Comments on Deputy Mayor wants to give $7 million to one tech company - Greater Greater Washington

Comment by w

Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:11:34 EDT

so what if it sounds "politically incorrect " to you?

I have lived here all of my life in proximity to the dangers of these projects and I for one HATE them and I despise the patronizing white people who built the projects in the first place.

Why don't you move in next door to a public housing project or to a ghetto area if you feel so "guilty" about the poor disadvantaged people who do not care to work and spend most of their waking hours tanked up on god knows what. Fine. No self respecting human being from any ethnic background would ever want to live in a place like that.
And I'm not the only person who is very resentful of having to pay for these same bums who victimize and hurt all of the people who happen to live nearby. They SHOULD be dispersed. They are "these people" in mind as long as they continue to act like creeps and degenerates- no matter what race they happen to be. There are very good and sound reasons why the new immigrants that have come into this area do not move into DC , and choose to live in the Sprawl.

It is becasue of "these people".

Comment by MPC

Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:50:01 EDT

These people need to be dispersed and spread out so that see how the rest of the world lives and works- and then maybe their kids will see the dysfunction and step up and out of mental poverty.

"these people"

Thank god for patronizing white people like yourselves who are gonna save the black community.

Studies have shown that dispersing poor people only disperses poverty. You can take the bum out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the bum.

Comment by Jacob

Wed, 25 Nov 2009 12:47:43 EDT

@Eric F.
That was my first thought too. Given the overt and consistent corruption of the Fenty administration I have a very hard time believing this deal is entirely above board.

Comment by w

Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:59:23 EDT

this last statement , Fritz, I must say I completely agree with.
The entrenched underclass that is unemployed in DC is a very dependent and problem fraught group of people.
No social programs are going to help unless the person gets motivated and does for themselves.

Same w/ the DC schools- a teacher can be the best and brightest- but if the illiterate parents do not read to their children and the other children mock the smart kids for "acting white" the schools will be a mess. These cultural problems are not being addressed in the name of institutional political correctness and an unwillingness to see what is really going on.

Taxing the hard working middle spectrum of people is not the answer. And I also think that business taxes are way out of line w/ the surrounding areas- and we also have a city government that is unwilling to court new businesses like Hilton to move to DC- they do not even seem to care.

As far as Im concerned- the business of catering to a huge underclass should never be the business of a munincipal government in a healthy city. These people need to be dispersed and spread out so that see how the rest of the world lives and works- and then maybe their kids will see the dysfunction and step up and out of mental poverty.

The city is going to need to address their hostility to the broad range of businesses and start catering to the new people moving in who will no longer tolerate the public housing/ welfare state that DC has become.

All of the new families I have seen move into DC over the last 10 years will bail unless something is done.

Not just schools- but across the board.

Comment by Fritz

Wed, 25 Nov 2009 08:49:06 EDT

Aren't there already tax incentives to locate in Wards 7 and 8 (and other specific areas of other wards)? Isn't that what the empowerment zones are for (I think that's what they're called)?

Low-income DC residents couldn't find employment in boom times, and they're not going to find employment in bust times. Partly that's because of employers' educational standards; partly that's because of employers' hesitance to hire people with criminal records; and partly that's because of potential employees' reliability of showing up to the job each day.

Of course, Fiscal Policy Institute's solution has always been the same regardless of the general economic condition: raise taxes on the middle and upper classes, and increase social welfare programs.

Comment by TWW

Wed, 25 Nov 2009 07:47:16 EDT

I'd be willing to support tax abatement if it had a clear benefit for District residents. This does not. This sounds like another failed project where 400 suburbanites get to enjoy the benefits of working downtown, using our streets and our fire and police protection then taking their paychecks home each evening to be spent in the suburbs. Meanwhile low-income District STILL can't find employment (how about some tax abatements for companies willing to locate in Wards 7/8?) and middle-class District residents bear the high tax burden of underwriting DMPED's foolishness AND supporting their unemployed neighbors.

I'd hoped for more from the new leadership at DMPED. If this is the best Valerie Santos can do, we're in trouble.

Comment by MPC

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 22:22:40 EDT

Maybe if DC had less inequality, then there wouldn't have to be as much massive social spending.

Comment by Gman

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:50:17 EDT

And so, MPC, in this economy right here in DC, what will and across the board tax cut do to help the immediate financial situation in DC? How will it balance the budget for the upcoming fiscall year? Are you advocating deficit spending as a way to generate more income for the District?

Comment by MPC

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:18:01 EDT

The only issue here is that there wasn't an across-the-board tax cut for businesses.

Oh well, I just guess that means more of them for us in VA. It seems like we get a new F-500 (Hilton) or government agency (NGA) every week.

Comment by Fritz

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:13:08 EDT

@David:

Are you really saying that FPI isn't generally advocating for higher taxes and increased social welfare?

I agree with them in this instance that a big tax break for one company is generally bad policy. Yet what's their last paragraph? A complaint that the city's $300M budget hole shouldn't be filled by questionable tax breaks, yet will there ever be a day FPI advocates cutting social welfare programs?

Doubtful. Which is why for the most part it's pretty easy figuring out what FPI's position will be without even reading it's slanted reports.

I'll give the FPI credit: the smartest thing they did was giving themselves a non-partisan, non-ideological sounding name. It ensures repeated media coverage.

Comment by Eric F.

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:50:39 EDT

I never thought the day would come when I would agree with FPI, but today is the day.

What is most striking about this deal is the secrecy behind it. The first question that came to mind was not whether this is wise, but rather how much the company, its employees, and its PAC (if it has one), have donated to the campaigns of the mayor and city councilmembers.

This looks incredibly suspicious.

Comment by w

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:13:29 EDT

Im not against abatments or tax breaks at all- but why is it given out in such a corrupt and scattershot way?
It needs to be targeted-
such as giving breaks to small businesses starting out that are rare or unusual, heritage, or essential for bringing back a particular area.
In short- there needs to be a sound and pat commercial policy and not just some kind of favors game which is how it goes on here in DC.
Samll independent businesses and individuals starting businesses here are very much over taxed and discouraged- so naturally- they leave and move to the burbs.
Add to this the neighborhood NIMBY mentality against new businesses- and we are creating a retail graveyard in a city that was once a thriving marketplace even 40 years ago.

Something needs to give or change here in DC.
The "entitlement" society needs to be done away with .

Comment by David Alpert

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:12:58 EDT

in the 2nd paragraph: ... are not good policy.

Comment by David Alpert

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:11:07 EDT

The usual Fritz comment on any Fiscal Policy Institute post:

1. Don't read the post to see if they make a good point or not.
2. Make a comment saying that FPI always wants to raise taxes on business.
3. Feel self-congratulatory.

FPI highlights cases where tax breaks are excessive, just like the Sierra Club highlights cases where the environment is at risk. Every time they say anything, do you write, "Typical Sierra Club argument: Anything protecting environment = good. Any strip mining = bad."

I don't personally believe we should always raise taxes and think that incentives for businesses can be useful, but that doesn't mean that any business tax cut is good. These tax breaks that play favorites, in particular, are

And by the way, if someone would like to contribute articles talking about the difficulties businesses face locating in DC and/or giving some data to show that a tax break for business is worthwhile, I'd be very interested in running it.

Comment by Fritz

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:47:41 EDT

The usual Fiscal Policy Institute argument:

anything benefiting businesses = bad.
higher taxes = good.
more social welfare programs = good.

Comment by w

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:34:50 EDT

why does Ben's get a property tax abatement?

There are [ and have been ] other, far older and just as significant commercial eateries in DC that have never been lent a hand by the city- and many have been allowed to go out of business.

This city is basically at war with any small/independent business that is not connected to the Ward #9 establishment that is the real government of DC.

Reeves, Market Inn, Harvey's, Sholls,China Doll, Sherrills- all of these were older than Bens and have gone out of business in the past 10-15 years with zero help or interest or notice from the city government.

Comment by Jasper

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:30:09 EDT

Tax breaks for individual companies are always bad.