Meanwhile ‘Medicaid for all’ will be any better for the taxpayers . That ship (fiscal responsibility)has sailed long ago. At least new jobs are being made. I am happy.
New jobs that make 40-60k but cost the tax payers 231k each before the latest increase. The Medicaid for all is the smartest idea for medicine ever. Medical Health controlled by Wall Street has been a disaster. When people don’t have insurance, they don’t get checkups and tend to wait until they are sick enough to go to the hospital. Keep in mind these are only the working poor to lower middle class citizens. The poorer or not working are covered and the richer can afford coverage. When simple illnesses are not treated they become chronic and are much more expensive to treat. They also mean more hospital visits that they can’t pay for. Guess who pays for this...Tax Payers.
So please ignore the hype. A single payer system would save an enormous amount of money and make us healthier at the same time. The lie being sold is to maintain the corporate profits that come from chronic disease treatment. There’s a reason there has been no desire to cure anything I’m the last 40 years.
Years back US Air (now part of American) was located in Pittsburgh where it was founded and used the Pittsburgh airport as its hub. Soon after they hounded the government to build them a nice new airport -- which it did.
And that airport was state the art and really cool. In addition to all its modern tech features they guaranteed US Air exclusive control of 90% of the gates in order to lock out competition from other airlines.
So, after Pittsburgh spent billions on them and restricted their competition, what did US AIr do? They moved to Charlotte and left Pittsburgh high and dry...
And, for their trouble, what did local tax payers get? Debt and poor air service.
Added: Perhaps the moral is the same as what was part of the reason for the Great Recession: Banks provided cheap mortgages to unscrupulous borrowers with little or no down payment required. Then, since the borrowers had no skin in the game, as soon as interest rates made they mortgage unfavorable, they just packed up and left.
... So, will FoxConn be required to put some of its skin in the game and, is it enough?
I don't think I would necessarily want to do business with any organization that named itself "Fox+Con". Neither of those words have much association with honesty and integrity.
Somehow 9to5mac was able to write its version of this story without mentioning Apple. :-)
Foxconn is a suppler to Apple and many other IT Kit sellers. The move by Foxconn to Wisconsin does not as I understand it, directly involve any product supply to Apple but it is of interest to us as it shows that at least bits of the Apple product supply chain can be moved to the USA. So not mentioning Apple is no surprise to me.
No idea if the Wall Street Journal is just confused or has an actual source but they're reporting Foxconn will now build smallish LCD screens for Apple iPhones and such at the Wisconsin plant rather than the large displays they had originally been discussing.
Nothing wrong with business friendly deals, but when the state of Wisconsin was selling this as some big boon for jobs generation, they were either fooling themselves or trying to fool the general population.
ROTFL! Love this facetious post from another blog site discussing the Foxconn deal:
" I offer to set up shop in Wisconsin. I promise 1 job, which I realize is only 1/3000th of the jobs that Foxconn is promising. I also suggest that the number of jobs I create may grow substantially - my wife or kids might get jobs in Wisconsin. I will also invest in infrastructure, buy buying some land and building a house. That's hundreds of thousands in capital investments per employee. Wow!
But here's the kicker: I will charge WIsconsin 25% LESS than what Foxconn is getting per employee. My deal's savings to the citizens of Wisconsin is tremendous. Plus, ALL of that Wisconsin investment goes to US nationals, and not a Foreign-owned company.
MY DEAL FAR EXCEEDS FOXCONNS!
Wisconsin: To start, please send me that check for $750000 and we'll get this deal going within the next 24 months. I'll even deposit your money in a US-based bank! Try that, Foxconn! And I'm sure I can find 3000 other friends who will take this same deal, making my program significantly more affordable and more effective than Wisconsin's Foxconn deal.
PS - Of course, if it doesn't work out for me, I reserve the right to wind down my operations in Wisconsin."
Years back US Air (now part of American) was located in Pittsburgh where it was founded and used the Pittsburgh airport as its hub. Soon after they hounded the government to build them a nice new airport -- which it did.
And that airport was state the art and really cool. In addition to all its modern tech features they guaranteed US Air exclusive control of 90% of the gates in order to lock out competition from other airlines.
So, after Pittsburgh spent billions on them and restricted their competition, what did US AIr do? They moved to Charlotte and left Pittsburgh high and dry...
And, for their trouble, what did local tax payers get? Debt and poor air service.
Added: Perhaps the moral is the same as what was part of the reason for the Great Recession: Banks provided cheap mortgages to unscrupulous borrowers with little or no down payment required. Then, since the borrowers had no skin in the game, as soon as interest rates made they mortgage unfavorable, they just packed up and left.
... So, will FoxConn be required to put some of its skin in the game and, is it enough?
Unfortunately, I think stuff similar to this happens all the time. A company gets a big tax deal to come in and as soon as its gone, they pick up and go elsewhere to get another tax deal. Unless they're a company such as Apple, some don't really care where their headquarters are as long as they can save money being based there its fine with them and moving everyone must cost less in the long run than sticking it out and paying more for taxes.
How can there be a larger burden on taxpayers than they have already? Is Foxconn getting a pay out in addition to their exemptions? Not sure I follow the logic here. They will be employing thousands of people in different capacities, who will all be paying taxes.
Did you read the article? It doesn't seem like it.
In short, these are new incentives for Foxconn, above and beyond what the state pitched. The costs to the state are continuing to climb.
Some seem to think Foxconn and other foreign manufacturers should choose to open factories in the U.S. out of the goodness of their hearts? States like Wisconsin are desperate for jobs and the boost to the economy those jobs bring. Will increased economic activity and tax revenues offset the incentives being offered. In other words will the incentives pay for themselves over time? I have a hard time understanding the two-faced logic from we Americans. We say we want well paying manufacturing jobs back in the U.S. but when a company like Foxconn decides to do just that we caterwaul about the tax incentives they negotiate to locate here. Has anyone studied the cost/benefit to the state for doing this. Seems like 13,000 jobs is a no brainer as people with jobs tend not to use social services as much people without jobs. What about the decrease in state spending on social welfare 13,000 jobs will cause?
This will this will probably lower Apples cost and thereby increase their profits. That way, more money goes to Wall Street where it can be invested productively.
I'd bet within 5 years a large percentage of those jobs will be automated away. You know Foxconn will not be creating a brand new facility without maximizing automation. This isn't Asia where labor is relatively cheap so the motivation to do so is even higher. So there will be some nice jobs building the plant, optimizing production and after that the need for labor goes way down.
In a few years labor unions will be dead as well as living wages to many Americans t\so this plant will operate the same way as it has in China with very low wage workers and no union to fight for them.
How can there be a larger burden on taxpayers than they have already? Is Foxconn getting a pay out in addition to their exemptions? Not sure I follow the logic here. They will be employing thousands of people in different capacities, who will all be paying taxes.
Did you read the article? It doesn't seem like it.
In short, these are new incentives for Foxconn, above and beyond what the state pitched. The costs to the state are continuing to climb.
Some seem to think Foxconn and other foreign manufacturers should choose to open factories in the U.S. out of the goodness of their hearts? States like Wisconsin are desperate for jobs and the boost to the economy those jobs bring. Will increased economic activity and tax revenues offset the incentives being offered. In other words will the incentives pay for themselves over time? I have a hard time understanding the two-faced logic from we Americans. We say we want well paying manufacturing jobs back in the U.S. but when a company like Foxconn decides to do just that we caterwaul about the tax incentives they negotiate to locate here. Has anyone studied the cost/benefit to the state for doing this. Seems like 13,000 jobs is a no brainer as people with jobs tend not to use social services as much people without jobs. What about the decrease in state spending on social welfare 13,000 jobs will cause?
Good god, make a better point than that. There is no costing that makes this come on top: none.
The job market right now is overheated, extremely few of those people would be on welfare. You know that yet pulled that out of your ass.
Put some actual numbers behind your "feels" or don't comment at all.
Kinda convenient you don't see that money as corporate welfare either.... Cause it sure isn't an investment hmmm.
Cause an investment is costed with an actual payback period and not just a lot of wishful thinking and hope it will all turn well (or at least get us elected...) entered on the balance sheet.
How can there be a larger burden on taxpayers than they have already? Is Foxconn getting a pay out in addition to their exemptions? Not sure I follow the logic here. They will be employing thousands of people in different capacities, who will all be paying taxes.
Did you read the article? It doesn't seem like it.
In short, these are new incentives for Foxconn, above and beyond what the state pitched. The costs to the state are continuing to climb.
Some seem to think Foxconn and other foreign manufacturers should choose to open factories in the U.S. out of the goodness of their hearts? States like Wisconsin are desperate for jobs and the boost to the economy those jobs bring. Will increased economic activity and tax revenues offset the incentives being offered. In other words will the incentives pay for themselves over time? I have a hard time understanding the two-faced logic from we Americans. We say we want well paying manufacturing jobs back in the U.S. but when a company like Foxconn decides to do just that we caterwaul about the tax incentives they negotiate to locate here. Has anyone studied the cost/benefit to the state for doing this. Seems like 13,000 jobs is a no brainer as people with jobs tend not to use social services as much people without jobs. What about the decrease in state spending on social welfare 13,000 jobs will cause?
When we say we want companies to open or keep their businesses here, why must it infer we’re cool with corporate welfare? Why can’t businesses simply operate, at a profit, and leave it at that?
If the cost of corporate welfare is greater than the state income generated, it’s a loss to the citizens, period. My state did the math of film credits and decided we were giving up money for things like roads and schools in order to help Hollywood make more profit, so we ended the program.
Meanwhile ‘Medicaid for all’ will be any better for the taxpayers . That ship (fiscal responsibility)has sailed long ago. At least new jobs are being made. I am happy.
New jobs that make 40-60k but cost the tax payers 231k each before the latest increase. The Medicaid for all is the smartest idea for medicine ever. Medical Health controlled by Wall Street has been a disaster. When people don’t have insurance, they don’t get checkups and tend to wait until they are sick enough to go to the hospital. Keep in mind these are only the working poor to lower middle class citizens. The poorer or not working are covered and the richer can afford coverage. When simple illnesses are not treated they become chronic and are much more expensive to treat. They also mean more hospital visits that they can’t pay for. Guess who pays for this...Tax Payers.
So please ignore the hype. A single payer system would save an enormous amount of money and make us healthier at the same time. The lie being sold is to maintain the corporate profits that come from chronic disease treatment. There’s a reason there has been no desire to cure anything I’m the last 40 years.
Seems like this is just a big transfer of $$$ from taxpayers to shareholders. Would this plant have been built without huge financial incentives? I seriously doubt it...
For that exact reason I've always thought that these kind of deals are a bad idea. If the project does not make sense without a public subsidy, then dumping public money into it does not make it better. They always talk about X thousands of jobs, which never come to pass unless you count the people who worked one day as contractors during construction. They talk about all the tax revenue, that never seems to pan out.
Maybe someone can help me out here. How is 3B in incentives/tax credits a huge risk when a foreign company will be investing 10B in the plant? Esp when so much of those incentives go towards improving the infrastructure? To all the Nervous Nellies in this thread.. is foxconn going to take the improved roads and infrastructure with them when they abandon these *doomed* plants in 5 years? Are they going to dismantle the plants piecemeal and ship them back across the Pacific? Are they going to retrospectively confiscate the wages that were paid to the workers that built the plants, that built the infrastructure, or that worked in the plants themselves?
Foxconn invests 10B.. and a large part of 3B incentives are being used to improve the state's infrastructure, jobs are created, economy is stimulated.. how is this risky, again??
I've never been a big fan of math, but I believe 10-3=7, which means there is a 7B risk for Foxconn, and a substantial investment in the state. Sounds like a pretty damn good deal to me, particularity since much of that 3B in incentives are going directly into improving the state.
This will this will probably lower Apples cost and thereby increase their profits. That way, more money goes to Wall Street where it can be invested productively.
must be nice to live in a fantasy world.
If you haven’t figured it out yet this @Nunzy character is actually a sacastic troll. His/her/its over-the-top fanboy comments are sarcastic gibberish intended to make eyes roll. @Nunzy is in reality mocking Apple and its fans.
Comments
So please ignore the hype. A single payer system would save an enormous amount of money and make us healthier at the same time.
The lie being sold is to maintain the corporate profits that come from chronic disease treatment. There’s a reason there has been no desire to cure anything I’m the last 40 years.
$$$...Chronic disease is big money 💴💰
The numbers don't add up. The environmental costs are terrible, and the state will be left with a labor deficit.
I know. I live here.
$231,000 per job is the number if Foxconn is 100% able to attain its targets. More like $275000 per job.
So, after Pittsburgh spent billions on them and restricted their competition, what did US AIr do? They moved to Charlotte and left Pittsburgh high and dry...
" I offer to set up shop in Wisconsin. I promise 1 job, which I realize is only 1/3000th of the jobs that Foxconn is promising. I also suggest that the number of jobs I create may grow substantially - my wife or kids might get jobs in Wisconsin. I will also invest in infrastructure, buy buying some land and building a house. That's hundreds of thousands in capital investments per employee. Wow!
But here's the kicker: I will charge WIsconsin 25% LESS than what Foxconn is getting per employee. My deal's savings to the citizens of Wisconsin is tremendous. Plus, ALL of that Wisconsin investment goes to US nationals, and not a Foreign-owned company.
MY DEAL FAR EXCEEDS FOXCONNS!
Wisconsin: To start, please send me that check for $750000 and we'll get this deal going within the next 24 months. I'll even deposit your money in a US-based bank! Try that, Foxconn! And I'm sure I can find 3000 other friends who will take this same deal, making my program significantly more affordable and more effective than Wisconsin's Foxconn deal.
PS - Of course, if it doesn't work out for me, I reserve the right to wind down my operations in Wisconsin."
In a few years labor unions will be dead as well as living wages to many Americans t\so this plant will operate the same way as it has in China with very low wage workers and no union to fight for them.
If the cost of corporate welfare is greater than the state income generated, it’s a loss to the citizens, period. My state did the math of film credits and decided we were giving up money for things like roads and schools in order to help Hollywood make more profit, so we ended the program.