Amazon HQ2



The enemy of progress is in the white house.

Everything circles around that vulture.

Amazon would do itself a favor, stay in the silicon valley. Screw the rest of the country.


Cost of living is too high and has to compete with AAPL, FB, GOOG & numerous startups for talents. Go where there is less competition for talent.

Sun Tzu,

“The wise warrior avoids the battle.”
“So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong, and strike at what is weak.”


“Amazon is also visiting these cities’ trendier areas as part of its visits, according to the WSJ, to ensure they are attractive enough to draw younger workers from all over the country.”


Geez, hope someone here can tell us which of the 19 cities is as hot as or hotter than Austin downtown and The Domain.


Come on, if that does stink of the Fab 7x7, I don’t know what will…


They aren’t talking about feces smell stink :slight_smile:

Nashville is pretty hot. Columbus has a pretty great downtown area.


The use of stink was intentional to emphasize Fab 7x7 positive attributes (and not the feces and urine scent etc that will be gone when Jeff visits by Amazon Priming cases and cases of Frebreze)


Go up Northern California Amazon. That will make those areas worth a penny.


30% of LA students don’t graduate high school. What kind of jobs are these high school dropouts having? 30% is a very big number for a big city.

State Test Scores
Percent Proficient - Reading 32%
Percent Proficient - Math 25%

Average Graduation Rate 70%


Its not just bad stats, but a terrible education experience provided by the weakest of teacher pools in the worst of SoCal’s neighborhoods. LAUSD’s “graduation rates” are boosted by social promotion rather than authentic achievement based learning. When a magnet or charter school opens in most LAUSD districts, the government schools experience a rush to the exits like you’ve never seen.

This unfixable problem will likely cause HQ2 to bail on LA.




Yes, I probably shouldn’t equate a bookstore with HQ2…



Detroit should have been the pick. The highways were built when the population was mich bigger. Housing is very affordable.



Property tax revenue is up over 38% compared to the 2009 peak. It’s grown over 8% every year since 2014. Would that happen without Amazon? That’s a ton of extra tax revenue. Population growth is ~10%, so thats a big improvement in tax revenue per person. If the budget is tight now with amazon, how disastrous would it be without?


Good questions. Generally good jobs lead to economic growth & taxes.

The professor in this article doesn’t seem to be questioning that. His main point is if amazon changes it’s plans over 15 years then there should be a clawback option for the benefits amazon has gotten.


It’s probably not as clear cut as this. How much did the costs rise to provide infrastructure & services to support that many people? I assume once you have denser cities, you need to invest in a bunch of other things that you wouldn’t have otherwise (like public transportation, which is usually roi negative).

My points are:

  1. Costs since 2009 also rose.
  2. Cost is not linear with the number of people.

I don’t know the answer, but asking in case someone does. Not arguing amazon didn’t contribute to seattle - it’s most definitely the opposite.


Wow! That’s very very interesting, but honestly a really good idea.