In November 2018 the online e-commerce company Amazon announced it would be building a second headquarters in New York City and Arlington, VA. The announcement came a year after the company announced it would accept proposals from any North American city who wanted to host the headquarters. Amazon said the company could invest over $5 billion and the offices would create up to 50,000 high paying jobs. More than 200 cities applied and offered Amazon millions of dollars in economic incentives and tax breaks. For the New York City headquarters the city and state governments gave Amazon $2.8…
Read moreNarrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Political party:
Province/Territory:
@9ZJXL261wk1W
Yes, IF and ONLY IF the city needs the business to thrive + its not hurting anyone who lives in the area.
@9RTLWCPIndependent4mos4MO
Yes, as long as the environment is protected, and the company hired local residents for new jobs created
@9RGCB9P4mos4MO
Only if they are relocating to Canada and not moving away and that the subsidy is smaller than the return.
@9RCRJ4F4mos4MO
This needs a more nuanced stance. Will the relocate benefit the citizens of the area? Are there other local business that can fulfill the need with support on their own? Is the company a multinational that will take money out of the country? It is not an easy yes/no decision.
@9QZCYDN4mos4MO
I don't think they should, but they should be allowed to if the people of that city agree and if there's a high chance the tax revenue will exceed the incentives. A better strategy I think would be to spend money on improving infrastructure and the community to attract companies
@9QZCYDN4mos4MO
I donr think they should, but they should be allowed to if the people of that city agree and if there's a high chance the tax revenue will exceed the incentives. A better strategy I think would be to spend money on improving infrastructure and the community to attract companies
That is up to each municipality to ensure that public officials enter into meaningful and productive contracts that attempt to benefit that community. Any official that willfully misleads the public and/or receives payoffs for promoting or agreeing to such an arrangement should be prosecuted and if convicted, EXECUTED. Did you hear that Trudildeau?
@9GZYG4J1yr1Y
Yes, but I would prefer to abolish corporate taxes to benefit all companies in Canada and also punish them for moving jobs out of the country by mean of tariff when they import their products in Canada.
@9GNXXXT1yr1Y
Yes, but it depends on the needs of each community, and if that money could be better spent on infrastructur
@9FWLZ8L1yr1Y
yeah as long as the private companies can say no? like you can OFFER anything they just dont need to say yes
@9FQ2ZJY1yr1Y
Yes, as long as it benefits the local economy, population, creates tax revenue and doesn't harm the environment
@9FPG8CX1yr1Y
Yes, but MAKE SURE that the money is well spent, meaning the benefits exceed the drawbacks!
@8SRCS7J4yrs4Y
Yes, as long as they stay in Canada.
@96JJRBT2yrs2Y
No, and we need to nationalize private companies, or give the employees control of them.
@95K5YQG2yrs2Y
Depends on the community and it's needs.
@95DH7PG2yrs2Y
Depends on the community and it's needs. Both can work.
@94C42JL2yrs2Y
I think it depends on each community's needs. If private companies would bring enough revenue in to be able to advance with other community projects, then municipal governments should pursue that as an option. But, if you have the opportunity and the resources to make your community a better place for everyone, by building amenities that everyone can use, it would be my own personal opinion that this is usually the best course of action.
@945C4M22yrs2Y
If you can, spend that money on benefitting the community. But, depending on the business, it could also be in a city's best interest to offer money to relocate.
@93FG53G2yrs2Y
It really depends on the situation of each municipality, because while it's easy to say that we should spend that money on infrastructure to attract businesses and make it a desirable place to live, what if the company builds that infrastructure that could make it attractive for the city? It's really hard to say.
@8ZN4YG43yrs3Y
Cities should be allowed to offer economic incentives for businesses to relocate, however it should also focus on improving the community, and infrastructure within to make it more desirable for people to live. It should also have high standards, such as environmental protections/and other regulations so that businesses can't get away with cutting costs at the expense of the environment/other issues.
@8Z7DWC93yrs3Y
Only if they stay in Canada.
@8Y9SZ7N3yrs3Y
As long as it's within the country, and they should be required to hire locals.
@8XMLGT43yrs3Y
Yes, unless this practise leads to a race to the bottom
@8XKT3BG3yrs3Y
No, instead cities can eliminate the corporate taxes
@8XKT3BG3yrs3Y
No, instead cities can lower the corporate taxes to benefit all local companies
@8WZ4NMB3yrs3Y
Yes, but they can only move forward with that incentive if they owner consents
@8VVG3K43yrs3Y
No, private companies should be nationalised
Nationalize all corporations
@8VN22QD3yrs3Y
they should be forced to move with no reward if they’re upsetting any local atmosphere or ecosystem with zero help from our tax paying dollars
@8VKKXXL3yrs3Y
All of the above . Its ok to offer ince tive to bribg new businesses to your area but not by giving them the key to the city and paying nothing while the others already there have to pick up the slack . Not at the expence of the environment , bring new jobs , to area helps the local economy , increases tax revenue , which can then be used for infrastructure, parks , and amenities. Federally though it would be nice to see jobs leavibg the country for cheaper labor get hit with higher tarrif taxes to bring it back here to the point it didnt make sence to leave in the first place . Buy local , buy canadian
@8VHY7NC3yrs3Y
Yes, but need to be careful about stealing jobs out from other municipalities instead of trying to equitably share job availability.
@8VHLQFB3yrs3Y
Yes as long as it benefits the community.
@8VHL7353yrs3Y
This has been a boondoggle so often i would say not.
Yes but nit in competition with other Canadian cities.
@8VBFZBC3yrs3Y
Yes, for local Canadian business and as long as the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives
@8V97FCK3yrs3Y
very complicated. If it will be a more benefit to the community as a whole then yes. This includes keeping environmental integrity and of course showing that the tax revenue exceeds tax incentives
@8V2CPTG3yrs3Y
Yes, but only if the local environment is not compromised, the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents, and local citizens can vote on the amount of incentives to offer
@8TZ65QC3yrs3Y
Yes, as long as any incentives have a short shelf life and that companies contribute fairly, in time, to the city’s economy. I’d like to see very clear commitments made on both sides eg. hiring local work force, fair tax incentives to start.
@8TM8L3W3yrs3Y
Yes, as long as local economies do not suffer and as long as citizens vote in favour
No, this takes tax funding from public schools, health care etc.
@8RWBHS34yrs4Y
As long as they stay in Canada, yes. But citizens should be allowed to vote on the incentives with the government.
@8QWBJC64yrs4Y
As long as it remains within environmental standards and benefits the community long term.
@abrielle2594yrs4Y
@8Q2SVY74yrs4Y
Depends on individual case
@8PQL4GY4yrs4Y
We should punish or make moving jobs out of the country less appealing. We can spend the money on improving infrastructure, and the community to attract companies.
@8LBMXPF4yrs4Y
No, incentives should go to local citizens to create citizen-run enterprises that are anchored in the community and can never relocate.
@8GZ4XM94yrs4Y
Yes if the company creates jobs by hiring locally, the local environment is not compromised, and as long as tax revenue eventually exceed the incentives.
Yes, but only if the people and the local legislatures agree
@8DC73B24yrs4Y
No, we should not allow private companies any incentives tax them at 60% and regulate them and if they break rules dissolve them, Government must own all business.
@97T4JZCConservative2yrs2Y
No, focus on improving infrastructure and the community, as well as do NOT compromise the local environment, also punish them for moving jobs out of the country
@8VJ8ZRD3yrs3Y
Yes only if they are relocating in Canada
Depends on a lot of factors.
@9CD9BPSConservative1yr1Y
@9C7V7281yr1Y
Yes but only if it opens up new areas for farmland and natural growth
@9BSYMVY2yrs2Y
Yes, but as long as they stay in Canada
@9BK2RQ62yrs2Y
It depends on what the community, provincial and even national interest is, and it should be dependent on these, as well as what works for each community.
@9BJY9J42yrs2Y
Yes, as long as it is in Canada
Citizens should be able to vote on the incentive, and it shouldn't compromise the enviroment
@99SZPFK2yrs2Y
As long as the environment is not harmed in the process
@995WHT52yrs2Y
No, the cities should look into expanding local companies so that the employment rate will go up in the process
@98Z9PLX2yrs2Y
Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised and the tax revenue will exceed the incentives
Depends on each community and it's needs.
@5YW53X94yrs4Y
No, spend that money on improving infrastructure and the community to attract companies and punish them for moving jobs out of the country.
@8MT5KGD4yrs4Y
no more private companies, period. it belongs to the state ❤️
@9ZNW7W52 days2D
Yes, as long as everyone gets to vote on it, taxes are still fair, everyone has a job, and the local environment is not compromised.
@8YWHYGD3yrs3Y
No, but punish them for moving jobs out of the country, and spend that money on improving infrastructure and the community to attract companies.
@LiamHal786386403yrs3Y
Nationalize all Industry
@ISIDEWITH12mos12MO
@4KL4PZC4yrs4Y
No, Lower Corporate Taxes to benefit all local companies
@ISIDEWITH12mos12MO
@8WNZXJ43yrs3Y
Yes as long as the environment isn't harmed and it is beneficial such as providing more jobs for locals and people overall, etc.
@ISIDEWITH12mos12MO
@Brunk4yrs4Y
No, it is generally a bad idea for the government subsidize private businesses.
@92JXK3J2yrs2Y
Yes as long as the company plans to employ local citizens of the area and I would prefer a lower corporate tax for all businesses, but I believe personally that this should be left to the states.
@8RSTXFT4yrs4Y
Yes, it should be allowed, but it should not be mandatory for private companies to relocate if they do not wish to.
@8C4Q7JD4yrs4Y
The city should decide whether or not they want to relocate.
@8H4DF7B4yrs4Y
yes but environment, hire locals, punish for outsourcing
@8MKJFKZ4yrs4Y
Yes, but only as long as the tax revenue will eventually exceed the incentives, the local environment is not compromised, and it benefits the community.
@87V5TYY4yrs4Y
Yes, and increased spending on infrastructure will further attract companies
@7PTCG384yrs4Y
Yes, as long as the the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents, the local environment is not compromised, and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives.
@7PTCG384yrs4Y
Yes, as long as the the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents, the local environment is not compromised, and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives
@7PTCG383yrs3Y
Yes, as long as the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives
@7PTCG384yrs4Y
Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised, the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, and the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents
@8D5J4RR4yrs4Y
All of the yes options but the last one (lower corp tax). Set the standard to 25% nationally and 2.5% state and 2.5% municipal.
@7PTCG384yrs4Y
Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised, the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, and the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents.
@7PTCG384yrs4Y
Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives
@7PTCG383yrs3Y
Yes, as long as the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, the local environment is not compromised, and the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents
@7PTCG384yrs4Y
Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised, the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents, and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives.
@7PTCG383yrs3Y
Yes, as long as three criteria are met: the local environment is not compromised, the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, and the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents
@7PTCG383yrs3Y
Yes, as long as three criteria are met: the local environment is not compromised; the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives; the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents
@7PTCG383yrs3Y
Yes, but only if three criteria are met: the local environment is not compromised, the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, and the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents
@7PTCG383yrs3Y
Yes, as long as three criteria are met: the local environment is not compromised, the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents, and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives
@8FPLGKD4yrs4Y
@8GTWWZJ4yrs4Y
I need more information for an opinion.
@8HJ6WYW4yrs4Y
I need more information to decide.
@8J4HK6S4yrs4Y
Yes, but they should be persuaded not to
@TogetherinSoli14yrs4Y
No, this gives unnecessary power to the government and would waste taxpayer money
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.