Amazon Fulfillment

[GaryOKC6]

Just looking at history of these sorts of things, this is what quite often happens. I know that I am not
the chamber of commerce, and therefore have to thoroughly document and back up with serious academic
research that I say...where they can just make a statement and that is that. But I don't really feel like it, so lets, as
always, just sit back and watch!

Thankfully you are not the chamber of commerce.

[mugofbeer]

nm

[mugofbeer]

Nobody can even say "$15 is too much money" with a straight face, when the Amazon founder, along with two other people, have more wealth than half the people in the United States*.

* https://www.politifact.com/wisconsin...warren-buffet/
* https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/09/gate...-combined.html
* https://dailycaller.com/2017/11/09/g...lf-of-america/
* https://www.forbes.com/sites/noahkir.../#3d92998d3cf8
Please note: The gaps have widened since the data above was published. It's just not known by how much.

** The above is a contender for the definition of insanity.

If a company has jobs available but doesn't offer enough money, it won't be able to obtain such help. If Amazon doesn't pay enough, they won't be able to attract the 1700 employees they desire for their facility. If it requires they pay $15/hr + benefits, so be it. If it's $12, so be it. The market determines what proper wages are.

In Denver, restaurants are having to pay more for wait staff and cooks because they cannot find the help so they are having to raise menu prices or trying to institute a wage surcharge directly onto customers. The market demands the higher wages.

Government, especially the Federal Government, has no business forcing a $15 minimum wage because the cost of living in varies so much across the country. McDonalds is not a career job nor is working checkout at Wal Mart.

My former employer cannot find enough qualified individual to work the needed number of customer service jobs they have available. They have finally exhausted the alternatives to avoid raising wages and have finally given in. At 20% pay increase was just implemented to retain help and attract new employees.

Government has no place in this process - especially the Federal Government. The market itself takes care of what the proper wages are.

[Pete]

^

Remember that Amazon gets billions in public subsidies including millions from OKC.

[HangryHippo]

If a company has jobs available but doesn't offer enough money, it won't be able to obtain such help. If Amazon doesn't pay enough, they won't be able to attract the 1700 employees they desire for their facility. If it requires they pay $15/hr + benefits, so be it. If it's $12, so be it. The market determines what proper wages are.

In Denver, restaurants are having to pay more for wait staff and cooks because they cannot find the help so they are having to raise menu prices or trying to institute a wage surcharge directly onto customers. The market demands the higher wages.

Government, especially the Federal Government, has no business forcing a $15 minimum wage because the cost of living in varies so much across the country. McDonalds is not a career job nor is working checkout at Wal Mart.

My former employer cannot find enough qualified individual to work the needed number of customer service jobs they have available. They have finally exhausted the alternatives to avoid raising wages and have finally given in. At 20% pay increase was just implemented to retain help and attract new employees.

Government has no place in this process - especially the Federal Government. The market itself takes care of what the proper wages are.

Horse****. The market is manipulated at every turn. How can we count on it to take care of itself?

[RedDollar]

^

Remember that Amazon gets billions in public subsidies including millions from OKC.

I would not term what Amazon negotiates as a subsidy. Here's the definition of subsidy

sub·si·dy
/ˈsəbsədē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
noun: subsidy; plural noun: subsidies

1.
a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

Amazon and other companies, negotiate incentives. They don't need the Govt money to survive. What they are doing, is monetizing the value they bring to a community where they locate.

There's no doubt, that a company ( or a sports franchise ) brings value to where ever they locate. I don't think a well run company is just gonna give that value away out of some altruistic sense of civic pride.

The value they bring, is determined by competition between cities who want the value these companies bring. In my book, that's pretty much an extension of the free market.

[Pete]

^

It's corporate welfare, no matter how you phrase it.

And as such completely contrary to a free market system because the huge majority of competing businesses do not receive the same. It's a distortion of a free market.

[RedDollar]

^

It's corporate welfare, no matter how you phrase it.

And as such completely contrary to a free market system because the huge majority of competing businesses do not receive the same. It's a distortion of a free market.

How is that welfare ?

An employee brings value to his employer, his employer pays the employee according to value received.

That's just economics.

I think its odd, to want these companies to give away the value the bring. The community where they locate profits off their presence. Why would the company not want a piece of that ?

A City will not offer an incentive that's higher than the value they expect to receive. If they do, then they misfigured and its on them for paying too much. City see's increase in tax revenue or they wouldn't do it.

IDK, the world I was raised in, said nothing comes for free.

[RedDollar]

OKC offered an incentive to Bass Pro Shops to locate in Bricktown.

BPS earned that money, because City officials thought that BPS would help Bricktown grow.

Billy Bobs Tackle company could not get that incentive, but because Billy Bob can't bring the value, that BPS can.

Each company is going to earn whatever value they can negotiate. Some have more value than others, some people are better at their job than others, some football players are more valuable than others.

[Pete]

^

It's still corporate welfare and the government creating an unfair advantage, plain and simple, and that's the opposite of the free market and a level playing field for all.

[jn1780]

^

It's still corporate welfare and the government creating an unfair advantage, plain and simple, and that's the opposite of the free market and a level playing field for all.

Yeah, we can argue whether or not we should provide incentives, but lets not pretend we are not manipulating the market.

[jn1780]

How is that welfare ?


IDK, the world I was raised in, said nothing comes for free.

Unless your a business then its fine? If you truly believed in a free market, the government shouldn't get involved in anyway. All this talk about bringing perceived 'value' shouldn't mean crap to the government by the strictest definition of a free market. The government isn't and shouldn't be in a positioned to determine who is more valuable.

The same arguments can be made by progressives that people should receive incentives because they have future value. They may or may not be correct.

[RedDollar]

^

It's still corporate welfare and the government creating an unfair advantage, plain and simple, and that's the opposite of the free market and a level playing field for all.

Not only was I taught that nothing is free ............ I was also taught that life is not fair.

What you're saying, is its not fair that Kevin Durant is more talented at basketball than I am.

You're saying that Bezos talents for building Amazon, are unfait.

The Amazon Fulfillment center has already increased property values along Portland and I-44 and the whole area is set to explode with development.

Now if you want to argue that the increase in tax revenue would happen elsewhere in the City and all Amazon is doing is centering it in one part of the City, then I might go along with that.

That's the problem I have with streetcar and downtown development, all that does is relocate business from one part of the City to another, and does not bring in new money into the local economy.

And that's where Amazon differs, its new money being spent here and that's true economic growth. Not just money churning inside the local economy.

[RedDollar]

Unless your a business then its fine? If you truly believed in a free market, the government shouldn't get involved in anyway. All this talk about bringing perceived 'value' shouldn't mean crap to the government by the strictest definition of a free market. The government isn't and shouldn't be in a positioned to determine who is more valuable.

The same arguments can be made by progressives that people should receive incentives because they have future value. They may or may not be correct.

There's no one holding a gun to City officials heads, forcing them to offer this incentive.

They've got a choice, either offer the incentive and compete .................... or don't, and lose out completely.

Its a no brainer for the City, its money spent to increase tax revenue.

There is no market manipulation, the company locates to the City that does the most for that company's bottom line.

[RedDollar]

The City has also spent a lot of money on an industrial air park along Portland. Paying Amazon an incentive, will go along way to making that air park more attractive to other business.

To not compete on some vague grounds that is somehow a manipulated market, which I still can't comprehend how that could even be the case, would be foolish.

[Pete]

^

It's not vague to the businesses who have to compete straight-up with Amazon while the government gives them billions.


People can contort this any way they want but you have a competitive market where one company gets billions in incentives and others do not, all at the discretion of the government. That is not a free market and is a bastardization of capitalism. Period.

[gopokes88]

Not only was I taught that nothing is free ............ I was also taught that life is not fair.

What you're saying, is its not fair that Kevin Durant is more talented at basketball than I am.

You're saying that Bezos talents for building Amazon, are unfait.

The Amazon Fulfillment center has already increased property values along Portland and I-44 and the whole area is set to explode with development.

Now if you want to argue that the increase in tax revenue would happen elsewhere in the City and all Amazon is doing is centering it in one part of the City, then I might go along with that.

That's the problem I have with streetcar and downtown development, all that does is relocate business from one part of the City to another, and does not bring in new money into the local economy.

And that's where Amazon differs, its new money being spent here and that's true economic growth. Not just money churning inside the local economy.

I was taught all those things too.

But handing tax breaks to Amazon while mom and pop stores are SOL isn't good business.

Govt should stay out of the equation. And part of staying out is saying you aren't allowed to pick winners and losers with tax breaks.

OKC is in a tough spot because Amazon would just say fine, we'll go to Yukon or Moore.

There needs to be a federal ban on this behavior so it stops pitting city versus city, state versus state.

[jn1780]

There's no one holding a gun to City officials heads, forcing them to offer this incentive.

They've got a choice, either offer the incentive and compete .................... or don't, and lose out completely.

Its a no brainer for the City, its money spent to increase tax revenue.

There is no market manipulation, the company locates to the City that does the most for that company's bottom line.

Like Pete said, except for all the smaller business having to bump their local warehouse workers salaries up to compete with Amazon. That's the direct impact that is set to occur here in the next few months. Maybe that's the right course of action? I don't know. I'm not really arguing for or against in this case. But, you can't just use the "life is not fair argument" to reclassify the better terms the city gives to Amazon compared to the other businesses across the city.

[Pete]

^

They don't need to really go to Yukon or Moore, just threaten to do so. Then the OKC people open the checkbook.


Here are two big examples of how this works: Cabela's and Costco. Both came into town looking for a handout. But each were going to place one location in the OKC area for the foreseeable future and maybe forever. You aren't going to Moore or even Edmond.

I know the broker involved with Costco and he said they never even considered going anywhere but near Memorial and Western. But they told OKC they were looking at other municipalities and that's all it took to get the millions they were asking for.

[RedDollar]

^

It's not vague to the businesses who have to compete straight-up with Amazon while the government gives them billions.


People can contort this any way they want but you have a competitive market where one company gets billions in incentives and others do not, all at the discretion of the government. That is not a free market and is a bastardization of capitalism. Period.

Why did not WalMart build a fulfillment center ?

Because they're not as smart as Bezo's company.

Come on man, there's nothing stopping Amazon's competitors from doing the same thing. And in fact, WalMart is trying to shift that direction.

And these incentives are penny ante to Amazon's bottom line.

We could move to the Euro model and make incentives illegal. But that screw over Oklahoma, in a big way. We can't compete with beaches or mountains or mild climates. I'd be real careful bout you ask for.

[RedDollar]

I was taught all those things too.

But handing tax breaks to Amazon while mom and pop stores are SOL isn't good business.

Govt should stay out of the equation. And part of staying out is saying you aren't allowed to pick winners and losers with tax breaks.

OKC is in a tough spot because Amazon would just say fine, we'll go to Yukon or Moore.

There needs to be a federal ban on this behavior so it stops pitting city versus city, state versus state.

Well, as I just got through posting, Oklahoma would be really screwed then, say goodbye to Boeing, who moved the engineering jobs here to get a big credit from the State.

[RedDollar]

^

They don't need to really go to Yukon or Moore, just threaten to do so. Then the OKC people open the checkbook.


Here are two big examples of how this works: Cabela's and Costco. Both came into town looking for a handout. But each were going to place one location in the OKC area for the foreseeable future and maybe forever. You aren't going to Moore or even Edmond.

I know the broker involved with Costco and he said they never even considered going anywhere but near Memorial and Western. But they told OKC they were looking at other municipalities and that's all it took to get the millions they were asking for.

I say more power to them, that's not a problem with offering incentives , that's a problem with OKC City officials who have a habit of blowing money, like there's no tomorrow. If what you say is true, OKC made a bad deal.

I'm not gonna penalize Costco because they're really good at what they do and are coveted by the consumer.

I heard a lot of this same argument over the Bass Pro deal, it was like, well what about Billy Bobs Tackle shop, he's gonna put out of business. In reality , BPS prices were no lower than the local tackle shops. One did not even try to compete, they shut the door. But they'd already lost long ago when Johnny Morris was building BPS to what its become and those guys did not have that vision and ambition.

And besides, they were gonna get wiped out by internet sales, anyway.

[gopokes88]

Well, as I just got through posting, Oklahoma would be really screwed then, say goodbye to Boeing, who moved the engineering jobs here to get a big credit from the State.

Lol what don’t you understand about the word “federal”

[BDP]

How is that welfare ?

An employee brings value to his employer, his employer pays the employee according to value received.

That's just economics.

I think its odd, to want these companies to give away the value the bring. The community where they locate profits off their presence. Why would the company not want a piece of that ?

A City will not offer an incentive that's higher than the value they expect to receive. If they do, then they misfigured and its on them for paying too much. City see's increase in tax revenue or they wouldn't do it.

IDK, the world I was raised in, said nothing comes for free.

I think all anyone is pointing out is that if a company is negotiating with government entities for any kind of exception for their entity, it is not a free market or "free enterprise" system. Sure, it is still economics. For that matter, socialism is still economics. And people have argued the merits of various economic systems for millennia, and one aspect of those arguments has always been what role government should play in economics and to what degree. So, really, it just kind of boils down to: if you are in favor of the city giving incentives to select entities on a one-on-one basis, that's one thing, but what it is not is a free market system. And that's not a qualitative statement.

Basically, capitalist theory contends, in part, that governments are corruptable, and therefore, should not play a part in market transactions, so it does not support these types of arrangements. Capitalism is not concerned with the return a government entity will receive by offering concession to a single market entity. It is concerned with keeping government entities out of the markets. Capitalism would prescribe that if Amazon is not sustainable in the market without government concessions, then it should not exist.

The big irony in all of this is that Amazon is sustainable in this market, and just about all others, on its own but it still demands and receives concessions from governments to do business in the jurisdiction of those governments. They have parlayed a broader market leverage into leverage over local governments (and federal as well, in some ways). They are basically following the Wal-Mart model. And so, they aren't so much creating new jobs out of thin air as they are shifting those jobs from traditional retail to online fulfillment, while netting a regulatory mandated competitive advantage over other retailers, mostly of the small and local variety.

So, when a government gives incentives to amazon, they aren't so much creating new jobs as much as simply facilitating and endorsing that shift. The government is basically saying we would rather have warehouse workers than retail workers and need to get involved to make that happen. To do this they offer incentives to the employer of warehouse fulfillment workers, but not to local retail employers. The net effect, and intended one, is to give a competitive advantage to the fulfillment employer over the local retail employer, effectively disincentivizing local retail, or at least shifting them into special markets not yet affected by government incentives to their competitors.

Again, this may be what you're advocating for, but it's not a free market system (we don't have one) and, yes, it is still just economics.

[BDP]

OKC offered an incentive to Bass Pro Shops to locate in Bricktown.

BPS earned that money, because City officials thought that BPS would help Bricktown grow.

Billy Bobs Tackle company could not get that incentive, but because Billy Bob can't bring the value, that BPS can.

Each company is going to earn whatever value they can negotiate. Some have more value than others, some people are better at their job than others, some football players are more valuable than others.

The fallacy here is that Billy Bobs Tackle couldn't have brought the same value as BPS. You don't know that (especially since BBT is fictional). Of course, maybe they couldn't have without the incentive, but BPS's contention was that they couldn't either, right?

But it was only offered to BPS (with a big middle finger from the city to Billy Bob.)