On Wednesday's episode of "The Michael Knowles Show," bestselling author Michael Knowles discusses New Yorkers' reactions to Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez thwarting Amazon's proposed headquarters from creating tens of thousands of jobs in her district and billions in tax revenues for the state. Transcript and video below.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is celebrating how she chased Amazon out of New York. Yeah! We got rid of 40,000 jobs! We did it! Progressivism for the win! Chuck Todd has to play this clip for Bill De Blasio. He has a tough answer but just listen to how this woman misunderstands taxes:
Ocasio-Cortez: We were willing to give Amazon… If we’re willing to give away 3 billion dollars for this deal, we could invest those 3 billion dollars in our district ourselves if we wanted to. We could hire out more teachers, we can fix our subways. We can put a lot of people to work for that money if we wanted to.
No, you can’t. Because the money doesn’t exist. I guess just pure ignorance coupled with her ideology caused her to fight and get rid of 40,000 jobs in her district. The three billion dollars does not exist. New York said that they would give three billion dollars in tax incentives to Amazon if they put their headquarters there. A tax incentive is a rebate on the taxes that you pay. So in order to get the three billion dollars in tax incentives, you have to pay at least three billion dollars in the first place. If that revenue isn’t there, revenue to the government, you don’t get the tax incentive. She thinks there’s just like three billion dollars sitting around on 15th Street, just waiting to be picked up and doled out to everybody. No, no, no. Amazon provides the money that includes and encompasses the three billion dollars. If there’s no Amazon, there’s no three billion.
This girl has a degree in economics from Boston University. Boston University should shut down. We should decertify Boston University. If you can get a degree in Economics from Boston University and not understand what a tax is, that university should not exist. Certainly, no one should send their children there if they want to study economics. Even if you could learn economics there, look at how low the standards have fallen. So, she doesn't understand what a basic tax is. By the way, the entire role of Congress is to control the purse strings, and she’s a congresswoman who doesn’t understand the very basics of taxes.
Here, Bill De Blasio tries to explain, without going after her too hard, what a tax incentive is:
Todd: Somehow people think that when you give a tax incentive, that somehow that’s money that you had over here and it was going over there. This is money that didn’t exist, this three billion dollars, okay. Do you think that there’s a problem in trying to explain how this deal worked?
De Blasio: Look, this was a deal that was going to bring 27 billion dollars in revenue to the state and city for things like public education, mass transit, affordable housing, and that three billion dollars that would go back in tax incentives was only after we’d be getting those jobs.
Todd: There’s no money that exists anywhere right?
De Blasio: Exactly. Here’s the bottom line right, people were looking for fairness here. They were looking for a positive outcome.
Okay, he won’t go after her specifically. Why not? Because she’s influential nationally. He keeps saying, “Look, I’m defining progressivism. Progressivism is pro-jobs, pro-worker!” No, you’re not. And the way we know that you’re not the spokesperson for progressivism is that you will not criticize AOC who just lost your city 27 billion dollars in tax revenue, 40,000 jobs. You won’t go after her because she is popular nationally. She is a far more widely known spokesman for progressivism than Bill De Blasio is. This is what happens when you follow AOC and you are factually incorrect but "morally right." There’s no such thing as that. She said the other day: "Some people are so obsessed with being factually correct that they’re not morally right." In order to be morally right, you have to be factually correct.
What AOC just did is immoral. She deprived that district of 40,000 jobs, a lot of money, a ton of wealth. And she did it because she was factually incorrect. She didn’t know what a tax was. She thought that the city was going to spend three billion dollars to bring Amazon there. Three billion that they could have invested in the people. No, no, no. That money doesn't exist. They we’re just going to take three billion less from the 27 billion dollars. It was going to go to the city anyway.