Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wisconsin has negotiated a dramatically scaled-back deal with Foxconn

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 196 posts

Re: Wisconsin has negotiated a dramatically scaled-back deal with Foxconn

#61

Post by altendo »

I am always struck at the amount that states and municipalities are willing to write off in order to attract companies. On one hand, I understand that companies want to take the best deal, but on the other hand, at times local governments are willing to give up so much money in tax revenue. I remember reading about the competitions for Google Fiber and Amazon's second HQ - it felt absurd the amount cities and states were willing to drop, financially speaking.

I'm glad this one has been renegotiated (especially seeing that the proposed plant never happened), but I'd like to see these deals be more level-headed before they get to this point.

Re: Wisconsin has negotiated a dramatically scaled-back deal with Foxconn

#62

Post by iainmerrick »

CydeWeys wrote: post #42
iainmerrick wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any discussion forum that grows gets worse. Huh! I hadn’t thought about it in such stark terms before, and I’d like to disagree, but there may be something in that. Is that an original thought, or did you get it from somewhere? It sounds like something that should be an eponymous law.

Eternal September.

Ah, yes! But that applied to the internet as a whole, rather than individual forums.

Re: Wisconsin has negotiated a dramatically scaled-back deal with Foxconn

#63

Post by luckylion »

altendo wrote: post #61

I am always struck at the amount that states and municipalities are willing to write off in order to attract companies. On one hand, I understand that companies want to take the best deal, but on the other hand, at times local governments are willing to give up so much money in tax revenue. I remember reading about the competitions for Google Fiber and Amazon's second HQ - it felt absurd the amount cities and states…

They don't have a choice between Amazon HQ or 50 medium sized new businesses, they often have Amazon HQ or nothing new. In that case, whatever they get is more than they have now, isn't it? New jobs that will bring other new businesses and local taxes etc are a bonus.

Re: Wisconsin has negotiated a dramatically scaled-back deal with Foxconn

#64

Post by danhak »

altendo wrote: post #61

I am always struck at the amount that states and municipalities are willing to write off in order to attract companies. On one hand, I understand that companies want to take the best deal, but on the other hand, at times local governments are willing to give up so much money in tax revenue. I remember reading about the competitions for Google Fiber and Amazon's second HQ - it felt absurd the amount cities and states…

They’re not really “giving up” anything if they attract a business that otherwise wouldn’t be there at all.

It’s still a net gain to have a major employer in your locale, along with all the other economic benefits and tax revenue that entails.

Re: Wisconsin has negotiated a dramatically scaled-back deal with Foxconn

#65

Post by jerry1979 »

Invictus0 wrote: post #2

Can someone explain to me why Foxconn didn't build the plant? Why would they go through the trouble of negotiating this deal, which ended up phenomenally in their favor, just to throw their hands in the air and walk away?

I think it shows the idea that "Americans can't do business well", and historically, doing business well has been one thing that Americans pride themselves on.

edit I should add that I believe that spreading that kind of message has geopolitical implications, and that groups might want to create that image for strategic reasons.

Re: Wisconsin has negotiated a dramatically scaled-back deal with Foxconn

#66

Post by Semaphor »

iainmerrick wrote: post #31
Semaphor wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Has the readership changed of HN or more specifically the commentariat? My personal impression is, that it got a lot worse since Covid, which I attribute to more people doing home office and/or having more free time. Any discussion forum that grows gets worse. But both my impressions and the 2nd part might be wrong.

Any discussion forum that grows gets worse. Huh! I hadn’t thought about it in such stark terms before, and I’d like to disagree, but there may be something in that. Is that an original thought, or did you get it from somewhere? It sounds like something that should be an eponymous law.

While it’s similar to Eternal September, it’s not exactly the same. It’s more that the more users there are, the more average things become. And I have a pretty low opinion of the average person.

It’s very visible on Reddit. Large subreddits have either very strict moderation, or they are low quality (I’m excepting picture subs here because they work differently)

Re: Wisconsin has negotiated a dramatically scaled-back deal with Foxconn

#67

Post by AlwaysRock »

danhak wrote: post #64
altendo wrote: post #61

I am always struck at the amount that states and municipalities are willing to write off in order to attract companies. On one hand, I understand that companies want to take the best deal, but on the other hand, at times local governments are willing to give up so much money in tax revenue. I remember reading about the competitions for Google Fiber and Amazon's second HQ - it felt absurd the amount cities and states…

They’re not really “giving up” anything if they attract a business that otherwise wouldn’t be there at all. It’s still a net gain to have a major employer in your locale, along with all the other economic benefits and tax revenue that entails.

It could be a net gain. Dropping a few thousand jobs and a factory into an area changes said area. Sometimes for the better. Sometimes not.

Re: Wisconsin has negotiated a dramatically scaled-back deal with Foxconn

#68

Post by rideontime »

1cvmask wrote: post #5
pen2l wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a nutshell, it mistook the nature of labor folks are used to here and its costs. Indeed wildly different from China and elsewhere.

It’s funny that they are downvoting you for stating the obvious no-brainer explanation. Just curious as I am seeing more of this on HN lately or is it just the Baader Meinhof phenomenon after I read someone else complain about the recent downvoting phenomenon for stating the obvious. Has the readership changed of HN or more specifically the commentariat?

The downvotes might be coming from people who are actually familiar with the situation and know that the "obvious no-brainer explanation" isn't the correct one.

Re: Wisconsin has negotiated a dramatically scaled-back deal with Foxconn

#69

Post by [deleted] »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #52
waterheater wrote: post #44

Do not trust Foxconn. I strongly believe they're playing a long-term game here. For example, the Foxconn plant is on a particular tract of land only partially within the Lake Michigan watershed. Anyone living within the watershed must return their water, and it must be cleaned up first. My understanding of the Great Lakes Compact is that Foxconn's land is one of legal ambiguity, that they may draw from Lake Michigan…

> but water is set to be more valuable than oil Desalination costs less than 0.1 cents per liter, so that sets a pretty firm price cap on the cost of water.

[deleted]

Re: Wisconsin has negotiated a dramatically scaled-back deal with Foxconn

#70

Post by jerry1979 »

ThaDood wrote: post #49
waterheater wrote: post #44

Do not trust Foxconn. I strongly believe they're playing a long-term game here. For example, the Foxconn plant is on a particular tract of land only partially within the Lake Michigan watershed. Anyone living within the watershed must return their water, and it must be cleaned up first. My understanding of the Great Lakes Compact is that Foxconn's land is one of legal ambiguity, that they may draw from Lake Michigan…

Not to be a naysayer, but do you have any sort of evidence to substantiate this claim? Any evidence of exceptions to laws regarding the usage of the watershed and lake with specific regards to Foxconn? Or any kind of indication that a bottling facility will be built up?

Not the parent, but there does seem to be a fair amount of legal shenanigans related to the Foxconn and the Great Lakes Compact.

https://www.wiscontext.org/what-foxconn-means-great-lakes-co...

Post reply on HN