER WARS



WHITE MAKES RIGHT

[Okeefenokee]

So who here's ready to talk about reigning in the franchise?

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Potentially mutually beneficial, for a very low cost per consumer, for a great service. That smells like capitalism working exactly the way it should, despite the possibility of failure.

Great service? They have already spent millions upon millions to fix their homeless problem and all they accomplished was making their homeless problem worse. What evidence do you have that this time, it will fix the problem, when they have never successfully spent the money before?

The 'great service' is Amazon's service that I am paying for. See the sentence you snipped out of the quote for context.