[avs733]

There should be research to support this argument. Has anyone found evidence for or against? Otherwise the claim here seems aspirational rather than useful.

I know that the history of stadium deals, for example, this claim is nearly universally made to support incentivizing sports teams - and the evidence nearly universally shows it to be false.

"In every case, the conclusions are the same. A new sports facility has an extremely small (perhaps even negative) effect on overall economic activity and employment. No recent facility appears to have earned anything approaching a reasonable return on investment. No recent facility has been self-financing in terms of its impact on net tax revenues. Regardless of whether the unit of analysis is a local neighborhood, a city, or an entire metropolitan area, the economic benefits of sports facilities are de minimus." [0]

[0] https://www.brookings.edu/articles/sports-jobs-taxes-are-new...

[skystarman]

I don't think the comparison to sports stadiums fit here. Usually there is already a stadium for a large NFL team or whatever in the city and the economies in the cities that are large enough to even host these teams are WAY more dynamic than where many factories are being built in the south or midwest.

For example Walmart's HQ was built in a TINY SW Arkansas town. The billions that have been invested there by the company, not only in jobs, but amenities in the city have no comparison to any other option that was available to them. If the city and state wanted to hand Walmart a $100 million dollar check, then that investment would have paid off way more than 10x. (IDK what subsidies they were given, probably none just using this for sake of the argument)

I know WM is the evil empire and I'm not defending all they do, just saying that if the right business moves into your small community it can be worth tens, hundreds or even many billions of dollars to a community that has no other options.

Amazon moving into NYC, or Atlanta giving many millions in subsidies to the Braves for a new stadium? Not really comparable.

[shadowwolf007]

The "Tiny town" is 70,000 people who live in an multi-city metro area of around 600,000. That may not be like SF or NYC big, but it's also not just a random metro area. Having lived there for a few years, you're painting with a poetic brush a bit and I'd like to clarify how I see it.

Walmart owns Bentonville. The city council, mayor, and basically anyone there is almost completely subservient to their interests. Again - WM never moved in to the small community, the small community literally is Wal-mart.

For many years, people in the town worked in Wal-mart retail buildings & warehouses around Bentonville. Around 2013 the company started to struggle to compete and found that they needed to attract talent, so the Walton Family Foundation started spending somewhere around $300 million - $400 million a year in improvements and restoration projects. This included massive subsidies for companies that moved in to the area - WFF also paid partially or fully relocation money, but I have no idea how much they paid other than one restaurant owner I spoke to who was basically given moving costs, a building, and "free" rent for a year.

The whole "Wal-mart HQ" thing is just another in their line of tactics to attract new talent in to the area because they are struggling to build an ecosystem of talented developers and analysts. Which, again, there's nothing wrong with this tactic if that's what you're hunting for.

One thing I'll give WM for sure - they are 100% focused on building out a tech bubble for people who want a semi-urban lifestyle. There's a lot of TX & CA transplants and honestly it's working great for them.

All told, none of this is even kind of comparable to Amazon moving to NYC or Atlanta. Nor is it comparable to a company moving in to a small town brand-new.

[ed: oops missed an important sentence!]

[skystarman]

According to wikipedia the population of Bentonville when the first WM store was built was 2,949.

It's now 54,909, but maybe it's 70k as you say.

Either way it sounds precisely like a situation where a giant corporation moved in to a small town. Or more accurately the tiny store grew into a giant corporation and so did the small town.

My point was merely that many small rural town mayors would love it if a giant corporation would move an HQ with tens of thousands of high paying jobs into their tiny communities! This is why the are willing to give giant incentives to them.

You make great points otherwise, thanks for sharing your perspective!

[mbesto]

> For example Walmart's HQ was built in a TINY SW Arkansas town.

I understand what you're saying here, but Walmart is a really bad example here. They started in Bentonville in the 50's as a tiny shop and the city grew with their growth - their decision to stay in "a little town in Arkansas" was organic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Walmart

[avs733]

I didn’t say the comparison was necessarily valid or invalid. I said that evidence for and against you things can exist and should be brought when claims are made.

The only comparison I am making is that virtually identical claims are made about stadium deals and the evidence suggest the opposite of those claims is true.

I would just like these claims to be evaluated and assessed using evidence not accept it is true because they fit within the narrative that is presented every single time a company wants a tax break

[cabotmoose]

> For example Walmart's HQ was built in a TINY SW Arkansas town.

Minor correction: Walmart's HQ is in NW Arkansas (Bentonville)

[kevin_thibedeau]

I'd just like Wal-Mart to honor Walton's rule about no more than two customers waiting in line.