Or by most strong urban design principles.

It's a research center on an interstate highway frontage. Not sure how urban it could be.

Guys. I feel like nobody is actually reading what others are actually saying on here.

NOBODY IS SAYING THIS IS AN OVERALL BAD DEAL. C'mon guys.

There are obvious design flaws. I'm not saying the entire deal is bad. That's stupid. All I am saying is that it is absolutely okay to criticize their site design, as we would with anyone else.

For the record, there are a few design flaws with Devon as well, but we won't get into that ;)

So very true. This board is amazingly full of urban design experts and critics.

Some of it is certainly warranted and healthy. It does tend to go overboard sometimes IMO.

I would have never thought a R & D building to be that type of project where these are the main concerns

Sounds like the issue is not so much the site plan, but the location.

A more urban design would be nice, given that it's incredibly close to the most urban neighborhood in the state. That said this is one of those "this is important enough to let them slide" type of projects.

It's a research center on an interstate highway frontage. Not sure how urban it could be.

Yes. I think it fits in quite well with its surrounding. Not getting the hubbub. We have bigger fish to fry in OKC. Also, congrats to OKC for landing this!

Or by most strong urban design principles.This is not a building that has to urban to be a great building. It is fine the way it is.

If you don't think this area will be walkable in 50 years, I don't think my arguments will go any further. If we resign ourselves to thinking nothing will change, nothing will.Nothing needs to change in this area, it is fine. It is outstanding. Just because it isn't up to your urbanist standards does not mean it "half of what it could be". Stick to focusing on C2S, Midtown, New BLVD., and other core areas.

Or by most strong urban design principles.

Post your resume. I'd love to see your buildings.

I don't design buildings for a living. I'm also not a cardiologist, but I know eating a cheeseburger isn't good for your heart.

Why is it so bad to suggest this site could have been planned better?

Look, it is just this simple. The City, at great expense, is being asked to build streetcar service to the HSC area, but the HSC isn't being made walkable so that streetcar service can be successful. If recent development in the HSC campus (GE, Toby Keith Kids Corral, Embassy Suites, and OIPA Headquarters) are the going to be the design standard then all the talk of spending money on a streetcar route to this area should cease and desist. We either make the HSC campus a high density walkable area with streetcar service - or we don't. I have been under the impression for several years that we did, but if that desire is no longer there then I withdraw all comments about the area.

Are topics like this even desirable now?

http://www.okctalk.com/general-real-estate-topics/35757-connecting-downtown-health-sciences-center-2.html

Look, it is just this simple. The City, at great expense, is being asked to build streetcar service to the HSC area, but the HSC isn't being made walkable so that streetcar service can be successful. If recent development in the HSC campus (GE, Toby Keith Kids Corral, Embassy Suites, and OIPA Headquarters) are the going to be the design standard then all the talk of spending money on a streetcar route to this area should cease and desist. We either make the HSC campus a high density walkable area with streetcar service - or we don't. I have been under the impression for several years that we did, but if that desire is no longer there then I withdraw all comments about the area.

I haven't kept up with the streetcar debate. Is it being built to the HSC? Personally I'm not so sure it should be. Retrofitting that area into a walkable area is a nearly insurmountable task. The only reason I can see the streetcar going there is for those who live west of I-235 and work east of it. It doesn't necessarily have to be walkable to do good there. The HSC can also be made walkable without being Walkable(TM). The former being simply adequate sidewalks to get from place to place and the latter being street-front, mixed-use urban design.

I haven't kept up with the streetcar debate. Is it being built to the HSC? Personally I'm not so sure it should be. Retrofitting that area into a walkable area is a nearly insurmountable task. The only reason I can see the streetcar going there is for those who live west of I-235 and work east of it. It doesn't necessarily have to be walkable to do good there.

Ding ding ding - winner. That what the urbanist have been saying. Either build it right the first time - or forget it. The area DOES have to be walkable to support mass transit - because WALKING is what people do after they get off mass transit. But like I said several time now, it is becoming increasing clear that while city leaders and others say they want mass transit to the HSC, they are in reality making much harder and more expensive to do so. People need to make their minds up on what they want.

Look, it is just this simple. The City, at great expense, is being asked to build streetcar service to the HSC area, but the HSC isn't being made walkable so that streetcar service can be successful. If recent development in the HSC campus (GE, Toby Keith Kids Corral, Embassy Suites, and OIPA Headquarters) are the going to be the design standard then all the talk of spending money on a streetcar route to this area should cease and desist. We either make the HSC campus a high density walkable area with streetcar service - or we don't. I have been under the impression for several years that we did, but if that desire is no longer there then I withdraw all comments about the area.

Are topics like this even desirable now?

http://www.okctalk.com/general-real-estate-topics/35757-connecting-downtown-health-sciences-center-2.html
Great, great point.

If we are really going to "give up" on making the other side of I-235 anything other than a suburban office park, then a streetcar in this area will be a certain failure.

Don't misunderstand me; this is a HUGE win for the overall economic prosperity of the city. It just unfortunate we are put in the position of "giving up" on trying to create a walkable, livable neighborhood right in the middle of the inner city.

Great, great point.

If we are really going to "give up" on making the other side of I-235 anything other than a suburban office park, then a streetcar in this area will be a certain failure.

Don't misunderstand me; this is a HUGE win for the overall economic prosperity of the city. It just unfortunate we are put in the position of "giving up" on trying to create a walkable, livable neighborhood right in the middle of the inner city.

Where is the "Like" button?

Also, making the HSC area walkable is hardly insurmountable. That's hogwash.

Where is the "Like" button?

Also, making the HSC area walkable is hardly insurmountable. That's hogwash.

I concur.

What exactly would you guys change, given the inherent limitations of this particular use?

Sid,
I don't always agree, but I enjoy your insight in your post...hope you stay in touch with us after you move. Your views are appreciated.

I think its unrealistic to compare OKC to true urban, boutique cities like Portland, Seattle, Denver, Austin, etc. First of all OKC is nowhere near on the level of those places and has developed very differently, especially in the past forty years. The culture is also very different in OKC, so much so it would be difficult to get everyone on board with the type of strict, walkable-at-all-costs standards that many on this board would support. It's also unrealistic to compare OKC to Tier 1 cities like Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, etc. Their size and economic clout make OKC look like a one caution-light town. Where OKC needs to look are places that are ahead but on the same basic playing field. I am thinking of places like Charlotte, Nashville, Louisville, Indianapolis, Kansas City, etc. These places all have walkable, urban areas but everything doesn't revolve around that. They have some very attractive suburbs and auto-oriented development as well as excellent placemaking in their core. OKC needs to focus on creating walkable, urban districts in specific areas while making its suburban development more dignified.

Seattle population: 634,535
OKC population: 599,199

Metros are different but I don't buy that OKC can be whatever it wants, including urban. Just don't buy it. It all comes down to planning. I think Brett if you witnessed how planning works in both cities you'd end up agreeing with me.

What would OKC's population be if its city limits were the size of Seattle's? One also has to remember Seattle has a metro population almost four times the size of OKC's. They also have limited space do to their natural surroundings and are required to go vertical.

The funny thing is we keep talking around the facts.

Fact, we are all not happy the planning department (and others close to planning, i.e. Sustainability) is losing quality people. We wish planning had much more of a role in design and well, planning of projects.

Fact, planning and these people of whom we are lamenting their loss, wouldn't be too proud (and I mean REALLY PROUD) of much that has been built or proposed lately.

Fact, whatever catchy phrase you want to use like New Urbanism, there has still yet to be a substantial shift toward true mixed use, zero-setback, walkable projects. The Steel Yard comes darn close but above ground parking means it misses the mark, but not by much.

Fact, this is OKC, not Seattle. We all get that. But we keep talking and preaching like we want to be more like cities like Seattle. So do we or do we not? Cause we wont be anything like Seattle with tons of big buildings with little street-level interaction, especially in our commercial areas. You've got to have enormous amount of permeability. Especially along a commercial corridor.

Fact, we all have limited political capital, except for people like me, who is on his way out of town, and Kerry, who doesn't live here. So please do take our remarks with a grain of salt. Additionally, there's not much else I think about so it's a subject I'm passionate about and am likely to be passionate in my call to action. I get that.

Fact, where there is a will, there is a way. I'm just looking for a design committee to rally the troops. To say, let's finally do X district the right way! Give people who want a true urban, vibrant district a place they'd love to call home. Deep Deuce is the closest to that simply because of density, but the lack of street options with most of the projects here means this district is going to stay mostly residential. Meaning people will need to walk out of it for most things. That's not a holistic district.

Fact, the research and health science area is all built up by large corporations that aren't going anywhere. Their designs could be just about anything (within budget constraints of course). The City could show leadership here by TIFF'ing the district and getting parking and infrastructure right so this area could develop into a world-class district. One that would attract some luxury housing and commercial space to complement the existing commerce there. If you've not yet walked HSC area, you're in for a real treat. Beautiful buildings (mostly) that sit surrounded by seas of parking lots.

Fact, all of this is just anecdotal if we really aren't willing to invest in the brain power to make it happen. Design committees probably needs to be stripped and very educated people need to be put on them. And from here on forward, a responsible and fair permit process and go forward that includes the letting of some sub-urban design but also our best chance at getting some real urban projects as well. That's all I think people like me want. A real chance at seeing some awesome urbanity here.

If it isn't possible, we really do need to stop comparing ourselves to great urban cities and think more about growing metros but with little in the form of an attractive core. Think like Houston for example. Focus strictly on growth for the sake of growth. I think anything is possible when cities evolve. It really just ever comes down to resolve. Again, something myself and others, including those like Clause, are just really wanting to see evidence of.

Pete, to answer your question, I'm not an architect. I'm not sure how this building could be built exactly. But because I've sat in enough design committee meetings and read enough minutes, I'm not a single bit convinced that any attempt to consider true urban solutions was even considered. Perhaps that's just lazy on my part.

This thread today has already sparked two private conversations from these people I'm talking about -- both started by 'them'. Saying things like "I am very sick of the "it's good enough" mantra"... I'm serious... we are either heartbroken we are losing these folks and we want to align our processes to attract them back or more like them in the future or we are missing the forest for the trees. Which is in OKC?

Lots of these things are not "facts"

What exactly would you guys change, given the inherent limitations of this particular use?

1) I would keep the grid.
2) I would put the parking garage in the block bounded by Central/Walnut/SE9th. This would allow the traffic enter/exit the parking garages almost directly as possible to I-235, which will keep them from driving along pedestrian routes (A-B street strategy)
3) I would put the out-door lab right where it is - but with grid intact. I would also require a decorative and interactive type of wall along NE10th. It would connect to main office building via a passage under Central.
4) I would move the main office space facing NE10th. This would shield the hospital area from any sound generated by the outdoor lab.
5) the rest of the space I would keep vacant for future development/growth

Here is a quick and dirty. The roads lined in purple would get P180 style makeover.

http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x378/KerryinJax/GE_zps0c3a7314.jpg

I think its unrealistic to compare OKC to true urban, boutique cities like Portland, Seattle, Denver, Austin, etc. First of all OKC is nowhere near on the level of those places ...

I disagree with this. IMO, it is this kind of thinking that would prevent or retard the process of Oklahoma City becoming like a Portland or Austin, albeit with its own character. I think I would have said that 10 years ago, but not today. And you know what, it has noting to do with the Devon Towers or the GE Research Centers type of developments. It's the changing attitude of our youth. Today's 20 and 30 somethings of OKC care about this city more than I have ever seen them care about it in my life. Just the fact that they're here and involved is a huge difference. Many also no longer think in that same self defeating language that seemed to dominate the attitude of people who live here just a short time ago. 10 years ago, any young grad who envied what was in those cities would just move there. Now, there is a significant amount of them that instead look at those cities as inspiration for what they could do here to make OKC better and actually organize to make it happen.

The funny thing is that while, yes, these type of projects do have a significant direct economic impact and provide amazing job opportunities the city has not seen before, I truly think it's the effort of those like Better Block OKC and those who jump started the Plaza district that are really making Oklahoma City a better place to live and are creating an identity for the city because they actually care. And that's exactly how it happened in places like Portland and Austin. OKC now has every bit as much of a chance now to have the nice diverse variety of urban neighborhoods like Portland and Austin and maybe parts of Denver. But we have to act and plan like that possibility is real. Interestingly, it seems that this has sunk in with our youth movement more so than with those that have the resources to make a significant contribution to that vision with a single project.

As long as the developers keep just seeing OKC as it is instead of what it can be, we will continue to get more of the same. Honestly, though, I have given up counting on our large scale developments to recognize that. I've just accepted that it will happen mainly by the efforts of smaller projects in more focused and unified districts that have been shaped by locally minded people. That's how cities really gain their identities and differentiate themselves anyway. It's really those changes that keep me excited about living here, even more so than something like this facility, as much as it does make me happy that we are now worthy of such a project and hopeful for what it may mean for the economic opportunities it can produce for the next generation of Oklahoma Citians.

Lots of these things are not "facts"

Feel free to expound on your thoughts here...

GE acquires Cameron's Compression unit for $550M

GE Oil & Gas (GE) and Cameron announced that GE has agreed to acquire Cameron’s Reciprocating Compression division for $550M. Cameron’s Reciprocating Compression division, which generated sales of approximately $355M in 2012, has approximately 900 employees and operates from 20 global locations. The acquisition is expected to close later this year subject to regulatory approval. After closing, Cameron’s Reciprocating Compression division will become part of GE’s Oil & Gas recently formed Downstream Technology Solutions business.

GE acquires Cameron's Compression unit for $550M

GE Oil & Gas (GE) and Cameron announced that GE has agreed to acquire Cameron’s Reciprocating Compression division for $550M. Cameron’s Reciprocating Compression division, which generated sales of approximately $355M in 2012, has approximately 900 employees and operates from 20 global locations. The acquisition is expected to close later this year subject to regulatory approval. After closing, Cameron’s Reciprocating Compression division will become part of GE’s Oil & Gas recently formed Downstream Technology Solutions business.

This will include Cameron's facility near SE 15th/Eastern, from their job postings it is primarily a manufacturing location (no engineering/marketing/exec. management types).

They have had a mini internal marketing campaign around my GE office for the past few weeks trying to draw up interest in the Downstream Technology Solutions business, none of us peons could figure out what products fell into the business (until just now).

OKC research center to benefit from GE's $10 billion investment | News OK (http://newsok.com/okc-research-center-to-benefit-from-ges-10-billion-investment/article/3936875)


General Electric on Monday said it was renewing its commitment to clean energy with a $10 billion investment that likely will include the company’s planned Oklahoma City Global Research Center.

“The Oklahoma City center is definitely a big part of the corporation’s investment and commitment to technology,” said Mike Ming, general manager for the Oklahoma City facility, which is scheduled to open in Oklahoma City in 2015.

“Being the eighth research center of the GE global enterprise, it’s an important part and displays the company’s commitment to the importance of oil and gas going forward, especially in taking this resource of natural gas and oil and doing everything we can to make it better, cleaner, safer, cheaper, faster and smarter,” Ming said.

The Oklahoma City research center is likely to be involved in the effort to develop technologies to allow companies to capture and sell natural gas that otherwise would be flared, and in the effort to reduce or replace the water being used in hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, Ming said.

Wow, $10 BILLION investment?

Hope a good chunk of that comes flowing into OKC.

I know another big project they're working on is replacing water with CO2 in hydraulic fracturing operations. Not that they're the only ones, but I saw that mentioned in a press release about this the other day.

Well with that suburban design, I wish they weren't even building it here! :tongue:

Well with that suburban design, I wish they weren't even building it here! :tongue:

It is a research center, it was never going to be a facility that welcomes the general public in the front door. I agree that some improvements could have been made in the design, but those flaws are tiny when compared to the hundreds of high quality jobs and the incredible amount of investment dollars that this facility will bring to downtown.

Sincerely,

A brainwashed GE employee

Yeah, I think he was being facetious...

Isn't this supposed to break ground in the next few weeks ? Like March or April ?

Well with that suburban design, I wish they weren't even building it here! :tongue:

I guess I don't understand why they couldn't do both. We can put people on the moon but we can't make a research facility blend seamlessly with its surroundings. Go figure. Alas, I would just as soon they built this on Memorial Road. Anyhow, old argument and it isn't like the OU campus area will ever be urban anyhow so there is little value is discussing it.

Wow, $10 BILLION investment?

Hope a good chunk of that comes flowing into OKC.

It really sounds like it will. The potential economic impact of this facility was easy to infer, but this latest information really gets the imagination going. I really think it could be a spring board to achieving much greater economic diversity. While it is positioned in the oil and gas sector, it's focus on innovation and development of new methods and products could result in local spin offs that are more adaptable when the energy sector has a downturn. It also sounds like it could help with the development and improvement of other forms of energy generation. I think the long term goal of the city should be to transition from an oil and gas economy to a diversified energy economy. The demand for energy will never stop growing, but the demand for specific sources of energy is always in flux.

Combine this with research going on at the HSC, and Oklahoma City suddenly becomes a place where significant investment in innovation is taking place. If this leads to some manufacturing and/or if we could add a technology R&D center, then I think we'd have a better and more stable economy than ever before.

Yeah, I think he was being facetious...

Correct, hence the stupid looking smiley face...though I think it would've been better if they had designed a more urban layout, given the substantial investment to the area, I think the stance of "it might as well be built in Norman" is a little extreme. (My apologies, Kerry)

I don't mind the design as much on that side of town, but definitely would be against it west of 235.

Correct, hence the stupid looking smiley face...though I think it would've been better if they had designed a more urban layout, given the substantial investment to the area, I think the stance of "it might as well be built in Norman" is a little extreme. (My apologies, Kerry)

I don't mind the design as much on that side of town, but definitely would be against it west of 235.

I'm kind of with you on that. If they had gone more urban, it would have been cool, but I didn't expect it and they would sort of have been pioneers. That area has more of a campus feel than urban feel. I still think it's a cool little building though and will be a nice place to work. Maybe it's good that we have a bit of a suburban / campus area next to DT. Maybe that will help deter any of that from being built west of 235.

Correct, hence the stupid looking smiley face...though I think it would've been better if they had designed a more urban layout, given the substantial investment to the area, I think the stance of "it might as well be built in Norman" is a little extreme. (My apologies, Kerry)

I don't mind the design as much on that side of town, but definitely would be against it west of 235.

No worries - I have written off the area east of I-235 as being anything other than what it is right now. It will be a perfect example how an area with billions of dollars in investment add up to 'no place special' Look at what is there now; the State Capitol, research facilities, OU medical, major hospitals... and yet, the place is devoid of all street life, character, uniqueness, and identity. They succeeded in making nothing out of something. The GE facility fits in perfectly, despite me previous comment. Also, I just realized they are going to have a gated compound.

http://www.chinahearsay.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/GE-green.jpg

No worries - I have written off the area east of I-235 as being anything other than what it is right now. It will be a perfect example how an area with billions of dollars in investment add up to 'no place special' Look at what is there now; the State Capitol, research facilities, OU medical, major hospitals... and yet, the place is devoid of all street life, character, uniqueness, and identity. They succeeded in making nothing out of something. The GE facility fits in perfectly, despite me previous comment. Also, I just realized they are going to have a gated compound.

I agree, it would've been cool if it had become more urban, but I'm afraid it is what it is. The suburban style buildings in place likely aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Unfortunately the Capitol grounds and hospital didn't set the best stage for urban development over there.

GE recently submitted plans that for the first time show sites for future buildings. One is labeled "Future Research Building" which will help address the setback from NW 10th, and the other "Future Office Building" with adjoining future parking.

Indicates plans for more growth and quality jobs in OKC.


http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/7084d1395437211-ge-global-research-center-ge032114.jpg

Is that the new ramp that is going to be built?

^

Yes.

This is great, certainly assuages our concerns about the urban layout so now we can all be really excited about this.

Oklahoma City Economic Development Trust to consider incentives for GE | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-economic-development-trust-to-consider-incentives-for-ge/article/3945802)

Seems like a reasonable plan, especially if it encourages them to expand sooner rather than later.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

This is great, certainly assuages our concerns about the urban layout so now we can all be really excited about this.

Yep. I dislike it much less. I'd be even happier if the parking garage had street-level retail space available. Those GE employees are going to need more than the Quiznos that's next door...

Oklahoma City Economic Development Trust to consider incentives for GE | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-economic-development-trust-to-consider-incentives-for-ge/article/3945802)

Gotta love corporate welfare comments on the newsok.com articles...

Yep. I dislike it much less. I'd be even happier if the parking garage had street-level retail space available. Those GE employees are going to need more than the Quiznos that's next door...

GE's facility security is intense though. I got in for a tour at their historic HQ in East Cleve, although obvious reasons abound there...

Oklahoma City Economic Development Trust to consider incentives for GE | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-economic-development-trust-to-consider-incentives-for-ge/article/3945802)


Gotta love corporate welfare comments on the newsok.com articles...

Well they probably have a point. While cities and states competing for jobs has become a reality, it still shouldnt sit well with folks that their tax dollars are paying highly profitable corporations money to locate somewhere.

But about the above article...why is this trust considering giving a couple million more? Has GE not already announced and made plans to come to OKC? With this incentive being after the fact it makes it look much more like a expensive favor and not necessary for GE's site selection.

The article clearly states that the incentives were part of why GE agreed to bring the facility here. The trust is simply upholding their part of the bargain. Also, you really need to look at the incentives as a giving-up of tax revenues we wouldn't have had without GE being here. You get them back in all sorts of other ways all the way from additional hotel/motel taxes to advertising to creation of support jobs and businesses.

It is sad that a company with billion in profits still has their hand out. It is quite a system we setup for ourselves. Any idea how many years it will take for the taxpayers to break even on this deal?

It is sad that a company with billion in profits still has their hand out. It is quite a system we setup for ourselves. Any idea how many years it will take for the taxpayers to break even on this deal?There probably isn't a publicly traded company in the world that doesn’t have its hand out for incentives..
In most cases they are expected and there is zero chance to land something like this new GE facility without them.

The incentives have moved well beyond tax breaks, free land and utility’s and things of this nature.
Company are now looking for locations that will help them train workers at tax payers expense before they are even hired.

Oklahoma and the USA still needs a lot of improvements in their relocation /start up packages.
Lowering the U.S. corporate tax rate would be a good start in improving our horrible national employment picture.

It is sad that a company with billion in profits still has their hand out. It is quite a system we setup for ourselves. Any idea how many years it will take for the taxpayers to break even on this deal?

According to the article:


If approved, GE would earn the jobs incentive if it creates 133 new jobs over the next five years, as planned. The estimated average salary would be $129,800 a year in the first year.

GE’s payroll at the Oklahoma City research center is expected to climb from $3.6 million in the first year to $13.5 million by the end of its fifth year, according to Couch’s memo.

Officials estimate GE’s research center will have a total economic impact of nearly $200 million over its first seven years, based the company’s capital investment, wages and state and local taxes.

Ignoring the estimated impact for some terribly inaccurate napkin math of my own, I am getting somewhere north of 800 grand a year in state income tax by the final year for 133 employees at that average salary. Making some more terrible assumptions, let's guess the five year total averages out to half of that a year so 2 million total over five years in state tax, which all by itself goes a long way towards paying for the 3 + 1 + 0.75 million that the article describes as the various incentives. Once you take the local sales tax those employees will be paying, the property tax on their houses, the property tax on the facility, etc. into account, I wouldn't be surprised if the investment is paid back long before even the first five years pass.

These incentives come from a job creation fund.

It applies to any company that is planning to add quality jobs, no matter how long they have been in OKC; not just those looking to relocate here.

It can be used as part of a package when recruiting new companies, but a good amount of the funds go to companies like Chesapeake who are (were) adding well-paying jobs. They only get the money if they meet the contracted requirements.

It is sad that a company with billion in profits still has their hand out. It is quite a system we setup for ourselves.

Free market capitalism at work.


Wait, what? ; )

There probably isn't a publicly traded company in the world that doesn’t have its hand out for incentives..
In most cases they are expected and there is zero chance to land something like this new GE facility without them.

The incentives have moved well beyond tax breaks, free land and utility’s and things of this nature.
Company are now looking for locations that will help them train workers at tax payers expense before they are even hired.

Oklahoma and the USA still needs a lot of improvements in their relocation /start up packages.
Lowering the U.S. corporate tax rate would be a good start in improving our horrible national employment picture.

I agree with JTF. What's sad is the acceptance of "that's just the way things are." When enough people wake-up and say this will STOP, only then can we even begin to have a conversation. The problem of the revolving door between big business and government, and back around again in reverse, means there is little chance that change will happen. Because of the Big Money involved in politics itself, we will one day have to stand and fight (as Thomas Jefferson said we would) and call the government for what it is: illegitimate, no longer working for the people, but for corporations that make sure their agenda is carried out. And not only in America, it's happening now everywhere. There is little resistance to capitalism run amok. Hand-outs to a company with a BILLION in profits is nothing less than obscene and unacceptable - no matter what fancy title you attach to it.

I agree with JTF. What's sad is the acceptance of "that's just the way things are." When enough people wake-up and say this will STOP, only then can we even begin to have a conversation. The problem of the revolving door between big business and government, and back around again in reverse, means there is little chance that change will happen. Because of the Big Money involved in politics itself, we will one day have to stand and fight (as Thomas Jefferson said we would) and call the government for what it is: illegitimate, no longer working for the people, but for corporations that make sure their agenda is carried out. And not only in America, it's happening now everywhere. There is little resistance to capitalism run amok. Hand-outs to a company with a BILLION in profits is nothing less than obscene and unacceptable - no matter what fancy title you attach to it.

You can't see me but I am giving you a standing ovation.

Lowering the U.S. corporate tax rate would be a good start in improving our horrible national employment picture.

How much lower can it go? GE already pays $0 federal taxes. Are you suggesting they pay less than $0?

How much lower can it go? GE already pays $0 federal taxes. Are you suggesting they pay less than $0?

Not sure where you are pulling your numbers from JTF....

But just in case you are just blindly throwing that number out there, trusting the numerous debunked and false reports that came out a couple years ago about the amount of tax paid by GE to the government, let me inform you that for the year in question, 2010, where it was stated that GE paid nothing to gov't, they actually reported around $1 Billion in taxes paid. They also paid another billion + in 2011.

Also, since you missed the point of why lowering the US corporate tax rate is important, GE is a global company. Its estimated that 53% of their business is done in a global market (non-US) (I would also assume that the percentage will grow more over the coming years). Why would GE bring those local earnings back to its main accounts in the US when they would have to pay one of the highest corp tax rates in the world, when that money is technically won and used by local regions and GE businesses.... and those local regions have much lower tax rates. Most companies do this, it is not just a GE thing, and its how many companies stay afloat.... (if this disgusts you, don't look up apple or google).

Top this global market with major major losses from Capital, and you will end up with a low tax rate. Just how when you have a small business and make no profit and lose money, you typically owe less in taxes at the end of the year.

GE plays by the books, but the books are full of loopholes and lobbyist. If you don't like what they are doing, become active in your government (not just making **** up on forums and reposting drudge articles) and make positive thoughtful changes.

Sourcing:
Fact checking the $0 taxes paid - Warren: GE Pays No Taxes (http://www.factcheck.org/2012/04/warren-ge-pays-no-taxes/) (backed up by multiple other sources online as well)

Not sure where you are pulling your numbers from JTF....

But just in case you are just blindly throwing that number out there, trusting the numerous debunked and false reports that came out a couple years ago about the amount of tax paid by GE to the government, let me inform you that for the year in question, 2010, where it was stated that GE paid nothing to gov't, they actually reported around $1 Billion in taxes paid. They also paid another billion + in 2011.

Also, since you missed the point of why lowering the US corporate tax rate is important, GE is a global company. Its estimated that 53% of their business is done in a global market (non-US) (I would also assume that the percentage will grow more over the coming years). Why would GE bring those local earnings back to its main accounts in the US when they would have to pay one of the highest corp tax rates in the world, when that money is technically won and used by local regions and GE businesses.... and those local regions have much lower tax rates. Most companies do this, it is not just a GE thing, and its how many companies stay afloat.... (if this disgusts you, don't look up apple or google).

Top this global market with major major losses from Capital, and you will end up with a low tax rate. Just how when you have a small business and make no profit and lose money, you typically owe less in taxes at the end of the year.

GE plays by the books, but the books are full of loopholes and lobbyist. If you don't like what they are doing, become active in your government (not just making **** up on forums and reposting drudge articles) and make positive thoughtful changes.

Sourcing:
Fact checking the $0 taxes paid - Warren: GE Pays No Taxes (http://www.factcheck.org/2012/04/warren-ge-pays-no-taxes/) (backed up by multiple other sources online as well)

He's probably referring to a few years back when GE lost some money for a few quarters. The federal government allows to carry the loss forward against future earnings for up to 7 years or go back 2 years to get a refund. So if ge loses 5 billion in 2014 but makes 3 billion in 2015 they won't pay any taxes in 2015 and still have 2 billion left to carry forward. It's a good law and helped many small business stomach the recession.

Not sure where you are pulling your numbers from JTF....

But just in case you are just blindly throwing that number out there, trusting the numerous debunked and false reports that came out a couple years ago about the amount of tax paid by GE to the government, let me inform you that for the year in question, 2010, where it was stated that GE paid nothing to gov't, they actually reported around $1 Billion in taxes paid. They also paid another billion + in 2011.

Also, since you missed the point of why lowering the US corporate tax rate is important, GE is a global company. Its estimated that 53% of their business is done in a global market (non-US) (I would also assume that the percentage will grow more over the coming years). Why would GE bring those local earnings back to its main accounts in the US when they would have to pay one of the highest corp tax rates in the world, when that money is technically won and used by local regions and GE businesses.... and those local regions have much lower tax rates. Most companies do this, it is not just a GE thing, and its how many companies stay afloat.... (if this disgusts you, don't look up apple or google).

Top this global market with major major losses from Capital, and you will end up with a low tax rate. Just how when you have a small business and make no profit and lose money, you typically owe less in taxes at the end of the year.

GE plays by the books, but the books are full of loopholes and lobbyist. If you don't like what they are doing, become active in your government (not just making **** up on forums and reposting drudge articles) and make positive thoughtful changes.

Sourcing:
Fact checking the $0 taxes paid - Warren: GE Pays No Taxes (http://www.factcheck.org/2012/04/warren-ge-pays-no-taxes/) (backed up by multiple other sources online as well)

Have you been played or what? "Taxes paid," you say? Read your own article you linked to at FactCheck.org. They say GE has paid a "billion dollars" in payroll taxes, local and state sales tax. The payroll tax and sales tax is not the issue here (and you probably know that). At all. It is the INCOME tax on corporations we are talking about! They may have, may not have.

From your own article, it concludes:

"...the company has clearly been aggressive in reducing its tax burden through various tax credits and deductions created by the federal government (one example is clean energy incentives). It also has been creative in moving a good deal of its profits offshore. But Warren overreached with her claim that GE pays “zero” in taxes. The company does pay payroll taxes and local and state taxes. And GE says it also pays federal income taxes. How much? We don’t know, and GE isn’t saying. Nor is it required to."

"Become active in your government." What black hole do you live in that any individual could get involved in government and fight the lobby of General Electric, one of the biggest defense contractors in the country? Unwrap the U.S. flag from around your rhetoric and be reasonable. They don't even have to report taxes paid because they're a supplier to the lucrative (and mostly illegal) off-the-books Black Op intelligence agencies.

I, for one, wish GE would just go away. I hate it they have this presence in OKC. In fact, go put your research on better ways to kill people on some other planet.
Oh, wait...it's an "oil & gas" research center....let's find less expensive ways to fuel tomorrow's advanced weaponry. Ike warned us. Yes he did.

`