The real issue here has nothing to do with apple. The real issue is that state and local governments fall all over themselves to give tax breaks to companies without really thinking about whether the benefits outweigh the costs. Another example is how cities fall all over themselves to build stadiums for sports franchises. I think it's largely a case of little people trying to feel big.
I don't know enough about the details here to know whether the NC folks made a mistake or not, but those sound like some pretty big tax cuts for a very small number of jobs. Again -- not apples fault -- they were honest about the number of jobs. The problem is a culture where everyone reflexively rolls over for big business.
What the HECK are you talking about?
How is anyone "rolling over" for anyone? So North Carolina says if you build that data center here we'll give a 50% tax break. Or 60% Or even 100%. That is still 50 good jobs that you otherwise wouldn't have. So your choice is 50 jobs or *nothing* and the smart move is to choose *nothing* so you can say you didn't "roll over"?
Unless those 50 new jobs went to locals and paid about $1M each, I don't see how they offset the $46 million in tax breaks, not to mention the huge cuts in personal and property taxes, that will impact the residents of the town and state.
and how much was the town getting in taxes from Donnie and Kathy Fulbright?
Even if Apple did not hire any locals, there are now 50 or more tax paying residents in the town or surrounding area than there were before Donnie and Kathy Fulbright sold the land.
The tax breaks are over many years, not one year. Even if Apple paid zero taxes, there is a net benefit to the town simply from the construction of the building and those 50 new employees that most likely have moved there.
The town has not said that Apple is costing them money. They are just disappointed that it was not the town's savior. They expected some kind of major change in their lifestyle and they did not get it. They are not worse off for the data center being there.
All construction materials and equipment were airdropped in and then slingshotted out at great expense to Apple from other counties to avoid any revenue from touching the town.
edit: And jragosta comes in Mighty Eagle the thread.
You are telling me 50 jobs that is all Apple offered. A dam disgrace indeed. This state is high in unemployment to begin with.Tim Cook and Apple better get their act together.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisrayb
3400 people in the town.
A potiential for 25-250 jobs.
Unemployment rate at 13%
Worst case scenario 25 jobs brings unemployment down .7%
50 jobs brings it down 1.5%
250 jobs brings it down 7.4%
Plus tax money to the town.
I can see why some of these people think that data jobs from Apple isn't for them and why their unemployment rate is so high. Basic math and logic must be hard to come by in this small town...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wings
"According to the report, local authorities have discounted property taxes by 50 percent and personal taxes by 85 percent."
If THAT'S not a major benefit to everyone there, I don't know what is. Please Apple, come build a plant in my town. I wouldn't care if I work there or not if it means I'll get my property taxes chopped in half.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol
Idiotic spending all the way around.
$1.7 million for an acre? Wow- that's Hawaii pricing (although that's a happy meal for apple).
North Carolina are the dumbest. $4.6 mil a year for 10 years for 50 jobs? Maybe (at most) 300? Wow...
Quote:
Originally Posted by freediverx
When a retailer discounts its products, the intended result is an increase in sales, thereby making the promotion a productive investment.
But exactly how did the state or local community benefit from having Apple build their data center there? If Apple only created a few new jobs and if there were no other strings attached - for example helping to train/educate locals for high tech jobs - then what exactly did the community get in return for the $46 million tax breaks and loss of revenue from the 50% reduction in property taxes and 85% reduction in personal taxes that will only place increased strains on already struggling services such as education ?
Amazing how lousy the thinking processes are here.
OK, let's look at what the consumers receive:
- Vast increase in their property values ($1.7 M for an acre? Obviously some one has no right to complain). Even the people who didn't sell their land to Apple at extortionate prices benefits from more job opportunities.
- Jobs. 50 direct jobs and up to 250 indirect jobs in a community that size is important. That probably makes Apple the largest employer. This is especially true in an area with such high unemployment rates (btw, Chris' figures are wrong because s/he assumes that all 3400 people are employable. You could probably estimate that about 1/2 of the people are employable, so the impact on unemployment would double. However, some of the people will come from neighboring towns, so that town won't get all the benefit)
- Job quality. In that area of NC, there aren't a lot of great jobs. These will be some of the best jobs around - and will give the local kids something to work toward.
- Taxes. While people focus on the tax breaks, they miss the fact that Apple will still be paying 50% of the property tax and 15% of the personal taxes for 10 years (and then 100% after that). Since Apple's entry into the area greatly increased the property value (the $1 B investment may be more than the entire county was worth before Apple came along), even 50% of the property taxes will be substantial. The city and county will benefit greatly from this so it's not a corporate handout. Rather, they agreed that they would take less than the full amount under the principle that half of a big number is better than 100% of zero. So instead of focusing on the $46 M in tax 'breaks', one could just as easily cite the $46 M in extra tax revenue that they'll be receiving.
Amazing how lousy the thinking processes are here.
OK, let's look at what the consumers receive:
- Vast increase in their property values ($1.7 M for an acre? Obviously some one has no right to complain). Even the people who didn't sell their land to Apple at extortionate prices benefits from more job opportunities.
- Jobs. 50 direct jobs and up to 250 indirect jobs in a community that size is important. That probably makes Apple the largest employer. This is especially true in an area with such high unemployment rates (btw, Chris' figures are wrong because s/he assumes that all 3400 people are employable. You could probably estimate that about 1/2 of the people are employable, so the impact on unemployment would double. However, some of the people will come from neighboring towns, so that town won't get all the benefit)
- Job quality. In that area of NC, there aren't a lot of great jobs. These will be some of the best jobs around - and will give the local kids something to work toward.
- Taxes. While people focus on the tax breaks, they miss the fact that Apple will still be paying 50% of the property tax and 15% of the personal taxes for 10 years (and then 100% after that). Since Apple's entry into the area greatly increased the property value (the $1 B investment may be more than the entire county was worth before Apple came along), even 50% of the property taxes will be substantial. The city and county will benefit greatly from this so it's not a corporate handout. Rather, they agreed that they would take less than the full amount under the principle that half of a big number is better than 100% of zero. So instead of focusing on the $46 M in tax 'breaks', one could just as easily cite the $46 M in extra tax revenue that they'll be receiving.
A good assement I'd think. I may be wrong but I assume the local economy also had some income from the building of the plant, albeit a limited time thing. It's hard to imagine Apple brought in labor and machinery from another state.
The construction jobs created for the previous and current/future data center.
All the costs associated with the people now living in that town to maintain the data center operations.
Exactly where is the town not gaining from Apple's presence and how exactly is it not like a retailer reducing the cost of an item to encourage a customer into their area. Hint: It's the exact same economic principle that prevents a competitor from getting the business.
The land sale is a one time deal, and only benefitted a few landowners.
Do you have any data to show that the yearly taxes on the land will exceed the amount that would have been paid by the former landowners, and if so that this increase offsets all the tax breaks?
How does the sale of electricity benefit the residents of the town or state? If anything, I'd think it would drive up the cost of energy.
The construction jobs are, again, a one time deal.
The data center is practically autonomous, with only 50 employees. There's no massive hiring of locals nor the local business benefits of serving an army of data center workers since there's only 50 employees.
At what point do we consider the downsides of the tax breaks on education and social services that benefit all the residents of the town and state?
The land sale is a one time deal, and only benefitted a few landowners.
Do you have any data to show that the yearly taxes on the land will exceed the amount that would have been paid by the former landowners, and if so that this increase offsets all the tax breaks?
How does the sale of electricity benefit the residents of the town or state? If anything, I'd think it would drive up the cost of energy.
The construction jobs are, again, a one time deal.
The data center is practically autonomous, with only 50 employees. There's no massive hiring of locals nor the local business benefits of serving an army of data center workers since there's only 50 employees.
1) One time deal or not, they benefit the local economy when without Apple's presence they wouldn't, yet you claim otherwise. Think of the tax break as a "coupon" good for 10 years at their store/town, but Apple is still paying a dozens of millions there instead of taking their business elsewhere.
2) Mugzy and jragosta have already hit you high and low better than I ever could so reread their comments instead of replying to me.
How is anyone "rolling over" for anyone? So North Carolina says if you build that data center here we'll give a 50% tax break. Or 60% Or even 100%. That is still 50 good jobs that you otherwise wouldn't have. So your choice is 50 jobs or *nothing* and the smart move is to choose *nothing* so you can say you didn't "roll over"?
Unbelievable.
The tax break is not "free". It comes at the expense of government services such as education, at a time when education and other vital services are under the worst strain in almost a century. Where is the equation showing that the lost tax revenue is made up for, over the long term, by actual benefits?
How many jobs were there when Donnie and Kathy Fulbright lived on that land?
How many jobs were there after Apple moved in?
OK, so there's 50 net new jobs (assuming nobody somehow lost a job as a result of this.) What is the value of those jobs compared to the strain on tax-supported services impacting all residents? If someone can show that the actual concrete benefits (not mythical or "possible future benefits") outweigh the loss of tax revenue, then I'd say the issue is closed and we can all go home. Otherwise, you're just looking at one side of the equation.
You are telling me 50 jobs that is all Apple offered. A dam disgrace indeed. This state is high in unemployment to begin with.Tim Cook and Apple better get their act together.
If all the unemployed people are qualified for the jobs required at the data center, then I'm SURE Apple would have hired more of them. Like the article says, "Those jobs aren't for us. All we know is furniture." I'm sure those furniture people benefited in that Apple needs to furnish their data center. After that, the benefit is gone until new furniture is needed.
So for the town to really benefit, the people need to learn how to work those jobs. That's their job, not Apple's. Apple hires those who qualify for the job. That's what they need to do and that's their rights.
The tax break is not "free". It comes at the expense of government services such as education, at a time when education and other vital services are under the worst strain in almost a century. Where is the equation showing that the lost tax revenue is made up for, over the long term, by actual benefits?
If Apple's there to pay 25% tax, that's 25% of money going into the state. If Apple isn't there, the state gets NOTHING from Tax. The state doesn't PAY Apple taxes. Therefore, your argument that it comes at government services is wrong as the supposed services doesn't lose any money simply from Apple being there.
- Vast increase in their property values ($1.7 M for an acre? Even the people who didn't sell their land to Apple at extortionate prices benefits from more job opportunities."
What makes you think that Apple building this data center staffed by a massive team of 50 will necessarily act as a magnet for other businesses that would in turn pay $1.7M an acre to other land owners in the area? How do these short term land sales benefit the community and the state over the long term?
"50 direct jobs and up to 250 indirect jobs in a community that size is important. This is especially true in an area with such high unemployment rates."
The 50 direct jobs probably didn't go to any locals and where are these 250 "indirect jobs" defined? How will a data center, that practically runs itself with just 50 technically trained employees, benefit local unemployment rates when locals are neither qualified for, being hired for, nor trained for these jobs?
"Job quality. In that area of NC, there aren't a lot of great jobs. These will be some of the best jobs around - and will give the local kids something to work toward. "
The place staffs 50. It's a data center. How does this equate to "a lot of great jobs" in the future? How will local kids work towards these nonexistent future jobs when their schools are strapped for cash as a result of the tax cuts?
"Taxes. While people focus on the tax breaks, they miss the fact that Apple will still be paying 50% of the property tax and 15% of the personal taxes for 10 years "
As opposed to the 100% of property taxes that would be paid by the former owners?
The tax break is not "free". It comes at the expense of government services such as education, at a time when education and other vital services are under the worst strain in almost a century. Where is the equation showing that the lost tax revenue is made up for, over the long term, by actual benefits?
Why don't you contact the town directly for the answers to these questions?
Did those people ever stop to consider the tax breaks that city receives? Sure it might be 50 jobs but its probably high paying jobs for that area. I'd rather see 50 high paying jobs than 200 McDonalds paying jobs.
According to the article there are 150 ancillary personnel as well so that's an extra 200 people that have to live, eat and shop in the area.
It's not much, but as many have said already, what's the logic of making up fake jobs use so people will have one? The only fault here would be if Apple implied that there were going to be thousands of jobs and then delivered only the 200. I'm pretty sure without even looking into it that this wouldn't be the case however.
What I didn't see mentioned, unless I missed it, was a comparison between Apple's 500,000 sq. ft. data center in NC and other companies' data centers. How many people are employed at other data centers that are owned and operated by Microsoft, Google, Facebook, etc. even if their data centers are smaller than Apple's in NC? I don't get the impression that data centers need a lot of workers.
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple did employ say 200-300 workers at their NC data center, someone would be complaining about the increased traffic to and from the center compared to what the traffic used to be like in their quiet, peaceful town before the center was built.
Comments
The real issue here has nothing to do with apple. The real issue is that state and local governments fall all over themselves to give tax breaks to companies without really thinking about whether the benefits outweigh the costs. Another example is how cities fall all over themselves to build stadiums for sports franchises. I think it's largely a case of little people trying to feel big.
I don't know enough about the details here to know whether the NC folks made a mistake or not, but those sound like some pretty big tax cuts for a very small number of jobs. Again -- not apples fault -- they were honest about the number of jobs. The problem is a culture where everyone reflexively rolls over for big business.
What the HECK are you talking about?
How is anyone "rolling over" for anyone? So North Carolina says if you build that data center here we'll give a 50% tax break. Or 60% Or even 100%. That is still 50 good jobs that you otherwise wouldn't have. So your choice is 50 jobs or *nothing* and the smart move is to choose *nothing* so you can say you didn't "roll over"?
Unbelievable.
Unless those 50 new jobs went to locals and paid about $1M each, I don't see how they offset the $46 million in tax breaks, not to mention the huge cuts in personal and property taxes, that will impact the residents of the town and state.
and how much was the town getting in taxes from Donnie and Kathy Fulbright?
Even if Apple did not hire any locals, there are now 50 or more tax paying residents in the town or surrounding area than there were before Donnie and Kathy Fulbright sold the land.
The tax breaks are over many years, not one year. Even if Apple paid zero taxes, there is a net benefit to the town simply from the construction of the building and those 50 new employees that most likely have moved there.
The town has not said that Apple is costing them money. They are just disappointed that it was not the town's savior. They expected some kind of major change in their lifestyle and they did not get it. They are not worse off for the data center being there.
How many jobs were there when Donnie and Kathy Fulbright lived on that land?
How many jobs were there after Apple moved in?
Succinctly stated, but I don't think Apple should pay anything in taxes until the town lifts their ban on dancing.
I suppose that building just built itself....
All construction materials and equipment were airdropped in and then slingshotted out at great expense to Apple from other counties to avoid any revenue from touching the town.
edit: And jragosta comes in Mighty Eagle the thread.
You are telling me 50 jobs that is all Apple offered. A dam disgrace indeed. This state is high in unemployment to begin with.Tim Cook and Apple better get their act together.
3400 people in the town.
A potiential for 25-250 jobs.
Unemployment rate at 13%
Worst case scenario 25 jobs brings unemployment down .7%
50 jobs brings it down 1.5%
250 jobs brings it down 7.4%
Plus tax money to the town.
I can see why some of these people think that data jobs from Apple isn't for them and why their unemployment rate is so high. Basic math and logic must be hard to come by in this small town...
"According to the report, local authorities have discounted property taxes by 50 percent and personal taxes by 85 percent."
If THAT'S not a major benefit to everyone there, I don't know what is. Please Apple, come build a plant in my town. I wouldn't care if I work there or not if it means I'll get my property taxes chopped in half.
Idiotic spending all the way around.
$1.7 million for an acre? Wow- that's Hawaii pricing (although that's a happy meal for apple).
North Carolina are the dumbest. $4.6 mil a year for 10 years for 50 jobs? Maybe (at most) 300? Wow...
When a retailer discounts its products, the intended result is an increase in sales, thereby making the promotion a productive investment.
But exactly how did the state or local community benefit from having Apple build their data center there? If Apple only created a few new jobs and if there were no other strings attached - for example helping to train/educate locals for high tech jobs - then what exactly did the community get in return for the $46 million tax breaks and loss of revenue from the 50% reduction in property taxes and 85% reduction in personal taxes that will only place increased strains on already struggling services such as education ?
Amazing how lousy the thinking processes are here.
OK, let's look at what the consumers receive:
- Vast increase in their property values ($1.7 M for an acre? Obviously some one has no right to complain). Even the people who didn't sell their land to Apple at extortionate prices benefits from more job opportunities.
- Jobs. 50 direct jobs and up to 250 indirect jobs in a community that size is important. That probably makes Apple the largest employer. This is especially true in an area with such high unemployment rates (btw, Chris' figures are wrong because s/he assumes that all 3400 people are employable. You could probably estimate that about 1/2 of the people are employable, so the impact on unemployment would double. However, some of the people will come from neighboring towns, so that town won't get all the benefit)
- Job quality. In that area of NC, there aren't a lot of great jobs. These will be some of the best jobs around - and will give the local kids something to work toward.
- Taxes. While people focus on the tax breaks, they miss the fact that Apple will still be paying 50% of the property tax and 15% of the personal taxes for 10 years (and then 100% after that). Since Apple's entry into the area greatly increased the property value (the $1 B investment may be more than the entire county was worth before Apple came along), even 50% of the property taxes will be substantial. The city and county will benefit greatly from this so it's not a corporate handout. Rather, they agreed that they would take less than the full amount under the principle that half of a big number is better than 100% of zero. So instead of focusing on the $46 M in tax 'breaks', one could just as easily cite the $46 M in extra tax revenue that they'll be receiving.
Amazing how lousy the thinking processes are here.
OK, let's look at what the consumers receive:
- Vast increase in their property values ($1.7 M for an acre? Obviously some one has no right to complain). Even the people who didn't sell their land to Apple at extortionate prices benefits from more job opportunities.
- Jobs. 50 direct jobs and up to 250 indirect jobs in a community that size is important. That probably makes Apple the largest employer. This is especially true in an area with such high unemployment rates (btw, Chris' figures are wrong because s/he assumes that all 3400 people are employable. You could probably estimate that about 1/2 of the people are employable, so the impact on unemployment would double. However, some of the people will come from neighboring towns, so that town won't get all the benefit)
- Job quality. In that area of NC, there aren't a lot of great jobs. These will be some of the best jobs around - and will give the local kids something to work toward.
- Taxes. While people focus on the tax breaks, they miss the fact that Apple will still be paying 50% of the property tax and 15% of the personal taxes for 10 years (and then 100% after that). Since Apple's entry into the area greatly increased the property value (the $1 B investment may be more than the entire county was worth before Apple came along), even 50% of the property taxes will be substantial. The city and county will benefit greatly from this so it's not a corporate handout. Rather, they agreed that they would take less than the full amount under the principle that half of a big number is better than 100% of zero. So instead of focusing on the $46 M in tax 'breaks', one could just as easily cite the $46 M in extra tax revenue that they'll be receiving.
A good assement I'd think. I may be wrong but I assume the local economy also had some income from the building of the plant, albeit a limited time thing. It's hard to imagine Apple brought in labor and machinery from another state.
The land sale.
The yearly taxes on said land.
The cost of electricity.
The construction jobs created for the previous and current/future data center.
All the costs associated with the people now living in that town to maintain the data center operations.
Exactly where is the town not gaining from Apple's presence and how exactly is it not like a retailer reducing the cost of an item to encourage a customer into their area. Hint: It's the exact same economic principle that prevents a competitor from getting the business.
The land sale is a one time deal, and only benefitted a few landowners.
Do you have any data to show that the yearly taxes on the land will exceed the amount that would have been paid by the former landowners, and if so that this increase offsets all the tax breaks?
How does the sale of electricity benefit the residents of the town or state? If anything, I'd think it would drive up the cost of energy.
The construction jobs are, again, a one time deal.
The data center is practically autonomous, with only 50 employees. There's no massive hiring of locals nor the local business benefits of serving an army of data center workers since there's only 50 employees.
At what point do we consider the downsides of the tax breaks on education and social services that benefit all the residents of the town and state?
The land sale is a one time deal, and only benefitted a few landowners.
Do you have any data to show that the yearly taxes on the land will exceed the amount that would have been paid by the former landowners, and if so that this increase offsets all the tax breaks?
How does the sale of electricity benefit the residents of the town or state? If anything, I'd think it would drive up the cost of energy.
The construction jobs are, again, a one time deal.
The data center is practically autonomous, with only 50 employees. There's no massive hiring of locals nor the local business benefits of serving an army of data center workers since there's only 50 employees.
1) One time deal or not, they benefit the local economy when without Apple's presence they wouldn't, yet you claim otherwise. Think of the tax break as a "coupon" good for 10 years at their store/town, but Apple is still paying a dozens of millions there instead of taking their business elsewhere.
2) Mugzy and jragosta have already hit you high and low better than I ever could so reread their comments instead of replying to me.
What the HECK are you talking about?
How is anyone "rolling over" for anyone? So North Carolina says if you build that data center here we'll give a 50% tax break. Or 60% Or even 100%. That is still 50 good jobs that you otherwise wouldn't have. So your choice is 50 jobs or *nothing* and the smart move is to choose *nothing* so you can say you didn't "roll over"?
Unbelievable.
The tax break is not "free". It comes at the expense of government services such as education, at a time when education and other vital services are under the worst strain in almost a century. Where is the equation showing that the lost tax revenue is made up for, over the long term, by actual benefits?
How many jobs were there when Donnie and Kathy Fulbright lived on that land?
How many jobs were there after Apple moved in?
OK, so there's 50 net new jobs (assuming nobody somehow lost a job as a result of this.) What is the value of those jobs compared to the strain on tax-supported services impacting all residents? If someone can show that the actual concrete benefits (not mythical or "possible future benefits") outweigh the loss of tax revenue, then I'd say the issue is closed and we can all go home. Otherwise, you're just looking at one side of the equation.
You are telling me 50 jobs that is all Apple offered. A dam disgrace indeed. This state is high in unemployment to begin with.Tim Cook and Apple better get their act together.
If all the unemployed people are qualified for the jobs required at the data center, then I'm SURE Apple would have hired more of them. Like the article says, "Those jobs aren't for us. All we know is furniture." I'm sure those furniture people benefited in that Apple needs to furnish their data center. After that, the benefit is gone until new furniture is needed.
So for the town to really benefit, the people need to learn how to work those jobs. That's their job, not Apple's. Apple hires those who qualify for the job. That's what they need to do and that's their rights.
The tax break is not "free". It comes at the expense of government services such as education, at a time when education and other vital services are under the worst strain in almost a century. Where is the equation showing that the lost tax revenue is made up for, over the long term, by actual benefits?
If Apple's there to pay 25% tax, that's 25% of money going into the state. If Apple isn't there, the state gets NOTHING from Tax. The state doesn't PAY Apple taxes. Therefore, your argument that it comes at government services is wrong as the supposed services doesn't lose any money simply from Apple being there.
Maybe Apple could start making the furniture for the Apple Stores at that site. At least the locals would have those skills one would think.
I picture the furniture looking something like this?
Losers :-))
Who - the people who quote the entire article and then offer a one-word retort?
"OK, let's look at what the consumers receive:
- Vast increase in their property values ($1.7 M for an acre? Even the people who didn't sell their land to Apple at extortionate prices benefits from more job opportunities."
What makes you think that Apple building this data center staffed by a massive team of 50 will necessarily act as a magnet for other businesses that would in turn pay $1.7M an acre to other land owners in the area? How do these short term land sales benefit the community and the state over the long term?
"50 direct jobs and up to 250 indirect jobs in a community that size is important. This is especially true in an area with such high unemployment rates."
The 50 direct jobs probably didn't go to any locals and where are these 250 "indirect jobs" defined? How will a data center, that practically runs itself with just 50 technically trained employees, benefit local unemployment rates when locals are neither qualified for, being hired for, nor trained for these jobs?
"Job quality. In that area of NC, there aren't a lot of great jobs. These will be some of the best jobs around - and will give the local kids something to work toward. "
The place staffs 50. It's a data center. How does this equate to "a lot of great jobs" in the future? How will local kids work towards these nonexistent future jobs when their schools are strapped for cash as a result of the tax cuts?
"Taxes. While people focus on the tax breaks, they miss the fact that Apple will still be paying 50% of the property tax and 15% of the personal taxes for 10 years "
As opposed to the 100% of property taxes that would be paid by the former owners?
The tax break is not "free". It comes at the expense of government services such as education, at a time when education and other vital services are under the worst strain in almost a century. Where is the equation showing that the lost tax revenue is made up for, over the long term, by actual benefits?
Why don't you contact the town directly for the answers to these questions?
Did those people ever stop to consider the tax breaks that city receives? Sure it might be 50 jobs but its probably high paying jobs for that area. I'd rather see 50 high paying jobs than 200 McDonalds paying jobs.
According to the article there are 150 ancillary personnel as well so that's an extra 200 people that have to live, eat and shop in the area.
It's not much, but as many have said already, what's the logic of making up fake jobs use so people will have one? The only fault here would be if Apple implied that there were going to be thousands of jobs and then delivered only the 200. I'm pretty sure without even looking into it that this wouldn't be the case however.
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple did employ say 200-300 workers at their NC data center, someone would be complaining about the increased traffic to and from the center compared to what the traffic used to be like in their quiet, peaceful town before the center was built.