| Procrastinato said: You forgot "from another campus location". How does this benefit anyone but MS again? reduces the number of MS employees having to traverse city routes, is basically what the article says. So... The taxpayers are paying to improve the layout of MS's campus. Isn't that really MS' responsibility? Should Redmond taxpayer money be spent to redesign all of Redmond, Washington, such that getting to MS has as little effect on the city, and thus the local economy, as possible? Is that something the average joe, including MS employees, should be paying for, or is it MS', the company not the employees, responsibility? Perhaps Redmond should foot some catered lunchtime bills as well? Would help MS do business, and would help a couple local businesses thrive, since MS -- via Redmond taxpayers -- would be having catered lunch every day. "No such thing as a free lunch"...unless you work at Microsoft, who desperately needs handouts. |
I'm assuming you've never been to the MS campus. They don't have a "mini-city" of their own... traveling between campus locations often requires traveling on city highways, which adds tremendously to the city traffic load in general. I can understand how the article is painting a picture that MS alone is benefitting, but this is simply not the case.
If you really want to know what this change involves, then send an email to the city planning commission and ask for clarification of what is being proposed.
EDIT: I should also mention that thousands of individuals work at the MS campus in Redmond, and this not only provides for the livelihood of those people, but it helps support the local economy in a very significant way. You seem to see MS as some sort of drain on Redmond, when in fact, MS is quite a benefactor to that area and would be very sorely missed if they moved out.
