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

101–110 of 196 posts

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

#101

Post by fnord77 »

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…

it's a pretty low risk gamble for the politicians and there's almost always a reward for them even if the deal falls through.

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

#102

Post by superkuh »

KZZ wrote: post #82
jcranmer wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I can tell, Foxconn never actually intended to build the plant. (I'm getting a lot of this from an interesting long-form article on the history of this deal; unfortunately, I don't remember where I found this article, sorry). Essentially, Foxconn thought that the Wisconsin deal would work more typically as its deals in China went. Glad-hand the government officials, get sweetheart deals on land and investme…

For information, the plant has been built. The building is there, just empty.

Nope. The plant that was promised was never built. They did build some storage warehouses and started a propaganda program where they hired dozens to hundreds of locals to come in to the warehouses, sit around, and do nothing to appear like they were doing something.

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

#103

Post by 34679 »

dntrkv wrote: post #80
34679 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're giving up fairness and equality- equal treatment under the law. If the entire state wasn't completely devoid of any entities looking to compete in that space, it probably is now. Anyone making LCD panels in Wisconsin suddenly has a $80,000,000 greater financial gap from their largest competitor. If the lower taxes are good for creating jobs at a net gain to the local economy, then the lower rate should be app…

> If the lower taxes are good for creating jobs at net gain to the local economy, then the lower rate should be applied equally among all similarly taxed entities. I agree with the premise here, but in reality, you can see that won't actually work. You have existing businesses in an area paying a certain amount in taxes. You want to attract a new major business. If you lower your taxes for all the businesses in hopes…

I believe luring in corporate giants with payouts collected from existing businesses is short-sighted and wrong both morally and economically. There are existing businesses in Wisconsin, and the way I see it, their current collective tax burden is excessive to the tune of at least $80,000,000.

The government is essentially running around to all of the Davids, collecting a few dollars from each to fund the construction of a tower that puts the Goliath beyond the reach of David's sling. I don't want a government that builds mountains for the largest companies while relegating small businesses to the trenches. I want a government that does everything possible to keep the battlefield level. Innovation rarely comes from the established giants.

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

#104

Post by analog31 »

AlexandrB wrote: post #13
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.

This is a take that's wildly generous to FoxConn, painting them as the "aww schucks" kinda honest guys that just didn't know about the challenges of the US labor market. The alternate take is that the whole deal was made in bad faith and FoxConn was hoping to collect subsidies and line its pockets. This version of events has some precedent[1]. It's especially hard to believe that FoxConn didn't know about US labor wh…

It's not unprecedented that someone who should know better, and has the best advisors in town, is blinded by their preconceptions about a country and its people. It's lost us a few wars.

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

#105

Post by CydeWeys »

iainmerrick wrote: post #62
CydeWeys wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eternal September.

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

It does apply to specific discussion venues. Originally it was about Usenet groups, not the Internet as a whole. It applies broadly to any forum-like venue.

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

#106

Post by hobs »

dntrkv wrote: post #80
34679 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're giving up fairness and equality- equal treatment under the law. If the entire state wasn't completely devoid of any entities looking to compete in that space, it probably is now. Anyone making LCD panels in Wisconsin suddenly has a $80,000,000 greater financial gap from their largest competitor. If the lower taxes are good for creating jobs at a net gain to the local economy, then the lower rate should be app…

> If the lower taxes are good for creating jobs at net gain to the local economy, then the lower rate should be applied equally among all similarly taxed entities. I agree with the premise here, but in reality, you can see that won't actually work. You have existing businesses in an area paying a certain amount in taxes. You want to attract a new major business. If you lower your taxes for all the businesses in hopes…

There's an old phrase "burning down your house for the nails" - so yes, we can blame these places for using them.

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

#107

Post by rectang »

KingOfCoders wrote: post #26
neartheplain wrote: post #7

The massive downward revision of this deal, and of Foxconn's commitment to create jobs in Wisconsin, is hardly a surprise. Foxconn has a history of reneging on promises to build factories, as was widely reported when this deal was first made in 2017: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/foxconns-history-of-broken... https://boingboing.net/2017/08/09/potemkin-factories.html https://urbanmilwaukee.com/2017/08/20/op-ed-the…

It helped Trump, mission accomplished.

The political aspect is central to the Wisconsin/Foxconn story, but by naming "Trump", or "Republicans", or a certain Wisconsin governor explicitly it guarantees that the discussion descends into a partisan flamewar.

Consider instead something along the lines of "it achieved the desired political benefit for certain politicians". By keeping it abstract, even if it can be deduced who you're referring to, the discussion can remain less adversarial.

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

#108

Post by function_seven »

phailhaus wrote: post #58
luckylion wrote: post #4

Is it just me or has it become more common for journalists to write about decreases by saying "X-fold" or "x times"? I always get confused, I find it much easier to say "by 97%".

It's because percentages are more misleading for humans than "x-times". 95% and 97% sound very close, right? They're not. 95% is a 20x reduction, while 97% is a 30x reduction. Percentages create a singularity at 100, which is why the effect is more pronounced the closer you get to 100. It's just like how saying something is "95% effective" sounds very convincing until you realize that's a 1-in-20 failure rate.

My favorite example of this were the labels on lunch meats back in the day. They'd say things like, "97% Fat Free!", or "98% Fat Free!".

So one of them had 50% more fat than the other, but they both look pretty close to "Fat Free"

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

#109

Post by vmchale »

fnord77 wrote: post #101
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…

it's a pretty low risk gamble for the politicians and there's almost always a reward for them even if the deal falls through.

In this case because Scott Walker lost re-election.

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

#110

Post by silexia »

api wrote: post #50
billyhoffman wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did it? His “8th wonder of the world nonsense” was after he was elected in 2017, and Trump then lost Wisconsin in 2020

Exactly. People like Trump have careers that resemble repeatedly pumped-and-dumped penny stocks. They rise and fall, rise and fall, rise and fall. Basically what they do is build themselves up through something like a social capital pyramid scheme. This eventually collapses when there are no greater fools and when all their promises fail, but the good ones already have the next grift in progress before the first one…

Brilliant comment, I think we are going to see this in the future too with Trump. He has gone quiet for now, but he's going to come back and make far more money than he was making prior to the presidency.
Post reply on HN