Jump to content

OT: Midtown Development


Pistol

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

And what money are they "giving away"?Bringing in a couple hundred jobs, new development in a lacking area, creating an environment with foot and car traffic allowing other businesses to open and develop nearby, all for 10 years of tax abatement, when the alternative is empty, dilapidated and run down real estate?I call that a win.

They are not bringing in any new jobs or new sales. To believe that, you would have to believe no one was buying hardware before the store opened. The only thing it does is transfer sales and jobs from one store to another. When the tax abatement expires the store and developer go looking for a new site and a new abatement while leaving a virtually useless and non tax producing site behind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are not bringing in any new jobs or new sales. To believe that, you would have to believe no one was buying hardware before the store opened. The only thing it does is transfer sales and jobs from one store to another. When the tax abatement expires the store and developer go looking for a new site and a new abatement while leaving a virtually useless and non tax producing site behind.

^^ THIS ^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In some cases, TIFs can be an effective development tool. That's usually not the case with big box retailers, however.

The biggest problem with TIFs, as with most government subsidies, is that when it comes time to negotiate their award, the smartest folks in the room are never sitting on the side representing the taxpayer. This effect exponentiates when you have all these petty fiefdoms getting involved. (Ellisville and Shrewsbury being two of the more egregious local examples.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are not bringing in any new jobs or new sales. To believe that, you would have to believe no one was buying hardware before the store opened. The only thing it does is transfer sales and jobs from one store to another. When the tax abatement expires the store and developer go looking for a new site and a new abatement while leaving a virtually useless and non tax producing site behind.

Just depends on what perspective you take. Obviously on a regional level, you're correct, but many small municipalities, as well as the city of St. Louis, lose a considerable share of retail development and sales tax $ to other neighboring communities, so these incentives become ways to close that gap and generate jobs and sales tax $ within your own community that weren't there before. As Box mentioned, TIFs can be powerful and effective tools, particularly for central cities. Personally, I agree that there are some serious problems with these incentives, but I think it's important that any potential reforms do not altogether render TIF completely useless. The potential solutions that I'd rather see, albeit difficult, include reforming the way sales tax dollars are distributed around St. Louis County and the region as a whole, encouraging the merging of municipalities (or at least their services), removing TIF power altogether from local municipalities, and/or giving TIF designation authorities to certain regional planning entities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giving TIF designation authorities to certain regional planning entities.

++++

As a start, it would be good if St. Louis City and St. Louis County had a single TIF authority that controlled both areas. This would allow TIFs to be used effectively for planning and development within the heart of the region.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are not bringing in any new jobs or new sales. To believe that, you would have to believe no one was buying hardware before the store opened. The only thing it does is transfer sales and jobs from one store to another. When the tax abatement expires the store and developer go looking for a new site and a new abatement while leaving a virtually useless and non tax producing site behind.

Wouldn't that imply that the entire economy is a zero sum game? Furthermore, it would suggest that economic growth is effectively impossible and that any new activity is only at the expense of another segment of the economy.

There are certainly abuses of certain TIF projects, but I wouldn't want to throw all of them under the bus because of a few rotten apples.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't that imply that the entire economy is a zero sum game? Furthermore, it would suggest that economic growth is effectively impossible and that any new activity is only at the expense of another segment of the economy.There are certainly abuses of certain TIF projects, but I wouldn't want to throw all of them under the bus because of a few rotten apples.

Not at all, but hardware sales are not a new or really growing part of the economy (in fact sales at hardware stores are down considerably since 2008). A big box hardware store isn't the same as a biotech firm and neither needs handouts from local governments to operate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like not too long ago businesses actually paid taxes to operate like businesses.

By the way, Ikea sucks. Has anyone shopped at one? I have - once. Worst shopping experience of my life. Makes no sense at all. I guess it'd be good for the local economy yada yada yada, but those places are horrible. I wouldn't go if the furniture were free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

++++

As a start, it would be good if St. Louis City and St. Louis County had a single TIF authority that controlled both areas. This would allow TIFs to be used effectively for planning and development within the heart of the region.

Good luck getting that through......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all, but hardware sales are not a new or really growing part of the economy (in fact sales at hardware stores are down considerably since 2008). A big box hardware store isn't the same as a biotech firm and neither needs handouts from local governments to operate.

Let's see. What happened in 2008 that might have put a damper on stores dealing with home improvement? Fortunatly home values and sales and financing is coming back......

I do agree though that a Biotech firm is more desiriable than a retail store.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's see. What happened in 2008 that might have put a damper on stores dealing with home improvement? Fortunatly home values and sales and financing is coming back...... I do agree though that a Biotech firm is more desiriable than a retail store.

I think both have their place. I don't think either should get public money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think both have their place. I don't think either should get public money.

Alright, I have to give my rant again. Can we please stop giving public (by Public I mean mine and the rest of the tax payers) money to any business for any reason. All this foucking is decided by who will give me the most. I own a small business and I'm barely surviving. The thing is I wouldn't take public money, It'd be like taking welfare and Id prefer to just die and get the fouck out of the way. However, it'd be a lot nicer if our government would stop stealing from me and giving it to other people, countries, and businesses. Most of whom already have more money, live in nicer houses, and drive nicer cars than I do, yet somehow I'm still required to subsidized them for the good of the whole.

How about we just make giving tax breaks or subsidies, or TIF's or any other form of welfare you want to come up with to any company illegal and companies can just decide if they can make money doing business somewhere, if so do it, if not don't. Seems simple, but I'm sure there are plenty of sophisticated answers on why our government stealing from me is good. I probably just don't understand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, I have to give my rant again. Can we please stop giving public (by Public I mean mine and the rest of the tax payers) money to any business for any reason. All this foucking ###### is decided by who will give me the most. I own a small business and I'm barely surviving. The thing is I wouldn't take public money, It'd be like taking welfare and Id prefer to just die and get the fouck out of the way. However, it'd be a lot nicer if our government would stop stealing from me and giving it to other people, countries, and businesses. Most of whom already have more money, live in nicer houses, and drive nicer cars than I do, yet somehow I'm still required to subsidized them for the good of the whole.

How about we just make giving tax breaks or subsidies, or TIF's or any other form of welfare you want to come up with to any company illegal and companies can just decide if they can make money doing business somewhere, if so do it, if not don't. Seems simple, but I'm sure there are plenty of sophisticated answers on why our government stealing from me is good. I probably just don't understand

I would rather live in many different places but I happen to reside in the state of Oklahoma because company forced me to (er I mean) suggested that I run an office here. Oklahoma City has the lowest unemployment rate of any major (its a stretch) city in the country and about half of the national average. They have this because they aggressively recruit business to move here, sighting lower cost of living, decent higher education rates, and provide massive tax incentives to do it. They have a staff of lobbyists that do nothing but talk to businesses headquartered in California and talk them in to moving here. I dont know if this is necessarily the right thing to do, but it has done amazing things for the local economy. There is a building boom here like nothing Ive ever seen before. Anyone who wants a job can pretty much get one. However individual state and sales taxes are ridiculously high. Thats why I cant wait to get the heck out of here....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would rather live in many different places but I happen to reside in the state of Oklahoma because company forced me to (er I mean) suggested that I run an office here. Oklahoma City has the lowest unemployment rate of any major (its a stretch) city in the country and about half of the national average. They have this because they aggressively recruit business to move here, sighting lower cost of living, decent higher education rates, and provide massive tax incentives to do it. They have a staff of lobbyists that do nothing but talk to businesses headquartered in California and talk them in to moving here. I dont know if this is necessarily the right thing to do, but it has done amazing things for the local economy. There is a building boom here like nothing Ive ever seen before. Anyone who wants a job can pretty much get one. However individual state and sales taxes are ridiculously high. Thats why I cant wait to get the heck out of here....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, I have to give my rant again. Can we please stop giving public (by Public I mean mine and the rest of the tax payers) money to any business for any reason. All this foucking ###### is decided by who will give me the most. I own a small business and I'm barely surviving. The thing is I wouldn't take public money, It'd be like taking welfare and Id prefer to just die and get the fouck out of the way. However, it'd be a lot nicer if our government would stop stealing from me and giving it to other people, countries, and businesses. Most of whom already have more money, live in nicer houses, and drive nicer cars than I do, yet somehow I'm still required to subsidized them for the good of the whole.

How about we just make giving tax breaks or subsidies, or TIF's or any other form of welfare you want to come up with to any company illegal and companies can just decide if they can make money doing business somewhere, if so do it, if not don't. Seems simple, but I'm sure there are plenty of sophisticated answers on why our government stealing from me is good. I probably just don't understand

I'd rather my tax dollars were spent convincing businesses to come to the area than a lot of other BS it gets spent on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather my tax dollars were spent convincing businesses to come to the area than a lot of other BS it gets spent on.

Yes and I'd prefer getting punched in the face once to getting punched in the face twice. But it'd be a lot better if not getting punched in the face at all was an option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...