Jump to content

Wonder how long it will remain "New Era Field"?


Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

Do your really think $1.5 billion (over ten years, no less) is important to a company with $200 billion in revenue?     That's like paying the typical U.S. household (median income ~$61,000) roughly $50 per year for ten years if they move to one of the highest cost cities in the country.    Think that would influence their decision?

 

It's not even real money.   NYS gave them credits against future tax liabilities.   In other words, nothing from any budget or derived from existing taxpayers.   

 

And the $38 billion (yes, billion with a B) in total wages and salaries paid to the 25,000 new Amazon workers over the next decade will cover that $1.5 billion in foregone tax revenue multiple times over.    Easy decision for NYS and NYC.

 

Back to the original point of this thread--New Era closing its Derby plant.    The easy fart in the wind opinion is that high taxes were the reason for the closure.   Nobody says NYS is a business paradise.   But consider this--the total payroll of that Derby plant including benefits is around $12.5 million a year.    New Era's total revenues are $750 million.   In other words, that plant's payroll expense equaled 1.7% of revenue.    Essentially nothing.

 

While I feel for those losing their jobs, the sad reality is that they were a fly on the butt cheek of an elephant.    New Era moved on and didn't need to have that plant any more, regardless of tax liability, tax breaks or anything else...

 

 

 

 

Yes. I do think it influenced their decision. Between that and the fact that NYC is such a highly populated city. Add in the fact that it is on the busiest shipping port on the entire east coast and 3rd largest in the country. 

 

If you dont think all of it included influenced their decision, I don’t know what to tell you. Do I admit that some of what you say is true and correct. Absolutely. But if you don’t think 1.5 billion dollars doesn’t effect a companies decisions, you are dilusional. Regardless how big and profitable the company is, 1.5 billion dollars effects them. To think they would not even bother with it is comical. If they really didn’t think it was influential, they wouldn’t even accept it. They wouldn’t accept tax cuts. But they did, because they are a successful business that makes those decisions with everything in mind. 

 

There. I agreed with some of what you were arguing. To dismiss all the other bonuses thy come with moving to NYC is just dumb. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, mrags said:

 Add in the fact that it is on the busiest shipping port on the entire east coast and 3rd largest in the country. 

 

 

 

Amazon is an e-commerce internet retailer, not a steel plant. They don't ship products to you by boat. A shipping port was not on their list of demands, however they wanted to be close to an international airport.

 

 

To answer the thread topic, New Era owns the naming right's until 2022.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BUFFALOBART said:

We can have Unions, or we can have a form of slavery. Right to work states simply have reinvented the concept. The problem is, workers in these states end up being the recipient of social services, and companies like Wal-mart are the beneficiary of $3.6 BILLION in indirect subsidies, via the so called 'safety net' for their workers.

 

Your level of stupidity throughout this thread is unmatched son.    You don't know what you are talking about.

 

Sorry, you just don't.    I pity you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mrags said:

You are sitting there trying to make an argument that people are moving away from NYS because they are cold. Has nothing to do with the highest taxes in the nation. Has nothing to do with the ridiculous laws in the state. 

 

Then have the nerve to say to say the reason Amazon moved their 2nd headquarters to nyc doesn’t have a tthig to do with the $1.5Billion dollars they are receiving for moving there. 

 

How about its its not a shock that NYC is the largest port on the east cost and 3rd largest in the country. Seattle and Tacoma are also top 10. 

 

But keep thinking whatever you want. Your making yourself look extremely intelligent. We are all in awe of your economic knowledge. 

 

 

If you look at population exodus, people are moving away from colder weather climates in droves. If you think that's 100% driven by taxes, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. Pennsylvania is shrinking, which is amazing considering overall population growth. Is that also 100% driven by taxes?

 

All things being equal, most people would prefer to live in warmer climates. Not all, but most. You can summarily dismiss that if you wish, but it's a fact.

Edited by LSHMEAB
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:

If you look at population exodus, people are moving away from colder weather climates in droves. If you think that's 100% driven by taxes, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. Pennsylvania is shrinking, which is amazing considering overall population growth. Is that also 100% driven by taxes?

 

All things being equal, most people would prefer to live in warmer climates. Not all, but most. You can summarily dismiss that if you wish, but it's a fact.

I never said that isn’t a factor. I simply stated the argument thy Cuomo and others have stated that NY states population declining because of climate is comical. To prove the argument false, is the fact that companies like Amazon Or anyone else for that matter would actually set up shop here despite the diminishing population because of the cold climate. It’s not climate. It’s multiple reasons why a company would want to set up shop in NY. A huge tax cut would be one of them. A check for $1.5B is another. As Lurker put it, there’s also a much bigger pool of employees to pull from being in the vicinity of one of the biggest cities in the world. A city where people come from everywhere in the world to live. Yet they leave when they get a chance because it’s just too cold. Got it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BUFFALOBART said:

Additionally, New York City is not nearly as cold as in Upstate New York, where I live.

I lived in Manhattan for several years in my younger days, and while the winter weather could be quite bitter, there were days where the temperature could be moderate, or even balmy. Up here in Albany county, it's already a frozen hell. I'm retiring next year, so I look forward to being elsewhere for half of the year.

Wow. Dave. You. Are. A. Real. ***DUMBASS***

Get out of your friggin' basement. Moron.

Do some research on which states are poorest per capita, and have the worst economies. You d!p$h!t.

I used to want to live somewhere nice 6 months of the year when I retire. But now, I can’t wait to live somewhere else 12 months a year. 16 more years and I can leave this god aweful state. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BUFFALOBART said:

'Right to work' = You can be fired for any reason, whatsoever. So, the workers better not complain about $7.50/Hr., or whatever the prevailing wage is in those states. -Better not complain about anything, for that matter, because 'The Man' has you by the family jewels.

Just a quick note here: You're confusing "Right to Work" with "At Will." What you describe above is "At will" employment. The employer can fire you for any reason or no reason (as long as it's not discrimination AND you are a protected class)...AND YOU can quit at any time with no notice. MOST states in this country use the "At Will" method.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, BUFFALOBART said:

Try collective bargaining in 'right to work' states. See how far you get....

Huh? Who are you directing this at, and why are you even bringing it up? IOW, Who cares? Here's what "Right to Work" means: A Right To Work law guarantees that no person can be compelled, as a condition of employment, to join or not to join, nor to pay dues to a labor union.

 

So to reiterate, as I posted above, you seem to not know the difference between "right to work" and "at will." Whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...