Answer: It _is_ corporate welfare, the practice of government picking corporate winners and losers, something any govmint isn’t really so hot at doing. Oh well.
“Corporate Welfare – Free Market Fundamentalism often leads to corporate welfare because deregulated markets often allow corporations to become so overgrown, even to the point of monopoly, that their influence over the government balloons and balloons. They can game the system so that government programs end up funneling money straight into their own pockets.”
Is the Furniture Mart building covered in this deal? Don’t know. It shouldn’t be.
As seen from Fell Street. They used to have furniture shows here twice a year, don’t know if they still do.
What’s that? You say, “This boondoggle isn’t just for Twitter?”
Oh yes it is! Right now it is, anyway. Next question.
“But this scheme is ‘revenue neutral’ right?”
“But at least we saved the Twitter from moving away.”
Uh, maybe. The problem with the proposed corporate welfare is that it won’t save Twitter all that much money. So it’s like the Mayor recently signing up for the Twitter service – it’s a nice gesture, it shows we care about Big T, but we’re not talking big bucks here anymore. Maybe there was talk of that last year, but the current proposal is pretty weak tea.
So it’s corporate welfare, but Twitter won’t benefit too much from it. Is this really going to keep Twitter here? And if they end up staying, how do you know they based their big decision on such a small amount of money?
And then they’re saying how Twitter will have 3000 employees in San Francisco in 2020. Can I get in on this action? Can I place a bet saying how that’s not going to happen? What color is the sky in your world, the world where you know The Future? Why did you change your green eyeshades for rosy rosy rose-colored glasses?
Oh well. Maybe we’ll end up loving the Twitter from afar. But that’s O.K.