Foxes and Hedgehogs

#1 When a city is dominated by one industry, particularly finance, that can spell ruin for its inhabitants. Good for the wealthy and the people in the industry, mediocre for many others. Tech might smooth things out a bit, but there is no reason we need to give anything to a behemoth for coming here. Many are already make NYC home. Although not the only one, NYC has some of the best universities, many top-tier companies, pools of talented people, and the best cultural amenities. There was no reason to kowtow to a behemoth to come here. NYC is big and innovative, and it will stay big and innovative for the foreseeable future. Tech was here before and will it be here after, without being dominated by a single company. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/22/technology/nyc-tech-startups.html?comments#permid=30741436 #2 Why we would we want to be a tech town or any kind of single-industry town? Why would we want to trade one harmful kind of industry, finance, for an equally bad indust...

I would prefer a more analytical and statistical comparison. This is not to justify the bad performance of the NYT system, but one needs to consider the politics, age, and extent of each system to make a fair comparison. As for details: - Who funds the subway? - Who maintains the subway? - How much track per system? - Measured on-time performance? - How many people does it serve? - How old is the system? There are others, but you get the point, and then again, there is the culture behind the system, the inclination of a nation toward order, coordination, and rule-following. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/11/reader-center/international-public-transit-new-york-subway.html?comments#permid=30569669 https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/11/reader-center/international-public-transit-new-york-subway.html?comments#commentsContainer&permid=30561344

Personally, I was against the deal, but I had mixed feelings, even afterward. For some portions of our economy Amazon coming might have been good news, e.g., real estate, technology, and support industries. For others, and for infrastructure services in NYC, my sense was that it would have been a strain and a drain, taxing our resources and us subsidizing it with tax breaks, leading to higher costs for local inhabitants. My later thoughts had to do with evening out our economy, so heavily reliant on finance. For myself, I've worked in technology for 30 years, mostly in finance but lately medical. I live in Manhattan, in one of the more densely tech-inhabited areas, and Amazon would have likely been good for me personally, although that is debatable. A large number of tech job, and with Amazon's higher pay, might have both made tech jobs more competitive while also making it more lucrative. Even then, Amazon has reached out to me several times about working for them, but then ...

#1 I was surprised that less affluent groups and minorities were for Amazon coming to NYC, although I was aware that locals in my area would be in favor. I live in Murray Hill, and it has a large number of software developers, in number and percentage, in Manhattan, and many - most? - people in our zip code earn in the six figures. I've worked as a software developer for over 15 years, and have occasionally been contacted by Amazon for my skills, although I would not put too much on this as I am always being contacted by recruiters, much of worthless. Although I am likely to benefit from Amazon coming to NYC, I am not a fan of the deal in its current incarnation. It takes too much money from our coffers, circumvents city governance, will place a large burden on existing resources, and will drive up costs for many New York residents. It seems the biggest boosters would be the real estate industry, along with anyone that might be able to profit from selling to the behemoth... h...

I'm am often reminded of a statement, paraphrased from Amartya Sen, that one person's equality is another man's inequality when discussing social welfare. Making the system work could mean increasing taxes on the wealthy, reducing the military expenditure, reducing payments for unproven medications, reducing the power of insurers, doctors, and medical/pharmaceutical companies. American wellbeing, on the whole, might improve substantially, but the flip side is that all of those impinged upon would take umbrage as if their freedom was reduced. In the end, we have to realize there is a greater good to human welfare and life, and that the interests of the powerful matter less. Even then, if we tried, expect lawsuits and smears, accusations of socialism and tyranny... https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/16/opinion/sunday/medicare-for-all-universal-health-care.html?comments#permid=30660804

In the end, the failure of this deal lays at the feet of Cuomo and De Blasio. It's a deal that should have never been made or should have been done in a way that wasn't filled with one-sided giveaways. As Amy Liu, vice president and director of the Metropolitan Policy Program at the Brookings Institution, describes, Virginia worked with local constituents to address concerns, negotiated a deal that required jobs from Amazon in exchange for incentives, and put more money into developing an education-focused job pipeline, rather than a simple giveaway to Amazon. Many people are going to blame a vocal minority for the failure when the problem was the deal itself. It could have been done to satisfy the critics, or at least mollify them, while still delivering for New York. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/16/business/amazon-economy-taxes.html?comments#permid=30664506