WI governor proposes 3B$ subsidy, waves all state EPA for Taiwanese

>Walker, who’s expected to run for a third term next year, took to the air on July 29 in a campaign-style airplane tour to make the case that the entire state would benefit from a plant three-times the size of the Pentagon.

>“There’s a whole lot of people out there scrambling to try and come up with a reason not to like this,” Walker said in Eau Claire. “I can tell you, that’s fine but I think they can go suck lemons. The rest of us are going to cheer and figure out how we get this thing going forward.”

>Environmental groups are among those with reasons not to like his plan. It would allow Foxconn, without permits, to discharge dredged materials, fill wetlands, change the course of streams, build artificial bodies of water that connect with natural waterways and build on a riverbed or lakebed.

>Foxconn would also be exempt from having to create a state environmental impact statement, something required for much smaller projects.

>“Building economic strength, creating jobs, and protecting Wisconsin’s vulnerable natural resources are not mutually exclusive endeavors," Kerry Schumann, executive director of the Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters, said in a prepared statement.

>"We all love Wisconsin." she continued. "We want Wisconsin’s economy to be as healthy as its drinking water, air, lakes, and rivers.

>"We were surprised by Gov. Walker’s radical exemptions for Foxconn. A rollback of such an extreme nature is unnecessary. Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters asks legislators to get the job done right — protect their constituents’ public health and water resources by rejecting the sweeping anti-conservation exemptions in the Foxconn bill.”

>The location of the new plant might also become a troublesome part of the deal. Although the exact location has not been determined, Foxconn is focusing its search on sites in Racine and Kenosha counties.

>“Gov. Walker has some explaining to do to taxpayers in every corner of the state who will foot the bill for this deal on the Illinois border,” said Scot Ross, director of the liberal activist group One Wisconsin Now.

>Walker might have anticipated that objection in choosing to take his campaign-style rollout of the deal to La Crosse, Eau Claire and Wausau.

>Lobbyist Bill McCoshen, who helped negotiate economic development deals in Gov. Tommy Thompson’s administration, said bipartisan support for the project should help ease the bill’s passage.

>Democratic U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin attended President Donald Trump’s White House announcement of the deal, and two-time Walker challenger Democratic Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett praised it at a signing event on July 28. Other Democratic lawmakers have spoken in support.

>University of Wisconsin-Madison agricultural economist Steve Deller said that based on what he knows of the deal, the state structured it in the most responsible way possible.

>“It seems as though, if you’re going to do this, this is the way to go about it,” he said.

>One of the harshest critics within the Legislature is Democratic state Sen. Dave Hansen, who represents Green Bay. He said moving quickly on the $3 billion incentive package would be “a serious case of legislative malpractice.”

>Hansen expressed concerns that Foxconn would replace jobs at the plant with robots, as it has done at other facilities.

>“Before the governor and legislators mortgage the future of Wisconsin taxpayers, possibly for decades, they should think very carefully about the long-term needs of the state rather than their own re-election,” Hansen said.

>A group of four Republican lawmakers from northeast Wisconsin pushed back against Hansen’s claims.

>Rep. David Steffen, of Green Bay, said there will be countless economic benefits across the state. Walker’s administration has estimated that there will be 22,000 other new jobs in construction and other associated fields thanks to the project.

>“To think that someone would actively cheer against this type of economic growth is insane,” Steffen said.

>[This story has been updated to include response from the Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters.]

>blowing 3 billion to send directly to chinese pockets so we can have max net job loss and more outsourced labor once automation kicks in
Really glad our president is handing out all these stable jobs for free and not sucking any foreign country's cock, and I'm also glad a couple of retarded hippies posing as politicians will take all the blame when this blows up in their faces

At least liberals are crying over shit that doesn't matter as usual

conservatives can stop complaining about big government and globalism now

>>163372
>At least liberals are crying over shit that doesn't matter as usual

I want the US to be wealthy and competitive and have the best infrastructure. But while those are priorities, is it really so bad to take into consideration the long-term suffering of all living things and loss of irreplaceable biodiversity? Does the international commerce have to become a race to the bottom of standards?

I get that China has shit EPA so people wanna make stuff there. But I think we should encourage them to adopt reasonable standards or just stop buying cheap electronics from them. We'll buy more from countries that have consistent and properly enforced EPA, and pay a little more for handsets and computers. Maybe we'll get the newest stuff a few months later than we otherwise would. And in exchange our ecosystems don't go to shit like in China. Humanity can make neat electronics but we can't ever rebuild destroyed wetlands, they're far more complex than we can conceivably engineer.

But we'll also achieve greater autarky, not importing as much of Chinese electronics, which is supposedly important to Trump supporters. Is that so terrible?