Incentives

Sometimes I hear well meaning people talk about things that they obviously don't understand.  They make statements such as "That money should be used for community incentives instead of a corporate incentive".  Of course this implies that the money actually exists.  Almost all incentives are a reduction of taxes or fees that would otherwise have to be paid.  If the project doesn't happen there is no money at all, in fact there is less money.

Take the Amazon deal that is now not happening in New York.  It would have created about 25,000 jobs and would have redeveloped an area that is currently underutilized.  Yes to some extent it would have led to some disruptions of people living there, but it would have provided a strong tax base in the area, created all those jobs, created all the secondary jobs, increased the need for housing and in exchange they would have received about $3 billion in incentives.

Yes they are a rich company and maybe they don't need incentives but now that they cancelled the deal, the incentives won't happen, but neither will all the other things.  So New York doesn't have $3 billion to spend, they have less taxes and less income taxes for the indefinite future.

It means there is less money to spend on schools, and other priorities as well as less jobs in general.

Is this a better outcome than having a thriving business in Long Island City that would employ tens of thousands and pay direct and indirect taxes for the foreseeable future?

That is probably a matter of opinion, but what is clear is that the incentive money actually doesn't exist without the deal.

There are no spoils from this victory.  Just less all around.