News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Promising Billions to Amazon: Is It a Good Deal for Cities?. Parent comment

Re:Promising Billions to Amazon: Is It a Good Deal for Cities? by maxerickson on Saturday January 27, 2018 @10:49AM (#16246613)
What's your definition of neutral?

Mine is that revenues go up more than costs of services.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Promising Billions to Amazon: Is It a Good Deal for Cities? by grecy on Saturday January 27, 2018 @11:17AM (#16246722)
Neutral would be everyone following the law and the tax code as it is laid out. "Neutral" should be the government getting billions from Amazon, as they are legally obligated to pay.

It's clearly harmful because revenue is supposed to be going up A LOT more than it will be.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Promising Billions to Amazon: Is It a Good Deal for Cities? by maxerickson on Saturday January 27, 2018 @11:24AM (#16246760)
The good news is that the majority of cities bidding on the Amazon project will get that deal!
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Promising Billions to Amazon: Is It a Good Deal for Cities? by Armisael16 on Saturday January 27, 2018 @11:26AM (#16246769)
That's precisely my definition of beneficial. Neutral would be when the cost of additional services are equal to the benefits.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Promising Billions to Amazon: Is It a Good Deal for Cities? by maxerickson on Saturday January 27, 2018 @12:06PM (#16246930)
Yes I agree, I was just imprecise in my statement there.
[ Parent | on HN ]