Hacker News Reader

Comment by avree | Hacker News Reader

Any particular reason why you chose Amazon as the company that should be paying for a public utility for some reason? What about Microsoft, Boeing, University of Washington... what's the criteria by which a company becomes responsible for public works in your mind?

View on HN

Whenever a company has as much office space in a city as that city's next 40 biggest employers combined. [0]

[1]https://www.seattletimes.com/business/amazon/thanks-to-amazo...

I live smack dab in downtown Seattle, and I can throw a rock from my window and hit an Amazon building. Microsoft and Boeing don't have the same presence in Seattle proper. UW contributes quite a bit to the area for their size.

I'll give Amazon kudos for helping keep many businesses down here alive through the pandemic so far, as much as I hate the company. Other than that... they could do more.

One potential reason to prefer Amazon over Microsoft and Boeing here is that Amazon is majority in Seattle proper, while the vast majority of Microsoft and Boeing are outside of the city (e.g. Redmond, Bellevue).

And if the city tries to “soak” Amazon too much, they will move outside of the city, too.

When has a tech company ever left a city due to taxes? As far as I can tell, sky high taxes haven't impacted the Bay Area one bit.

I don’t think Amazon would leave the Seattle area entirely, just the city limits. And not even SF has imposed the level of taxation Seattle’s local socialist movement keeps trying to impose on Amazon. (NB: I’m not using “socialist” as a slur; Seattle has an actual socialist movement with one council member openly affiliating with the “Socialist Alternative Party”).

Sure, but Amazon can probably afford it seeing as how they pay $0 in federal income tax unlike a lot of other companies including those in the Bay Area.

Amazon pays $0 in federal income tax because they reinvest all of their profits into their own growth. Most of the tech industry does the same thing.

They "can afford" a lot of things, sure. But at some point it won't be cost-effective for them anymore, and I suspect they will reach that point long before the demagogues of Seattle's extreme left reach the limit of how much they want to extract from Amazon's coffers.

The fact that the Amazon executives are extraordinarily well paid seems to contradict that claim. Besides, saying there is “some point” at which the tax is too much is the same as saying “they don’t have infinite money.” Of course; no company does. Amazon has a limit to what it can pay in taxes, but the point is it’s nowhere near $0.

> The fact that the Amazon executives are extraordinarily well paid seems to contradict that claim.

Tell you what: you go and do a better job than Amazon of growing a large scale business year after year by paying executives less and maybe then your opinion will be worth something.

The funny thing about your comment is that it presumes we are talking about opinion, when really it’s just a logical progression. Unless you can see a valid counterargument besides one that employs a logical fallacy [1].

[1] https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Appeal-...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com