Here's the deal (in part) as reported by the Democrat and Chronicle newspaper here in Western NY. on 2/15/19:


Critics:
"The public subsidies for the project, plus concerns about gentrification of Long Island City, sparked significant opposition from residents and political leaders, including Rep. AOC, D-Bronx.
They feared that the public services in the city - the subways, the schools and the neighborhoods- would be overtaken by Amazon.
Amazon, whose founder, Jeff Bezos, who owns The Washington Post, had yet to lease or purchase office space for the NYC project, the paper reported Friday.
Critics said the deal was brokered without public knowledge.
"Today's behavior by Amazon shows why they would have been a bad partner for NY in any event," Gianaris (head of the Public Authorities Control Board) said in a statement. "Rather than seriously engage with the community they proposed to profoundly change, Amazon continued its effort to shakedown governments to get its way."
Unions had also protested Amazon's arrival, and they and supporters hailed their ability to beat back a corporate giant.
"Ultimately, Queens is not for sale," Sen. Jessica Ramos, D-Queens, said at a rally after the announcement.
The company had refused to unionize the workforce, and the unions opposed the big tax breaks for one of the world's most valuable company and the world's richest man.
Critics said Amazon refused to work with local leaders to assauge their issues.
"Rather than addressing the legitimate concerns that have been raised by many New Yorkers- that's not what a responsible business would do," said Chelsea Connor, spokeswoman for the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union.
"It's a bit cruel and inconsiderate to get people all stirred up," said Miguelina Rodriguez, an urban studies professor at the City University of NY's LaGuardia Community College in Long Island City.
"Landlords were practically doubling and tripling the rents in a matter of weeks in anticipation of Amazon's arrival."
"I moved out of Long Island City three years ago because things were getting too expensive," said Betsy Alwin, 45, an artist who was there Thursday for a conference. "It's good that Amazon listened to the people. I think it's good that we make sure that large corporations aren't just getting handouts unless people are really going to benefit."

 

My PC posted before I was done.
From the D & C:

Proponents:

"Cuomo put the blame squarely on the Senate for scuttling the deal.
"A small group of politicians put their own narrow political interests above their community- which poll after poll showed overwhelmingly supported bringing Amazon to Long Island City- the state's economic future and the best interests of the people of this state," he said in a statement.
Cuomo's office said the $3 billion in public subsidies would be small compared to the estimated $27 billion in economic activity and jobs the company would bring to the city and metropolitan area, an estimate culled from a state-financed report.


Ultimately, from Mayor DeBlasio:
"You have to be tough to make it in New York City, We gave Amazon the opportunity to be a good neighbor and do business in the greatest city in the world. Instead of working with the community, Amazon threw away that opportunity."

So make of it what you will. Amazon wanted NYC and they got it, lol. Other parts of NY state made offers to the corporation but they weren't having that so there you have it.

 

Leave it to NY to flub up a golden opportunity like that one. I'm technically "from" NY and I have a lot of family that still lives there. The government's relationship with businesses there has always been pretty bi-polar.

People can't get out of there fast enough too. They've had a net population decline of approx. 50k per year for several years running. High taxes and bad politics will do that., and it's kind of a nanny state. It's not a good situation.

They need businesses like Amazon who want to invest in their community. That doesn't mean that Amazon can do whatever they want, but you still gotta play nice. The "anti-Amazon" people have been very vocal about all of Amazon's sins, but word on the street is that a lot of politicians really opposed this because they didn't want to look like they were pandering to a mega-corporation.

Oh well, their loss is Virginia's (or wherever they wind up) gain.

 

Well, if you're technically from here, you know NYers don't speak with one voice. If Andy had his way, it would have been there. If Bezos had done his homework he might have been better prepared for the negative response he got downstate.
As for people not getting out of here fast enough? Pfft. Sure, people go but not all necessarily for the reasons you state and plenty of us like it here just fine.

 

Yes. That's nice. Thanks for the wisdom of that. No one from any state speaks with one voice, so I'm not sure what you were hoping to accomplish with that, other than over-stating the obvious.

 

Well you're point was painfully obvious that you felt "NY" blew some golden opportunity but if you said that down in Long Island City I think the majority would tend to disagree. It's easy to pontificate when you don't live here. It might turn out you're right or not but the whole thing could have been handled better and it's not all "NY's" fault.

 

Whatever you say, Purriwinkle. It sounds like you've got it all figured out as always. I'm so happy for you.

 

Lol. Where are you going with all of this? If you don't like my opinion or you are offended by it, then just be honest and say as much. You're jumping to conclusions and and putting words into my mouth. I never suggested that the "whole thing" was New York's fault.

My opinion on this topic is very nuanced and goes far beyond a just few sentences, but that is all that I cared to opine with. And I don't feel like I need to justify my position any further.

This conversation isn't going anywhere constructive anyway, so what's the point in continuing?

 

I think it came down to something like yes, we'd love Amazon to come to NY but not in my backyard. Ultimately a majority of people who actually lived and worked in the city feeling that this wasn't going to benefit them (more than just an inconvenience) and their government representatives worked on their behalf to voice their concerns. Could the wrinkles have been ironed out? Most likely with some time. In fact I read that some proponents thought things were on track and wrinkles were being ironed when Amazon abruptly pulled the plug. Again, Bezos should have done his homework. NYC is a tricky place politically and he should have known ahead of time what he was likely to encounter. He just thought they were going roll over because Gov. Cuomo was keen to have them come in.

I thought it might be a good idea but I don't live down state. While anyone can have their opinion, even I really can't say whats best for a community far from me. I have no idea why they targeted Long Island City in the first place. They most likely could have breezed right in in most other NY locales but Bezos wanted the prestige of saying they were in NYC apparently or who knows, maybe he had some idea to show Trump he could do better in his home town or some other motivation only he knows. At this point it's water over the dam. We don't have to denigrate the whole state. NYC is going to have to decide what it wants going forward and figure out how they'll go about it with some sort of consensus. Personally, I don't give a damn about their subways. We have our own concerns with growing the economy Upstate.

.

 

Bernie has announced.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/19/us/politics/bernie-sanders-2020.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

Since California has moved up its primaries, at least I will be able to vote for him then with a hope of helping him.

 

So, he decided to throw his hat in the ring! You must be thrilled! Let's see how he stacks up against the other Democrats running. I know I'll be paying close attention.

 

HE'S NOT A DEMOCRAT. He will try to win the nod even though he's not a Democrat, and then when he doesn't get it he'll piss and moan and claim he was cheated and run as an independent and help get Trump elected to a second term.

 

I'm super excited that Bernie is going to run. Not because I like Bernie though, but because it's going to be like the Hunger Games. Who can become the most radical and extreme counterweight to Trump? May the odds be ever in his favor. lol

 

lol. That's totally what's going to happen. He's gonna come in 2nd or 3rd place and go off the rails and his people are going to tell him that he's got enough support to go "Third party" and win that way, and then it's all going to blow up in his face/ America's collective face.

I think this election is going to force me to reconsider my opinion about Obama's effectiveness as the POTUS.

 

That's nonsense. Bernie isn't going to run as an independent. He didn't last time, and he isn't going to this time. All he did was run against Hillary in the primaries. For the actual Democratic race for the presidency, he threw all of his support to her and campaigned hard for her.

Since conceding defeat in the primaries, Sanders has been one of the real champions of this campaign. He let his supporters yell at him and deride him as a sellout in bleak delegate breakfasts at the Democratic National Convention, in Philadelphia, as he endorsed Clinton and explained why they needed to do the same. He made getting support for her his priority, putting aside any subtle, undermining gestures that might have better preserved his rebel-rock-star status. He has kept doing so despite other revelations in the Podesta e-mails, ones that are not about him personally but about issues that he believes in—for example, about money in politics, as exemplified by the Clinton team’s nurturing of donors. And he has earned the right to negotiate hard on such issues in the future.

As Sanders finished his speech in Raleigh—“We have to do everything that we can to elect Secretary Clinton!”—Clinton and Pharrell were on their feet, cheering. “Wow!” Clinton said, when she took to the rostrum. “Whew! I gotta say, after hearing from these two extraordinary men, I feel all fired up and ready to go for the next five days!” She knew what it was like to run against Sanders. Having him on her side was “a lot more fun.” A few hours later, Sanders was off on his own to Iowa. Trump is ahead in that state, in the latest average of polls, by about two and a half points. Sanders had three events scheduled for Friday—Cedar Falls, Iowa City, Davenport. On Saturday, there would be more.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-davidson/bernie-sanderss-hard-fight-for-hillary-clinton

So don't worry about that. The real concern is anyone who actually WILL run as an independent candidate.

Sen. Bernie Sanders announced his 2020 run for president Tuesday morning and appeared on "CBS This Morning" to discuss his candidacy.

"The bottom line for me is I think it is absolutely imperative that Donald Trump be defeated," the Vermont senator told CBS host John Dickerson. "Because I think it is unacceptable and un-American that we have a president who is a pathological liar. It gives me no pleasure to say that, but it is true. We have a president who is a racist, who is a sexist, who is a xenophobe, who is doing what no president in our lifetimes has done or come close to doing -- that is to divide us up."

"This campaign is a continuation of what we did in 2016," Sanders said.

CBS's John Dickerson caught Bernie's ire when he mentioned a possible independent run from Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz.

"Oh isn't that nice?" Sanders said. "Why is Howard Schultz on every television station in this country? Why are you quoting Howard Schultz?"

"Because he's a billionaire."

"There are a lot of people I know personally who work hard for a living and make 40 or 50,000 dollars a year who know a lot more about politics, than with all due respect does Mr. Schultz. But because we have a corrupt system, anybody who is a billionaire and can throw a lot of TV ads around on television suddenly becomes very, very credible."

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/v..._can_throw_ads_on_tv_and_become_credible.html

Schultz terrifies me. He is a political ignoramus who doesn't understand that any independent run will only help Trump.

 

Sanders is going to suffer in a large field. The last time around he gathered all of the anti-Clinton vote. I really don't see him having the same traction this time around.