Live data from Hacker News

Wisconsin has negotiated a dramatically scaled-back deal with Foxconn

arstechnica.com

111–120 of 196 posts

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

#111
post #33

There's a great Reply All podcast about local politics in the town where this plant is to be built. Beware, it's slightly infuriating. https://gimletmedia.com/shows/reply-all/wbhjwd

I grew up in Racine County (which contains Mount Pleasant). Let me tell you, SE WI is a strange place. Caught between so many sensibilities and hit so, so hard by economic shifts of the last two decades. I think it suffers, like many places in the American Midwest, the phenomenon of an historically working-class population, who, a few decades ago, would have organized for labor and other rights very vocally and outwardly, but who now are radicalized to the right for no understandable reason.

I still like to believe that most of the people around there are good and mean well, but it gets harder and harder every day to believe the willful ignorance they possess of economic, societal, and cultural issues at hand, here and now, will fade. But there's hope. Younger leaders are working their way into local government (hi Greta!), especially over in the formal City of Racine. There's hope that Racine and Racine County might be a leader of progressive values in the area.

As an aside, I think there's oodles of opportunity in the SE WI area for younger folks. It really is a beautiful place, is near to Chicago and Milwaukee, and is inexpensive. You get all four seasons, for better or worse. I think it's better than SF's summer and grey-chillier-summer. Some joke that the four seasons are winter, construction, construction, and construction, but that's an exaggeration. Anyway, I think an influx of more diverse people in background and ideology could really stimulate an area like SE WI. Add to that making it worth young people staying around instead of fleeing to the coasts, and suddenly Racine can be a really cool place.

This whole Foxconn thing just makes me so sad, and angry.

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

#113
post #50

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…

Not sure why you're downvoted because this is what Trump has done through most of his life. While POTUS, his healthcare plan was 2 weeks away, his infrastructure plan was 2 weeks away, the wall - I guess a few feet were built.

Great at marketing, terrible at execution.

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

#114
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.

It looks that way in the end, with no other alternative but to yield, but at some point there were many options, that is how the town, city, county or state came to be in the first place. The problem is that they gave so many concessions just to get a short term political advantage, that real productive and sustainable jobs couldn't compete with corruption.

Now because of the giant snowball made from all the little policy mistakes that sounded insignificant at first, or ever worse, sounded sound! I mean who wouldn't want high paying jobs that barely require any training? the only option in many places is to keep the charade, but at some point politics need to give way to real production, and that only means real competition.

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

#115
The absolute hilarity of HN obsession with 'both siding' every story and going back to see how it unraveled over the years.

on Jan 22, 2017 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13457176

on Jan 16, 2018 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16163558

on April 14, 2018 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16839542

on Oct 29, 2018 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18328772

on April 12, 2020 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22850723

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

#116

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?

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…

I believe you're remembering this story:

https://www.theverge.com/21507966/foxconn-empty-factories-wi...

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

#117
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…

> local governments are willing to give up so much money in tax revenue

It's literally a race to the bottom, and for some reason people are eager to win!

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

#118
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Not arguing at all--- you got a link for those costs? I always thought desalination was cost prohibitive. I'd be thrilled to know it was 0.1 cents per liter (seriously)!

A web search for 'desalination cost' will easily confirm this for you.

e.g. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00119...

"current [published in 2008] large-scale desalination plants are capable of producing water in the range of $0.50–$2.00/m3"

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

#119

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…

I believe you're remembering this story: https://www.theverge.com/21507966/foxconn-empty-factories-wi...

Yes, that does look like the one I was remembering.

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

#120
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…

you cant "give up" tax revenue you haven't collected
Post reply on HN