4 ms·

ESID, but some rural areas really, really need the jobs that would be created a lot more than the sentiments of a handful of people who don't want to move. In s

ESID, but some rural areas really, really need the jobs that would be created a lot more than the sentiments of a handful of people who don't want to move. In such cases it's in the community's best interest to displace holdouts in order to grow the local economy.

kelnos 9y ago
If it's a rural area, surely they can build the factor in a place where they don't have to destroy people's homes, no? Even if the state/county has to build new roads, power lines, water mains, etc. to support a new locale, seems like that would be better than taking people's land away. I'm sympathetic to the idea of using eminent domain to take land for public projects, but for a private company? Nope. That's simply insane.
- dahdum 9y ago
  Impeding, or just not encouraging, job growth in rural communities devastates them far more than rare eminent domain issues. Building all new infrastructure can quickly turn an endeavor unprofitable, resulting in it not being done at all. There is a balance, but I favor the use of eminent domain to expand economic opportunities to rural areas, as long as the buyouts are above market rate. Those that are affected are often the wealthier and older homeowners, not the struggling young families that most need help.
  - KozmoNau7 9y ago
    Foxconn is not an "economic opportunity", it's a grey faceless corporate leech, which will suck the life out of the community.
    - briandear 9y ago
      Don’t be ridiculous. Humans are going to work there. Humans are going to earn money there. And “a corporate leech?” You mean a company that actually builds stuff? Without this factory, what would you have the local residents do, get high on opiates or meth? Government are the leeches.
      - facetube 9y ago
        Who will be held accountable if the predicted return on investment is not seen?
      - KozmoNau7 9y ago
        If you consider $14/hr for factory work acceptable. I certainly don't, especially not when you consider Foxconn's history of working conditions. I call it desperate people getting exploited.
  - candiodari 9y ago
    That must be why Foxconn factories have -extensive- barbed wire on top of their buildings to prevent employee suicides. Second, can we please agree this is NOT eminent domain. This is about government corruption to lower the cost of the eminent domain action to follow. Eminent domain would be that the government buys the house at market price, so that the people can buy a reasonably similar house somewhere else. That would, of course, satisfy all your objections. The government is working to destroy these houses without compensation, so they can save something like perhaps $5 million (maybe not even that) while throwing these people into the street. People are not opposed to this because their opinion is that these homeowners should be allowed to block economic development of a large area. People are opposed to this because they do not believe throwing these people into the street to save the government and the biggest corporation on the planet a small amount of money is acceptable. The government should be forced to pay as normal under eminent domain rules, and it should extract that money from the company wishing to settle there.
  - facetube 9y ago
    This is all very easy when it's "them". An HN user looks from afar and decide what's better for those rural folk. Those undeveloped types. The basket. The reality: the government is attempting to take these peoples' property, ultimately under threat of force, in order to transfer it to a for-profit corporation in violation of state law. It does not meet the legal requirements for blight or for eminent domain under Wisconsin law. It is illegal. Watch someone try to illegally bulldoze your own home you paid for and built, making you incur substantial moving expenses and disruption, destroying a place where you've built memories – all in exchange for a bunch of Foxconn temp agency jobs – and then tell me how you feel.
    - dahdum 9y ago
      I grew up in a rural area, and I’ve seen first hand the destruction that lack of economic opportunities does to the next generation. I’m not looking from afar - my sentiment is shared by many, if not most, in those communities.
      - facetube 9y ago
        Then find a way to do it that's legal. The scheme described in the article is illegal, and illegal activity is the most short-sighted way possible to economic growth. The area is prima facie not blighted as described by Wisconsin statute, and is therefore prohibited from being subjected to eminent domain for purposes of transfer to a private corporation.
  - mikeash 9y ago
    It strikes me as more than a little Orwellian to describe basic respect for property rights as "impeding job growth." What next, failing to plead guilty in court is impeding justice?
test6554 9y ago
The whole point of property rights is that it only matters who owns the property, not who needs it.
- closeparen 9y ago
  Property isn't worth much when it's not reachable by roads.
KozmoNau7 9y ago
Those jobs are $14/hr, according to the article. Exploitation, in other words.
- briandear 9y ago
  That is a very inexpensive area. Racine isn’t San Francisco. You can buy a house for $100,000 there.
  - KozmoNau7 9y ago
    That doesn't change the fact that it's shit pay for factory work. Foxconn are exploiting desperate people.

kelnos 9y ago

If it's a rural area, surely they can build the factor in a place where they don't have to destroy people's homes, no? Even if the state/county has to build new roads, power lines, water mains, etc. to support a new locale, seems like that would be better than taking people's land away. I'm sympathetic to the idea of using eminent domain to take land for public projects, but for a private company? Nope. That's simply insane.

dahdum 9y ago
Impeding, or just not encouraging, job growth in rural communities devastates them far more than rare eminent domain issues. Building all new infrastructure can quickly turn an endeavor unprofitable, resulting in it not being done at all. There is a balance, but I favor the use of eminent domain to expand economic opportunities to rural areas, as long as the buyouts are above market rate. Those that are affected are often the wealthier and older homeowners, not the struggling young families that most need help.
- KozmoNau7 9y ago
  Foxconn is not an "economic opportunity", it's a grey faceless corporate leech, which will suck the life out of the community.
  - briandear 9y ago
    Don’t be ridiculous. Humans are going to work there. Humans are going to earn money there. And “a corporate leech?” You mean a company that actually builds stuff? Without this factory, what would you have the local residents do, get high on opiates or meth? Government are the leeches.
    - facetube 9y ago
      Who will be held accountable if the predicted return on investment is not seen?
    - KozmoNau7 9y ago
      If you consider $14/hr for factory work acceptable. I certainly don't, especially not when you consider Foxconn's history of working conditions. I call it desperate people getting exploited.
- candiodari 9y ago
  That must be why Foxconn factories have -extensive- barbed wire on top of their buildings to prevent employee suicides. Second, can we please agree this is NOT eminent domain. This is about government corruption to lower the cost of the eminent domain action to follow. Eminent domain would be that the government buys the house at market price, so that the people can buy a reasonably similar house somewhere else. That would, of course, satisfy all your objections. The government is working to destroy these houses without compensation, so they can save something like perhaps $5 million (maybe not even that) while throwing these people into the street. People are not opposed to this because their opinion is that these homeowners should be allowed to block economic development of a large area. People are opposed to this because they do not believe throwing these people into the street to save the government and the biggest corporation on the planet a small amount of money is acceptable. The government should be forced to pay as normal under eminent domain rules, and it should extract that money from the company wishing to settle there.
- facetube 9y ago
  This is all very easy when it's "them". An HN user looks from afar and decide what's better for those rural folk. Those undeveloped types. The basket. The reality: the government is attempting to take these peoples' property, ultimately under threat of force, in order to transfer it to a for-profit corporation in violation of state law. It does not meet the legal requirements for blight or for eminent domain under Wisconsin law. It is illegal. Watch someone try to illegally bulldoze your own home you paid for and built, making you incur substantial moving expenses and disruption, destroying a place where you've built memories – all in exchange for a bunch of Foxconn temp agency jobs – and then tell me how you feel.
  - dahdum 9y ago
    I grew up in a rural area, and I’ve seen first hand the destruction that lack of economic opportunities does to the next generation. I’m not looking from afar - my sentiment is shared by many, if not most, in those communities.
    - facetube 9y ago
      Then find a way to do it that's legal. The scheme described in the article is illegal, and illegal activity is the most short-sighted way possible to economic growth. The area is prima facie not blighted as described by Wisconsin statute, and is therefore prohibited from being subjected to eminent domain for purposes of transfer to a private corporation.
- mikeash 9y ago
  It strikes me as more than a little Orwellian to describe basic respect for property rights as "impeding job growth." What next, failing to plead guilty in court is impeding justice?

test6554 9y ago

The whole point of property rights is that it only matters who owns the property, not who needs it.

closeparen 9y ago
Property isn't worth much when it's not reachable by roads.

KozmoNau7 9y ago

Those jobs are $14/hr, according to the article. Exploitation, in other words.

briandear 9y ago
That is a very inexpensive area. Racine isn’t San Francisco. You can buy a house for $100,000 there.
- KozmoNau7 9y ago
  That doesn't change the fact that it's shit pay for factory work. Foxconn are exploiting desperate people.