Amazon HQ2 RFP

Status
Not open for further replies.
lexicon506 said:
PM Trudeau announced yesterday's Vancouver expansion in person. You really think the PM would come out for this relatively measly news if Amazon was going to pick Toronto for HQ2 in the near future? Toronto's bid is dead, this is clearly Canada's consolation prize.

Does that mean Boston's expansion is a similar deal? Of course not. Could always be a coincidence, but the timing makes it an interesting development.
Click to expand...

That's a good point. Does seem like Northern Virginia won.
 
Are these 2,000 jobs new jobs? Or will they imply be consolidating operations in the Boston area and then adding a modest amount of jobs?
 
jklo said:
That's a good point. Does seem like Northern Virginia won.
Click to expand...

This expansion has been talked about in the Seaport since late last year. Its not new news, its just confirming what we already knew. I think it has 0 to do with HQ2 going somewhere else.
 
GW said:
More housing. Well, duh. But that's only half the problem.

Yes, there should be a lot more housing.

No, people shouldn't accepts tens of thousands of well-moneyed workers moving into their city just because market fetishists think the government has no business preventing hardship and disruption in their lives.

If the city keeps trying to get rich and upper-middle class to move into the city, the people who live here now are going to be priced out. That's a future worth preventing.
Click to expand...

Stupid logic. No one is guaranteed to live in the exact same spot they're in now unless they bought property. We can debate the merits of Amazon coming here all day, as long as we do so in the context of reality. I for one won't be putting up a memorial for people who can no longer live in Southie like it was still the 1970's. Times change. If you bought back then, you're rich right now. If you didn't, then you're at the whims of the market just like everywhere else in the country.

On another note, I also don't see the connection between this and not getting the 2nd HQ. What it sounds like people are saying is that Amazon will not locate the HQ in any place where they already have a presence, because they can just put a few more jobs in existing locations as a consolation prize.
 
lexicon506 said:
PM Trudeau announced yesterday's Vancouver expansion in person. You really think the PM would come out for this relatively measly news if Amazon was going to pick Toronto for HQ2 in the near future? Toronto's bid is dead, this is clearly Canada's consolation prize.

Does that mean Boston's expansion is a similar deal? Of course not. Could always be a coincidence, but the timing makes it an interesting development.
Click to expand...

You think Bezos gave inside info to Trudeau that Toronto was out?
 
Rover said:
Stupid logic. No one is guaranteed to live in the exact same spot they're in now unless they bought property. We can debate the merits of Amazon coming here all day, as long as we do so in the context of reality. I for one won't be putting up a memorial for people who can no longer live in Southie like it was still the 1970's. Times change. If you bought back then, you're rich right now. If you didn't, then you're at the whims of the market just like everywhere else in the country.

On another note, I also don't see the connection between this and not getting the 2nd HQ. What it sounds like people are saying is that Amazon will not locate the HQ in any place where they already have a presence, because they can just put a few more jobs in existing locations as a consolation prize.
Click to expand...

Well yes, but I do have some ideal in my head about a social fabric that is woven with more than Facebook and Twitter. Having multi-generations of people connected to the neighborhoods does have benefits to society. Some downsides in terms of stagnation and personal grudges that get carried forward to the next generation.

Being a renter in a rising real estate market is unfortunate for those without the savings and investments to afford rising rents. Uprooting families and children, especially, can have lifelong affects many of which are negative.

I don't like the socialist solutions to rising rents, but it would be good to see some way for families to get vested in a community so they can at least stay for their children to get through high school and get on their own two feet. Many job opportunities are based on who you get to know and it can set kids back years if they can't afford to stay where they know people.
 
Rover said:
Stupid logic. No one is guaranteed to live in the exact same spot they're in now unless they bought property. We can debate the merits of Amazon coming here all day, as long as we do so in the context of reality. I for one won't be putting up a memorial for people who can no longer live in Southie like it was still the 1970's. Times change. If you bought back then, you're rich right now. If you didn't, then you're at the whims of the market just like everywhere else in the country.

On another note, I also don't see the connection between this and not getting the 2nd HQ. What it sounds like people are saying is that Amazon will not locate the HQ in any place where they already have a presence, because they can just put a few more jobs in existing locations as a consolation prize.
Click to expand...

You're talking about "logic" and "reality" but I don't think you understand either of them. There's no law guaranteeing anyone a place to live (not even ownership trumps eminent domain), but there's no law guaranteeing developers and companies the uncontested right build what they want either, including ownership.

It's the job of representative government to balance interests and people have different opinions about those interests. Maybe you favor economic Darwinism and I favor social amelioration. Other people will have different opinions. Your clichés and commonplace observations have no bearing on my point, the logic of which was quite sound, in my opinion. Plenty of others on this forum would agree. Are we all stupid?
 
shmessy said:
You think Bezos gave inside info to Trudeau that Toronto was out?
Click to expand...

Well considering that Trudeau personally lobbied Bezos back in February, it seems like the respectful thing to do to let him know ahead of time. Allows Trudeau to celebrate a win in Vancouver and take the sting off a coming loss in Toronto.
 
GW said:
You're talking about "logic" and "reality" but I don't think you understand either of them. There's no law guaranteeing anyone a place to live (not even ownership trumps eminent domain), but there's no law guaranteeing developers and companies the uncontested right build what they want either, including ownership.

It's the job of representative government to balance interests and people have different opinions about those interests. Maybe you favor economic Darwinism and I favor social amelioration. Other people will have different opinions. Your clichés and commonplace observations have no bearing on my point, the logic of which was quite sound, in my opinion. Plenty of others on this forum would agree. Are we all stupid?
Click to expand...

Yes, if your take is that people should be able to live in the same place they did decades ago without taking into considering the "fact" that times change. You favor fantasyland from the sound of it.

Renting is a choice. So is owning. If you own you have more rights to stay in a certain place than a renter but your property could depreciate. That's risk/reward. Do I feel bad if people have to move out because prices get too high? Of course, but that's life. Dealing with reality is always better than adopting some bizarre philosophy that the city should piss off 50,000 jobs and hundreds of millions of tax revenue so everyone can live where they are now.
 
tangent said:
Well yes, but I do have some ideal in my head about a social fabric that is woven with more than Facebook and Twitter. Having multi-generations of people connected to the neighborhoods does have benefits to society. Some downsides in terms of stagnation and personal grudges that get carried forward to the next generation.

Being a renter in a rising real estate market is unfortunate for those without the savings and investments to afford rising rents. Uprooting families and children, especially, can have lifelong affects many of which are negative.

I don't like the socialist solutions to rising rents, but it would be good to see some way for families to get vested in a community so they can at least stay for their children to get through high school and get on their own two feet. Many job opportunities are based on who you get to know and it can set kids back years if they can't afford to stay where they know people.
Click to expand...

I think your heart is in the right place. The problem is not everybody in this situation is the proverbial hard working parent holding down two jobs to make ends meet. Many people are happy to do the bare minimum to just live for the day. As there isn't a way to separate out the hard working go-getters from the slackers in housing preservation, I don't see how keeping Amazon away helps this situation.
 
falcon42 said:
This expansion has been talked about in the Seaport since late last year. Its not new news, its just confirming what we already knew. I think it has 0 to do with HQ2 going somewhere else.
Click to expand...

Yeah but it's officially confirming what was already known. It sounds like the HQ2 announcement is due soon... they would have just waited if Boston was the winner. I think the idea that they are getting some announcements done so they can clear the table for HQ2 makes sense.
 
The referenced expansion in Boston appears to be directed at voice recognition and robotics, This stuff us developed at Lab126 Sunnyvale, but there probably is too much competition for certain skill sets in the Silicon Valley to scale up in these areas, so post development and applied development is going to Boston.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-to-be-working-on-another-big-bet-home-robots

https://www.cnet.com/news/amazon-expands-alexa-hub-in-boston-with-2000-new-jobs/

Highly unlikely that a HQ2 city other than Boston would replicate the work being done / to be done in robotics and voice recognition,
______________________

A reason why ramping up in the Valley is difficult: median compensation for a Facebook employee last year was $240,000.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/at-facebook-median-pay-tops-240-000-1523924535
 
Rover said:
Yes, if your take is that people should be able to live in the same place they did decades ago without taking into considering the "fact" that times change. You favor fantasyland from the sound of it.

Renting is a choice. So is owning. If you own you have more rights to stay in a certain place than a renter but your property could depreciate. That's risk/reward. Do I feel bad if people have to move out because prices get too high? Of course, but that's life. Dealing with reality is always better than adopting some bizarre philosophy that the city should piss off 50,000 jobs and hundreds of millions of tax revenue so everyone can live where they are now.
Click to expand...


It isn't a choice for everyone. What you are really saying is that you don't care about poor/working class people and are fine with people who cannot afford to buy being displaced. You should just come out and say it rather than hiding behind the bullshit market devotion (which I'm sure ignores all the way those currently in power manipulate the markets, for example to favor developments for the rich).

Rover said:
I think your heart is in the right place. The problem is not everybody in this situation is the proverbial hard working parent holding down two jobs to make ends meet. Many people are happy to do the bare minimum to just live for the day. As there isn't a way to separate out the hard working go-getters from the slackers in housing preservation, I don't see how keeping Amazon away helps this situation.
Click to expand...

People's worth in the abstract and to their community isn't limited to the value they create for a boss. This kind of of logic that if you aren't living up to the plutonic ideal of a devoted and deserving worker, completely busting your ass to generate value for the capitalists 24/7, you do not deserve basic human necessities like housing and should face displacement, alienation, and forced relocation is fucking disgusting. Your heart is in absolutely the wrong place.
 
Take this fwiw, but here is another sign Amazon is focused on housing as its top concern. I know I sound like a broken record, but this isn't Bostons strong point. If this is a two way race between NoVa and Boston based on housing and general tech work force, I would say advantage NoVa. If they are focused on super advanced research skills and/or urban downtown (assuming they land seaport) I would say advantage Boston.

https://www.bisnow.com/washington-d...87894?utm_source=CopyShare&utm_medium=Browser
 
coleslaw said:
People's worth in the abstract and to their community isn't limited to the value they create for a boss. This kind of of logic that if you aren't living up to the plutonic ideal of a devoted and deserving worker, completely busting your ass to generate value for the capitalists 24/7, you do not deserve basic human necessities like housing and should face displacement, alienation, and forced relocation is fucking disgusting. Your heart is in absolutely the wrong place.
Click to expand...

Well, clearly not enough housing is being built, so something's gotta give.
 
jklo said:
Well, clearly not enough housing is being built, so something's gotta give.
Click to expand...

The problem is the overall infrastructure is crowded and very outdated.

Boston is in trouble concerning overall infrastructure vision especially when this casino finally opens up. 93 will be a nightmare.

I totally understand why Baker does not want to propose anything because of the Big Dig debacle. And it seems the Unions, MBTA are in trouble with their own future funding for pensions. Mass Bonds have been downgraded to B--
 
coleslaw said:
It isn't a choice for everyone. What you are really saying is that you don't care about poor/working class people and are fine with people who cannot afford to buy being displaced. You should just come out and say it rather than hiding behind the bullshit market devotion (which I'm sure ignores all the way those currently in power manipulate the markets, for example to favor developments for the rich).



People's worth in the abstract and to their community isn't limited to the value they create for a boss. This kind of of logic that if you aren't living up to the plutonic ideal of a devoted and deserving worker, completely busting your ass to generate value for the capitalists 24/7, you do not deserve basic human necessities like housing and should face displacement, alienation, and forced relocation is fucking disgusting. Your heart is in absolutely the wrong place.
Click to expand...

This is all fantasyland nonsense. I'd expect it out of a group of broke college kids smoking dope and dreaming of Bernie Sanders as President. Why don't we just legislate that everybody gets to marry the person they're in love with as well without having to put any work into that either. :rolleyes:

Look, lets get back to reality. If you choose to live off the land and do your own thing without having a boss, go for it. However, if you make that choice, you ARE NOT entitled to live in the highest rent districts in the city if you can't afford it, nor are we the taxpayers on the hook to keep you comfortable. You made a choice, so live with its consequences both good and bad.

Finally, I grew up in a place that time forgot (SE Mass). Some of you have a way too romantic view of living in a place that never changes. That leads to stagnation and apathy in many places and isn't something we should aspire to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top