Amazon Spokesperson Blames Ocasio-Cortez for NYC Retreat
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
An Amazon spokesperson blamed Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and her vocal resistance for the company’s shocking decision to cancel plans for its New York City headquarters on Thursday.
Polls showed that 70 percent of New Yorkers supported Amazon’s planned investment in the state.
Thus, Amazon stunned many New Yorkers and the nation at large when the company bowed to intense opposition from some state and local officials on Thursday and announced it was abandoning the Big Apple for its second headquarters.
“For Amazon, the commitment to build a new headquarters requires positive, collaborative relationships with state and local elected officials who will be supportive over the long-term,” Amazon said in a statement.
But “a number of state and local politicians have made it clear that they oppose our presence and will not work with us to build the type of relationships that are required to go forward with the project we and many others envisioned in Long Island City,” the company admitted.
Jodi Seth, Amazon’s head of policy communications, told NBC News that same day the company blamed a few specific New York politicians for its decision.
“It wasn’t any one incident,” Seth noted. “It was that the environment over the course of the past three months had not got[ten] any better. There were some local and state elected officials who refused to meet with Amazon and criticized us day in and day out about the plan.”
“If you talk to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, it’s ‘Never Amazon,'” Seth added. “If you talk to [New York City Councilman Jimmy] Van Bramer [a Democrat], it’s unions.”
Seth said Amazon hadn’t even been sure “if the deal would be approved until a year from now” if the company had stuck with it.
“We were pretty confident the deal would be approved, in that the governor was working hard to make it happen. But looking at the opposition and the timeline we decided we don’t want to work in this environment in the long term,” Seth said.
Long Island City apartment owner Sam Musovic even called for a nationwide boycott of Amazon and its products to take place Friday at 2:15 p.m. Eastern.
“Musovic and his fellow business and apartment building owners are weighing their legal options and have already [announced] their intention to organize and sue the shipping giant after they shipped their jobs elsewhere,” a statement from Long Island City Public Relations read. “He has started a petition to boycott Amazon which is being circulated [among] Queens residents and business owners.”
Amazon still plans to follow through on its headquarters plans in north Virginia.
The company would have brought an estimated 25,000 jobs to New York.
But Ocasio-Cortez and other liberals did not like the $3 billion in incentives that New York planned to award Amazon. They also resisted the second headquarters idea because they claimed it would lead to gentrification and skyrocketing housing prices.
The congresswoman celebrated Amazon’s retreat on Thursday.
“Anything is possible: today was the day a group of dedicated, everyday New Yorkers & their neighbors defeated Amazon’s corporate greed, its worker exploitation, and the power of the richest man in the world,” Ocasio-Cortez tweeted in triumph.
Ocasio-Cortez told reporters, “I think it’s incredible. I mean, it shows that everyday Americans still have the power to organize and fight for their communities and they can have more say in this country than the richest man in the world.”
“If we were willing to give away $3 billion for this deal, we could invest $3 billion in our district ourselves if we want to. We could hire more teachers, we can fix our subways, we can put a lot of people to work for that money if we wanted to,” Ocasio-Cortez added.
“There was no guarantee [of] those jobs for the New Yorkers that were here. We were looking at a deal that was not primarily putting the community first,” the congresswoman insisted.
Ocasio-Cortez pushed back against the criticism leveled at her for Amazon’s cancellation on Twitter on Friday.
“Come for me all you want, but my job is to make sure that people are protected in society,” the congresswoman wrote. “Someone’s got to look out for the people our system is leaving behind — esp now, when most of the wealth created is going to fewer people, those left behind are the majority of Americans.”
Some blamed Ocaiso-Cortez directly — while others blamed her indirectly for the loss.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) blasted the “small group [of] politicians” who “put their own narrow political interests above their community” in a statement.
He noted that “poll after poll showed” New Yorkers “overwhelmingly supported bringing Amazon to Long Island City.”
Those politicians “should be held accountable for this lost economic opportunity,” Cuomo added.
Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y.) said it was “absolutely disgraceful” that Amazon was “driven from New York by left-wing progressive politicians.”
“Terrible loss of jobs for New York workers and New York economy,” King added.
By Kathryn Blackhurst | February 15, 2019
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
114 visitors
For those New Yorkers who voted for Ms Cortez - You got just what you deserve.
For the rest of us - Let's celebrate!
Blaming the AOC, huh?
No. It is way past time for the mega-profit big corporates to STOP demanding cities, regions, states and taxpayers put themselves on the line for non-guarantee prosperity.
AOC is correct. Americans do not 'owe the corporates.' Instead, 'the corporates' owe the Americans.
This Supply Side crap is...…………..crap.
Seems some idiots in Long Island should be blaming AOC and other moronic Dems- but instead are taking their aggression out on Amazon.
Amazon building in Long Island was very popular with those who had businesses there. 25000 jobs would require an increase in businesses at every level to support the people working there. Along with the taxes that would go to the local and state coffers. Short sighted morons just cost themselves far more in taxes than the 3 billion.
25,000 new jobs would only lower unemployment by 0.006 if those hires were from the local market.
Otherwise they just add to an already nightmarish traffic problem on Long Island, extending to NYC, the Bronx, et al...
Possibly, or they just saved current Long Island residents untold hours of quality time not spent traveling or being delayed by already needed infrastructure improvements.
Bet the 25,000 that would have gotten the jobs would feel as irelevent as you make them out to be.
Well, sentence structure and spelling aside....
There are 4.1 million people working in NYC with an estimated 166,000 who chose not to work. That is NYC's lowest UE rate in history.
Walking on any street in down town Manhattan, one cannot help but see how many "help wanted" signs are in many restaurants and shops.
It's not much different in Philly, Dallas or Fort Worth. (Krogers, Albertsons, Tom Thumb all hiring )
Amazon will be hard pressed to find any area that can support 25,000 new jobs with an existing infrastructure and housing base.
Ignorant statement.
Bet the 25,000 who will get the jobs in the new location will feel just great about it.
I think it's a little weird that so many public figures complain about the various entanglements between government and big business, but they're crushed that New York won't be giving $3 billion to the richest man in the world.
Right. Doesn't make sense does it?
but they're crushed that New York won't be giving $3 billion to the richest man in the world.
Interesting that you think its significant enough to mention (that Bezos is the richest man in the world)> My impression of you was that you werepolitically conservativeand not a Socialist-- but perhaps I was wrong?
Apparently you've fallen for the propaganda of AOC and the far Left. Because the fact of the matter is this-- there was never a plan to give Amazon any money!
Rather, some of the wiser NYC leaders realized that by freeing Amazon up from paying some taxes, the result of their move would bring in many, many more dollars than that initial lost tax revenue. Net net Amazon's presence would increase NYC (and NY State) tax revenues by a very bigly amount! (And probablyincrease tax revenue for nearbysuburbs in CT and NJ as well.)
But the city never promised to give Amazon any money.
A 3 billion dollar tax break. Which AOC and other idiotic Dems opposed.
Really, do tell. That is what we are saying. The Dems just cost themselves big in tax revenues.
You have misplaced anger. We are laughing at AOC and the idiot left for costing themselves so much revenue. Dems love tax revenue; and they just screwed themselves out of a very big pay off.
Seems that you don't understand what mocking is. We are mocking the Dems that are upset that a few vocal morons like AOC and state Dem leaders cost them Amazon. The soak the rich party is eating their own. AOC is becoming the new face of the Democratic party. What is not to love if you are a conservative?
I do try to default to that, yes. That's why I generally think it's better to create an environment that supports opportunity for all businesses and not just one in particular.
True, I don't normally consider a tax break as "giving someone money." I consider taxing someone as "taking their money." However, when there is a tax that applies to all, but you are excusing one lone entity from having to pay it, then yeah you are "giving" them money.
So if someone offered to pay your mortgage for you for a year, you don't believe you would have gained any extra money to spend???
Wow...
From the news of the past little while about what Democratic congresspersons are doing and saying, and the divisions growing wider, I'd say the Party is attempting suicide.
Um-hum....They are going to run on this stuff in 2020!!!
Now one might wonder if the midterms were such a victory for the Democrats - looks to me like they might have shot themselves in the foot.
So she admits that she doesn't want more teachers or to fix the subways or to put more people to work. I guess she is just in it for the power and notoriety that it brings her and that the job pays better that a Barista.
In other words, they would not be given all the tax breaks they want so they said no.
Where did you get that from? Amazon would still have gotten the tax breaks; they chose not to build/grow in the area due to the toxic business atmosphere created by AOC, and a select few radical Dems at the state and local level.
Who wants to build a business having to fight against politicians? They were right to can the project; and NY has AOC to thank for it.
The voice of one person would not stop the company from moving in if they wanted to.
No, but it is painfully obvious to Amazon that AOC and others who share her philosophy wanted no part of Amazon.
But hey, it is just a few jobs, right? Who needs them!
Still, if Amazon wanted to move there, no one could stop them.
The only reason not to, is they don't want to have to pay.
Why go where you aren't welcomed?
Plenty of smart folks out there would welcome an influx of jobs in their area.
Still, one person does not hold the fate of any area in their own hands.
I actually agree with her. Why deal with all the repercussions that having the company there would entail yet get zero money in taxes.
So you refuse to recognize the simple fact that all those people with those new jobs would be paying taxes, and Amazon itself would be when the incentives expire.
That is shortsighted.
I hope she rises to a position of power in the Democratic Party. Best thing to happen to the GOP since DWS!
In 2017 Amazon had profits of $5.6 Billion and paid no federal taxes. I'm fully aware that these would be state taxes, just pointing out Amazon latest tax record.
Hopefully the politicians that make these deals to bring corporations to their city/town/state write contracts that have dis intensives for not living up to their promises of jobs/revenue/etc.
If they are believing the hype from the corporations then they are not doing the citizens of their district/state any favors.
Interesting article on just this subject....
As an example in the industry I was in, world wide container shipping, we would have major US corporations come to us and promise us the moon on the number of containers that they would ship with us. I would then negotiate the contract as to price, shipping lanes, etc etc. I would then explain to them that the contact pricing was based on their promise of 5,000 (example) containers. If they didn't meet that number and shipped only 4,000 they would be responsible for the ''dead freight'' and would be charged for the 1,000 that they did not ship...It made the corporations very mindful of their promise.
I am sure those same corporations expected it to be written into the contract that that if they had product to ship, and the containers weren't available, that would void the penalty for not meeting the promised ship quantity.
I work on the opposite end. I move those containers for customers both on the rail and internationally when required. I can't tell you how many times we received great pricing and promises that containers would be available when we needed them in both large and small markets; only to find out there were no containers to be had once we received the business. We end up having to move with second, third, and fourth options on containers and eat the loss in profit. No container providers will put into the contract they will make up losses for moving product with their competitor if their containers are not available.
Both parties need to be protected. Same when businesses deal with governments. Unfortunately there are some unethical business and politicians that take advantage of the system.
Our contract were specific as to the time frame, total numbers of containers, number of containers per vessel etc etc.
Major shippers from the Far East would try the old, we called for 500 containers for the APL China four days before sailing. This was the old ruse if they were falling behind in their contracts.
No go, the contracts gave a specific number of days lead time and a maximum number of containers per vessel.
You stated that you moved the containers via rail, are these domestic moves (using intl containers)
and also internationally when required. Export shipments?
We also moved the containers via rail on a through B/L via MLB...We at that time had our own double stack cars and contracts with some of the railroads. So we were in some instances both vendor and customer.
We may be talking two different services. We had our international (SS line) and also a domestic service using containers via rail and truck.
You are correct in that both sides (parties) need to be protected.
Sorry forgot to answer that....Yes they did.
we could invest $3 billion in our district ourselves if we want to
It's scary how little she understands what's going on. NY isn't giving Amazon 3 billion. It NY can't redirect the three billion from Amazon to teachers or subways or anything else because it never had the three billion to "invest."
In fact, by turning away billions in marginal tax revenue, NY now will have less money to invest in those things she purports to care about. She basically lost 24 billion in marginal revenue for New York in one day.