Trump Steals Land From The People To Benefit His Corporate Buddies

Presidents Clinton and Obama, under the Antiquities Act, designated lands as national monuments during their terms. The lands were important to several Native American tribes as heritage sites. Together, the monuments comprised about 3 million acres.

During his first term, Donald Trump tried to downsize both monuments, but President Biden restored both to their original size. 

Now Trump has again downsized both monuments - from their original 3 million acres to about 300,000 acres. He did this in spite of the Antiquities Act giving presidents the power to create monuments, but not to downsize or eliminate them.

Most egregious was the lie he said as the reason for his action - to give it back to the people of the United States. That's ridiculous! As national monuments, the people of the United States (all of us) owned that land.

What he has actually done is to steal the land from the people so he can sell or lease it to special interests - corporate interests who want to mine it for minerals (uranium, copper, and possibly other minerals).

Trump has no interest in history or antiquities, or what is best for the people of this country. He's only interested in what can be bought and sold (and you can bet he will benefit personally from this).

We can only hope that the desecration of these monuments can be delayed until a Democratic president (elected in 2028) can restore them again.

Trump Has No Core Economic Or Foreign Policy Beliefs

If there is one thing that could be said about Trump's second term, it's that it is chaotic. No one seems to know what Trump's actual policies are from one day to another - and that seems to be true of all his economic and foreign policy proposals.

During his campaign, Trump said he would deport 11 million undocumented immigrants, use tariffs to create a balance of trade favorable to the U.S., and lower prices on goods for consumers. He said these things so often that one could think these were core beliefs he held. But it hasn't worked out that way.

Once elected, Trump did start his deportation program. But when backlash started ti appear, he (and his administrative aides assured Americans that he was only going after criminals. Most people liked that (including Democrats), but then we began to hear of ICE agents going to schools, businesses, agricultural sites, and day labor locations - the places you would find law-abiding people, not criminals. When the business community objected (because they needed those workers), Trump reversed course and said he would avoid business and agricultural sites. Then he reversed himself again and said he would again go after workers (and children), but only in blue states. His policy has changed so much and so often that no one really knows what the policy is anymore.

The same is true of tariffs. He put a 10% tariff on nearly all nations and a higher tariff on some nations. When the stock market dropped sharply, he suspended a lot of the tariffs (except for China). Then he realized that China was banning the export of rare earth minerals and quickly lowered the tariff on them. Now no one knows what the tariffs will finally be because no nation is rushing to make a deal and Trump continues to threaten high tariffs.

The same is true of foreign policy. Trump said he would end the Russia-Ukraine war on his first day. That hasn't happened as Russia ignores his pleas (and threats) and Trump is now considering just giving up and walking away. At the same time, he can't seem to make up his mind whether to involve the U.S. military in the conflict between Israel and Iran.

As for lowering prices, that was just campaign rhetoric. He has done nothing to lower them, and in fact, his tariffs (and threats of tariffs) have insured prices will continue to rise.

This raises the question - does Trump have any core beliefs? Or is he like a weather vane - changing course with however the winds of public opinion blow? Some have said that Trump's belief is changed by whoever he last talked with. That seems like it is true. Whatever, his seeming lack of core beliefs has resulted in a very chaotic administration.

While he is chaotic on economic and foreign policy, he does seem to have a couple of core beliefs - greed (making himself much richer) and retribution. He has used his office to make hundreds of millions of dollars, and is using the federal government to attack those he doesn't like.

Unfortunately, neither of those beliefs help the American people - only himself.

Why Aren't Democrats Talking More About Corporate Greed?

The following is part of an excellent post by former Labor Secretary Robert Reich:

At the same time Democrats and progressives are justifiably enraged at Trump’s gonzo Cabinet picks, they’re all but mute about corporate America’s continued siphoning of economic gains to the top. 

Yet this siphoning has created the stagnant wages and insecure jobs that helped propel Trump into the presidency and give Republicans control over both chambers of Congress. 

Trump at least gave workers an explanation for what’s happened to them — although it was a lie: It isn’t undocumented immigrants or the “deep state” or transgender kids or any other Trump bogeyman.

 

It’s corporate greed. 

The most recent example: On Friday, GM announced it was laying off 1,000 workers. These layoffs followed another round of GM layoffs in August, which saw 1,500 jobs cut. The cuts affected both salaried and hourly staff, including some United Auto Workers members.

Most of the workers being laid off Friday were notified via email early Friday morning. Some had been working for GM for over thirty years. 

GM says it has no choice. It must cut costs. 

This is what we hear again and again from corporate America. We’ll be hearing even more of this as Artificial Intelligence takes over white-collar as well as blue-collar jobs.

No choice? 

GM is on track for making record profits this year, surpassing its 2022 record profit of $14.5 billion. In the third quarter of 2024 alone, GM made $3.4 billion. That’s a $200 million increase from the same period last year.

GM CEO Mary Barra’s compensation for 2024 is $27.8 million. This includes a base salary of $2.1 million, stock awards of $14.6 million, stock option awards valued at $4.9 million, an “incentive plan” compensation (as if she needed more incentive) of $5.3 million, other payment of $997,392, and perks (personal travel, security, financial counseling, company vehicles, and an executive health plan) valued at $389,005.

The ratio of Barra’s compensation to that of the typical GM employee is estimated to be 303-to-1.

 

In June, GM announced $6 billion in stock buybacks. This means $6 billion of GM’s record profits will be used to purchase its own shares of stock — thereby boosting share prices (and the portion of Barra’s compensation in stock grants and options) simply because fewer shares of GM stock will be in circulation. 

Keep in mind that the richest 1 percent of American hold over half of the value of all shares of stock held by Americans, and the richest 10 percent hold 92 percent. 

So, in fact, GM’s savings from axing 1,000 jobs will be transferred into the pockets of wealthy Americans (including GM’s CEO). 

Why aren’t Democrats up in arms about this?

It’s important to rail against Trump’s appointments. But unless we attack the sources of the outrage Trump has tapped into, working Americans will continue to go along with whatever Trump and his lapdogs want to do. 

Greedy Corporate CEO's Climb On The Trump Bandwagon

The following is part of post by former Labor Secretary Robert Reich:

The Business Roundtable is an association of more than 200 CEOs of America’s biggest corporations, their most powerful voice in Washington.

 

Last Wednesday, its chair, Joshua Bolten, told reporters that his group planned to drop “eight figures” while “putting its full weight behind protecting and strengthening tax reform.”

Translated: It’s going to pour money into Trump’s campaign to ensure that Trump’s 2017 tax cuts — most of which benefit big corporations and the rich — don’t expire in 2025, as scheduled. 

On Thursday, Trump met at the Business Roundtable’s Washington headquarters with over 80 CEOs, including Apple’s Tim Cook, JPMorgan Chase’s Jamie Dimon, and Walmart’s Doug McMillon.

Trump reportedly promised the CEOs he’d cut corporate taxes even further and curtail business regulations if elected president.

Trump’s 2017 tax cuts reduced the rate of corporate income taxes from 35 percent to 21 percent. That has cost the nation $1.3 trillion. Those tax cuts, along with the tax cuts put in place by George W. Bush, are the primary reason the national debt is rising as a percentage of the economy.

What have corporations done with the money they’ve saved? They haven’t invested it or used it to raise wages. Nothing has trickled down to average workers.

A large portion has gone into stock buybacks. The year after the tax cut went into effect, corporations bought back a record $1 trillion of their shares of stock. Buybacks raise stock prices — and, not incidentally, CEO compensation, which is largely in shares of stock. 

Making Trump’s 2017 tax cuts permanent — as the Business Roundtable seeks — will cost $4 trillion over the next 10 years, $400 billion per year — and cause the debt to soar.

Yet the CEOs that Trump met with last week have been thriving under Biden.

Corporate profits are way up. Stocks are at near-record levels. Inflation has plummeted. Industries like energy that appeared to be at risk from Biden’s policies are doing well.

So why are these CEOs attracted to Trump, whose antics are likely to destabilize the economy? . . .

They’re coming around to Trump because they want even more tax cuts and regulatory rollbacks — which means even more money in their own pockets. . . .

The greedy cynicism of America’s corporate elite is now on full display. 

Don't Believe GOP Myths About What's Causing Inflation

 Inflation is high right now, and that's hurting most Americans. But Republicans want you to believe that the inflation is caused by worker wages or Biden administration policies -- not corporate greed. They are lying. Here, from the Economic Policy Institute, are five myths (lies) about inflation:

The labor market is largely strong right now, but inflation continues to be a pressing economic concern.

The reasons for escalating inflation are hotly debated, but some theories gaining traction have not been grounded in the data. EPI research sets the record straight on the causes of inflation—and how policymakers can best restrain it. Below, we debunk 5 top inflation myths.

• Myth #1: Workers’ wage growth is driving inflation. Nominal wage growth—while faster relative to the recent past—has lagged far behind inflation, meaning that labor costs have been dampening, not amplifying, inflationary pressures all along.

• Myth #2: Corporate profits are not contributing to inflation. In fact, fatter corporate profit margins have driven over half of the increase in prices in the nonfinancial corporate sector between the second quarter of 2020 and the end of 2021. This is not normal. From 1979 to 2019, profits only contributed about 11% to price growth. Ignoring the role of profits makes inflation analyses a lot weaker.

• Myth #3: Federal relief and recovery measures overheated the economy and fed inflation. Evidence from the past 40 years suggests strongly that profit margins should shrink and the share of corporate income going to labor compensation should rise as unemployment falls and the economy heats up. But the exact opposite pattern has happened so far in the recovery—casting much doubt on inflation expectations rooted simply in claims of macroeconomic overheating. In short, the labor market is strong, but it’s not overheating.

• Myth #4: Removing import tariffs would be a major tool to fight inflation. Tariffs were put in place far before early 2021 when inflation began rising, and eliminating tariffs could not significantly restrain it. Further, removing tariffs would not be costless. Tariff removal could result in job losses, plant closures, cancellations of planned investments, and further destabilization of the domestic manufacturing base, which would increase domestic dependence on unstable import supply chains.

• Myth #5: Investments in child and elder care would accelerate inflation. In fact, investments in child and elder care could help restrain inflationary pressures. By subsidizing families’ use of child and elder care and providing direct investments to providers, such investments could boost future labor supply by allowing working-age parents or children who want to look for paid employment to do so while remaining confident their family members are receiving care.

Trump's Ready To Profit From QAnon's New Craziness

The followers of QAnon were the most disappointed people in the country on January 20th. They had been convinced that on that day, Trump would magically be sworn in for a second term and he would arrest Democratic leaders -- executing some and imprisoning many others. 

As they watched Joe Biden take the oath and become president, there dream was shattered. What were they going to do?

Well, some came to their senses while others joined other militant Trump-supporting groups (like militias). But a lot of them just found a new theory to embrace. They now believe that Biden is not really president, and their hero (Donald Trump) will take the oath of office for a second term on March 4th.

Here's a capsule of the new QAnon belief from Joshua Zitser at Business Insider:

The importance of March 4 for QAnon supporters is rooted in the bizarre beliefs of the "sovereign citizen" movement. 

The basis for that conspiracy theory is that a law enacted in 1871 secretly turned the US into a corporation. It posits that some Americans are therefore not subject to a variety of federal laws.

Supporters of the theory believe that every president who's been inaugurated since then is illegitimate; they believe that Ulysses S. Grant was the last legitimate president.

Grant, like other presidents in the 19th century, was inaugurated on March 4. The sovereign-citizen movement posits that the republic will be restored and that Trump will become the US's 19th president on March 4, 2021.

This fantasy has gained traction with the hardcore QAnon adherents trying to make sense of President Joe Biden's recent inauguration.

Donald Trump is not pushing this farcical theory, and probably couldn't do it if he wanted to (since he has lost his social media presence). But he's not ignoring it either. He's planning to profit from it.

He knows that the hotel of choice for these QAnon believers is his own Washington hotel, so what does he do? Does he lower the costs for his followers? NO! The hotel has tripled the price of their rooms for March 3rd and 4th!

Trump's misguided followers have yet to understand that Trump only has one value -- GREED! And he will continue to con them out of their money as long as he can.

Will Trump's QAnon followers finally come to their senses after he is NOT sworn in on March 4th? probably not. They haven't shown much ability for rational thinking. It will be interesting to see what new theory they come up with after March 4th. Only two things are certain -- it will not make sense to sane people, and Trump will try to make money from it.

Voters Opt For Protecting Lives Over Protecting Economy

The chart above is from the Politico / Morning Consult Poll -- done between April 10th and 12th of a nationwide sample of 1,990 registered voters, with a 2 point margin of error.

Donald Trump wants to reopen the economy. He has even praised the protesters in several states to try and pressure state governors to do that. And some Republican governors are doing what he wants. Governors in several states are allowing businesses to reopen. And some Republican officials and other right-wingers have even gone so far as to say reopening the economy is more important that the lives of Americans. They are willing to sacrifice thousands of Americans so their rich buddies can protect and increase their wealth.

That is not the feeling of most American voters though. About 64% say the public health impact of Coronavirus is more important than the economic impact (on stock market and unemployment). About 75% say it's more important for the government to address the Coronavirus spread than the economy. And about 81% say Americans should continue social distancing even if it means continued damage to the economy.

The Republicans are playing a dangerous political game. They think reopening the economy will help them win in November. This poll shows the opposite may be true. If they are seen as putting money over the lives of the people, they will lose more votes than they gain in November. And that's what it is looking like right now.

Federal Supply System For Coronavirus Is "Crony Capitalism"

Donald Trump's handling of the Coronavirus epidemic in this country has been nothing short of incompetent. He acted far too slowly after being notified of the coming epidemic as early as December of 2019. He finally put a ban on travel from China, but only after nearly 400,000 people had flown from China to the United States. And even though it quickly became obvious that the ban was too late and the virus was spreading in the U.S., he took not further action until about the middle of March.

His slow action was also a primary cause of the shortage of ventilators, tests, and protective gear for medical workers. He has refused to actually use the Defense Production Act, and even though he now brags about what he has done, those shortages still exist. And putting Jared Kushner in charge of a committee overseeing the supply chain has just caused chaos -- piling greedy incompetence on top of greedy incompetence. He favors his buddies in large corporations over smaller business that have proven they can deliver. It is the very essence of "crony capitalism".

The following is part of an article from NBC News:

For weeks, Trump has resisted pressure to use the full power of his office to temporarily turn the private sector into an arm of the federal government in a national emergency. But he and his lieutenants instead have used the crisis to make federal assets and personnel ancillary to industry, according to NBC's interviews with dozens of public- and private-sector sources involved in various aspects of the coronavirus response.

In doing so, the vice president's coronavirus task force — mostly through a supply-chain unit led by Admiral John Polowczyk and heavily influenced by White House adviser Jared Kushner — has favored some of the nation's largest corporations and ignored smaller producers of goods and services with long track records of meeting emergency needs, according to officials at multiple federal agencies and people familiar with contracting.

They have also operated almost entirely in the dark, releasing few details of their arrangements with the big companies; created a new and convoluted emergency response system; and sown confusion and distrust in the states and among the people who need medical supplies.

There is virtually no accountability for their decisions about how and where to allocate emergency equipment, a vacuum that has produced strong criticism from Democratic congressional officials, who are demanding answers.

The story of the supply-chain group, a power center within the larger task force run by Vice President Mike Pence, is one of chaos, secrecy and ineptitude, these officials said. Governors, local officials and veterans of federal emergency response say it has deeply complicated the national fight against the pandemic. . . .

With so many ad-hoc groups purchasing goods and services for the crisis — the White House coronavirus task force, one of its seven subsidiary task forces, or other government agencies — it’s impossible to tell whether taxpayers are getting the best deals possible or are being gouged. . . .

The supply chain task force leaders pushed aside the existing federal emergency management response teams that had long-established methods for engaging assistance from the public and private sectors. Instead, they first reached out to personal contacts, according to people familiar with their operations. To the extent that they have absorbed some of the old practices over the course of time, with the help of career officials intent on bringing their actions in line with protocol, it has taken time to figure out their own system.

"Jared and his friends decided they were going to do their thing," said the senior government official involved in the response effort. "It cost weeks." . . .

In one wrinkle that has had repercussions for small businesses and communities around the country, the task force ended FEMA's long-running practice of using its regional offices to locate, pay for and acquire goods from smaller local vendors in an emergency, preferring instead to contract with heavyweights. . . .

Working from a war room on the first-floor concourse between two towers of the FEMA’s leased headquarters in southwest Washington, the task force was handed the keys to the deepest treasury in the world, and it empowered the Trump administration to quietly corner the scarce market of medical goods in the United States and overseas. . . .

Using what it calls a "40-40-20" formula, the task force buys whatever it can get its hands on and then allocates the goods, according to the people familiar with the response effort. The first 20 percent is reserved for the federal government’s Strategic National Stockpile. The task force directs where the next 40 percent goes, and the company selling the product gets to deliver the remaining 40 percent as it sees fit. . . .

In practice, the 40-40-20 arrangement means the federal task force can re-route a shipment that is already on its way to a state, city or hospital that previously had agreed to buy it from the supplier. . . .

Right now, what the public is getting from its money is a process that state and local officials, along with the frontline hospitals and medical personnel, have been forced to spend valuable time trying to figure out. In some cases, they have wasted that time bidding against the federal government for supplies.

The only people who claim to understand what’s going on are political officials who work closely with Trump, Pence and Kushner — and representatives of some of the companies in the supply chain.

Trump's Attack On LeBron Just Shows Trump's Own Flaws

(Photo image of LeBron James and Donald Trump is from Sporting News.)

The tweet above is from Donald Trump. It has received some serious backlash (even from Trump's own wife), but in my opinion the tweet exposes Trump's own flaws more than it damages Mr. James. Flaws like:

* Lack of intelligence -- Trump likes to brag that he is a genius, but that is far from true. That is exhibited on a daily basis by his incessant lies. He lies about things that are easily disproved. That may please his base (because those lies are what they want to believe), but the majority of Americans don't like it -- and they don't think a truly intelligent person would tell such obvious lies. And how smart is it to attack someone who has donated many millions of his own money to help the children (and parents) in his community?

* Racist -- Once again, Trump has attacked a black athlete. This is not the first time (and probably won't be the last). This is nothing new, and not just limited to Blacks or athletes. He has a history of racist activity going back to the 1970's. This is just the latest example. Once again, it appeals to his base (who love having someone validate their own racist views), but doesn't go over well with the majority of Americans.

* Greed -- It's easy to understand why Trump thinks someone giving their own money to help their community is "dumb", because that's something Trump would never do. Money is everything to Trump. He's the epitome of "I've got mine, screw you". You can see it in the way he conducted business (perpetrating frauds and failing to pay his bills), and in the way he has governed (with policies that help only himself and his rich friends). Even the "charity" he created was nothing more than an effort to avoid taxes. Nothing went to actual charitable causes, but instead, it was just a tax-free piggy bank for him to dip his dirty finger into.

Decent people applauded LeBron James move to spend millions to help his community. Only a stupid, racist, and greedy person could find fault with it. But those are all traits that Trump has in spades. Altruism is beyond Trump's capability to understand.

Trump Turns Public Lands Over To Greedy Corporations

Republican Teddy Roosevelt is largely responsible for protecting many of our national resources and treasures -- and urged others who followed him in power to do the same. We owe him a huge debt of gratitude for that.

Sadly though, today's Republicans are not of the stature of Roosevelt. When they look at lands protected by the government, they don't see natural wonders belonging to all Americans. They see land that could be exploited for profit by greedy corporations (who will repay them with large campaign donations) -- and one of the worst of these is Donald Trump. Trump has single-handedly turned over large tracts of our public lands to greedy corporations.

The following is part of an article by Jenny Rowland for Think Progress:

Trump took an unprecedented step for a U.S. president in December — signing a proclamation that dramatically reduced the size of two national monuments. Bears Ears National Monument was cut by more than 85 percent and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument was reduced by half. This resulted in the largest elimination of protected areas in U.S. history. The move put tens of thousands of Native American sacred sites at risk, along with key wildlife habitat, and areas used for outdoor recreation.

While the longer-term fate of Trump’s likely illegal action will play out in the courts, also buried in his December proclamation was a provision that on February 2, 2018, the areas excluded from the monuments would become open to private mineral companies to begin staking mining and drilling claims. . . .

Staking a mining claim on public lands gives an individual or company the exclusive right to extract minerals from a specific area of that land. Under the nearly 150-year-old 1872 Mining Law, staking a claim still involves literally putting stakes into the ground at the four corners of the boundary of your claim. This is then followed up within 90 days by recording the claim with the local BLM office and paying a modest annual fee. . . .

Bears Ears in particular, has proven deposits of uranium and other minerals within it’s original boundaries. One company, Energy Fuels Resources, owns and operates a uranium mine just outside the boundaries of the original monument. In May, the company submitted a letter to Interior requesting reductions to the monument and noted “there are also many other known uranium and vanadium deposits located within the [original boundaries] that could provide valuable energy and mineral resources in the future.”. . .

The potential destruction to Bears Ears is also gaining attention from conservation observers outside of the U.S.; earlier this week an arm of the United Nations asked the president to reverse his action, writing that the reduction to Bears Ears could cause irreparable damage to historical artifacts. . . .

While the national monuments in Utah face imminent harm, they are not the only public lands currently at risk. The Trump administration’s national monument report includes plans to alter at least eight additional monuments that range from allowing logging in Maine’s Katahdin Woods and Waters, to allowing commercial fishing in the Pacific Remote Islands.

Amazon Cuts The Bidding War For Its New Facility To 20 Cities

(This cartoon image was found at The Contributor.)

Amazon, the mega on-line corporation, wants to build a new headquarters complex. But instead of just searching for a good location, they threw the bidding open -- and over 200 cities entered the fray (offering all kinds of benefits to the corporation -- from land to tax cuts). Those cities wanted the thousands of jobs that likely will come with the new complex.

I'm sure that Amazon considers this procedure to be good business, and the cities consider there giveaways to be worth the new jobs. But those cities overlook the fact that most of their jobs come from small businesses (who get none of the giveaways being offered to Amazon), and the fact that their citizens will have to make up what Amazon doesn't pay in taxes.

To me, this doesn't look like good business or good government. Instead, it reeks of greed and corruption. At the very least, it's corporate welfare.

Here are the 20 cities that have made Amazon's short list, along with what some have offered (offers that will probably be increased now that they made the first cut):

Atlanta: Atlanta's mayor, Kasim Reed, said the city would offer incentives and development that would be worth more than $1 billion. In Stonecrest, a Georgia city about 20 miles east of Atlanta, the mayor offered to rename it "Amazon" and instate Jeff Bezos as the permanent mayor. 

Austin, Texas: Austin hasn't publicly disclosed any type of tax incentive or break for Amazon. In its bid, the city decided to tout its culture, instead. The city's mayor, Steve Adler, said it's offering Amazon a chance to be the "social fabric and future" of Austin. 

Boston: The city proposed an "Amazon Task Force" in its 109-page bid. It would essentially entail paid city staffers whose sole purpose is to represent Amazon's interests to Boston's government. 

Chicago: The city offered $2 billion in tax breaks, and suggested it could go even higher than that.

Columbus, Ohio: The Midwestern city offered Amazon tax breaks for 15 years, including 100 percent property tax abatement, and a 35 percent income tax refund. These offers would save Amazon millions in taxes for more than a decade.

Dallas: Similar to Austin, Dallas is also not offering any major tax break. Instead, it's pushing on its city's merits. 

Denver: The city is offering "performance-based incentives," which isn't exactly a special break for Amazon. It's relying on the state's Strategic Fund Incentive and Job Growth Incentive Tax Credit, offered to any business that comes to Colorado. These incentives can save Amazon more than $100 million in taxes. 

Indianapolis: It's keeping its bid details secret. 

Los Angeles: The Southern California city has kept its offers under wraps, but has indicated it would provide "costs and incentives" to Amazon. There are no specific details on how much that would entail. 

Miami: It's keeping its bid details secret. 

Montgomery County, Maryland: Bethesda Magazine's Bethesda Beat received the bid through a public records request with the government. The state redacted all information on financial and tax incentives. But at least we know there are incentive offers. 

Nashville, Tennessee: The Music City's officials actually frowned on all the tax incentives being offered, calling it "absurd" in one interview. Instead, they're pitching to Amazon based on the city's development and steady population growth.  

Newark, New Jersey: This is the big one. Newark is offering Amazon $7 billion in tax incentives, the largest one among all 238 cities that made a bid. 

New York: Other than the orange light-up show Mayor Bill de Blasio pulled off, the city is also offering lots of space, both for development and housing for potential employees moving there.  

Northern Virginia: It's keeping its bid details a secret. 

Philadelphia: The Philadelphia Inquirer received a heavily redacted document after it made a public records request to the city. But the pitch did offer up 280,000 square feet of office space at the 30th Street Station building, along with up to 4.2 million square feet of development space across the city.

Pittsburgh: It's keeping its bid details a secret, but noted that its tax incentives make a "very competitive package." 

Raleigh, North Carolina: It's keeping its bid details a secret, and has denied 11 out of 15 public records requests from WRAL.

Toronto: Toronto is the only Canadian city listed as a finalist, and a good chunk of its pitch relies on that appeal. There are no tax subsidies in its pitch, but the city's officials point to its lower corporate tax rates compared to the US, as well as its universal health care.   

Washington: The bid noted "significant tax breaks," though details were redacted in the public records provided to WAMU. The records also pitched creating an "Amazon University," which would train and create a direct pipeline of people to work at Amazon.