5 ms·

> We were highly skeptical of this deal when it was announced Aug. 24. In the fullness of time, we’ve subjected it to closer scrutiny. And now it looks even wor

by breck 9y ago

> We were highly skeptical of this deal when it was announced Aug. 24. In the fullness of time, we’ve subjected it to closer scrutiny. And now it looks even worse. Oh great, so you carefully gathered data and put it into some sort of spreadsheet or something? Where's the spreadsheet? Where's the decision tree that shows this is a bad deal for Iowa? Oh, you don't have any of that actual diligence? You started with a conclusion and then wrote a bunch of B.S. with cherry picking and misleading statements throughout? This is why I flagged it.

privong 9y ago
> You started with a conclusion and then wrote a bunch of B.S. with cherry picking and misleading statements throughout? This is why I flagged it. Can you expand on this and point to some of the misleading statements and why you think they're misleading?
- cabaalis 9y ago
  I think it is misleading to say everything was in return for only 50 jobs. Data centers require huge investments in development, connectivity, energy supply. All of these things take people to make happen.
  - Caveman_Coder 9y ago
    This is true...the union halls will be busy with "travelers" to make up for the lack of local IBEW journeyman. There will be a flurry of economic activity during the construction phase but it will taper off eventually as the site completes construction. There will be continual economic activity for the contractors (electricians, pipe fitters, fire protection system technicians, etc.) that will service the data center.
- breck 9y ago
  Start at the very beginning: "State and local officials in Iowa have been working hard to rationalize their handout of more than $208 million in tax benefits to Apple" That sentenced is aimed to make it sound like the state is giving $208 million to Apple. That is false. If Apple is going to pay $300M in taxes to Iowa, then the state is getting $100M by having Apple come, and $0 if Apple goes to another state. "These corporate handouts might make sense if they spurred economic growth. They don’t." First, that sounds overly confident. And then to support it the author cites two cherry-picked articles. "Unless that expansion occurs...Apple is guaranteed to contribute only one-fifth as much as people were led to believe." Okay, where's your spreadsheet modeling the probability of the expansion occurring? Because if it's 80% likelihood, then the $100M figure is accurate. I don't say I disagree with the author's main claim that the system is flawed in that we have lots of government entities having to negotiate individually with bigger companies (I'd prefer a simpler tax system across the board in general), I'm just saying in this particular case the author has provided no detailed numerical justification why he is right, which leads me to believe he is in fact, likely wrong.
chmaynard 9y ago
This is an opinion piece, not a news article. I don't think it's appropriate to flag it. From the HN Guidelines: "If a story is spam or off-topic, flag it ... When you flag something, please don't also comment that you did."
- breck 9y ago
  Thanks for the comment. I believe the story was off-topic though, as defined in the guidelines by: "Ideological or political battle or talking points"
  - chmaynard 9y ago
    It's sort of a gray area because Apple doings are generally considered newsworthy by HN readers. The author is a columnist for the LA Times. Columnists, like newspaper editorial writers, almost never back up their arguments with data or cite sources. They don't leave their offices to dig up information in the field. I think of them more as pundits than journalists.

by breck 9y ago

privong 9y ago

> You started with a conclusion and then wrote a bunch of B.S. with cherry picking and misleading statements throughout? This is why I flagged it. Can you expand on this and point to some of the misleading statements and why you think they're misleading?

cabaalis 9y ago
I think it is misleading to say everything was in return for only 50 jobs. Data centers require huge investments in development, connectivity, energy supply. All of these things take people to make happen.
- Caveman_Coder 9y ago
  This is true...the union halls will be busy with "travelers" to make up for the lack of local IBEW journeyman. There will be a flurry of economic activity during the construction phase but it will taper off eventually as the site completes construction. There will be continual economic activity for the contractors (electricians, pipe fitters, fire protection system technicians, etc.) that will service the data center.
breck 9y ago
Start at the very beginning: "State and local officials in Iowa have been working hard to rationalize their handout of more than $208 million in tax benefits to Apple" That sentenced is aimed to make it sound like the state is giving $208 million to Apple. That is false. If Apple is going to pay $300M in taxes to Iowa, then the state is getting $100M by having Apple come, and $0 if Apple goes to another state. "These corporate handouts might make sense if they spurred economic growth. They don’t." First, that sounds overly confident. And then to support it the author cites two cherry-picked articles. "Unless that expansion occurs...Apple is guaranteed to contribute only one-fifth as much as people were led to believe." Okay, where's your spreadsheet modeling the probability of the expansion occurring? Because if it's 80% likelihood, then the $100M figure is accurate. I don't say I disagree with the author's main claim that the system is flawed in that we have lots of government entities having to negotiate individually with bigger companies (I'd prefer a simpler tax system across the board in general), I'm just saying in this particular case the author has provided no detailed numerical justification why he is right, which leads me to believe he is in fact, likely wrong.

chmaynard 9y ago

This is an opinion piece, not a news article. I don't think it's appropriate to flag it. From the HN Guidelines: "If a story is spam or off-topic, flag it ... When you flag something, please don't also comment that you did."

breck 9y ago
Thanks for the comment. I believe the story was off-topic though, as defined in the guidelines by: "Ideological or political battle or talking points"
- chmaynard 9y ago
  It's sort of a gray area because Apple doings are generally considered newsworthy by HN readers. The author is a columnist for the LA Times. Columnists, like newspaper editorial writers, almost never back up their arguments with data or cite sources. They don't leave their offices to dig up information in the field. I think of them more as pundits than journalists.