FoxConn ??

[brrabbit]

Originally Posted by guidoLaMoto

Well, except for coal miner's lung a century ago, nobody gets sick from breathing "polluted" air. In fact, since the EPA instituted its Draconain exhaust regs 50 y/a (and about to get even stricter) asthma and COPD rates have increaased several fold. It ain't "air pollution" causing the proiblems. Never was. (In the interest of intellectual honesty-- I must admit that the rise in incidence of lung disease is due to better awareness, diagnositc techniques & looser diagnostic criteria.)

My granpa died in the young age of 56. His lungs were full of holes, all burned out. So, in his day and age people just did not get time to go to a doctor and ask for asthma treatments, since if you're sick, it would mean you're out of good paying job.

I don't know about you, but I was absolutely angry with Scott Walker for selling my children's future health for the benefit (again!) Chinese investors.
And if you look at the history of my posts, you'd know that I despise Democratic party and believe them to be criminals. So, I credit Scott Walker's brightness to the lack of his education, not to the bad intentions. But it was really bad deal, thank god it did not work out.

[guidoLaMoto]

Your anger is misdirected.

RE: air pollution vs asthma & COPD-- Things like temperature changes, hi or lo humidity, dust in the air or even just laughing or yelling will bring on the brochospasm reflex in those afflicted (the basis if the archaic methacholine challenge test). Those factors do not CAUSE pulmonary disease.

An excessively agressive bronchospastic tendency (asthma) is inherited, as is the tendency to develope alveolar degradation (COPD) Cf- alpha-1-antitrypsin deficiency. Not all smokers get COPD and not all coal miners got Black Lung-- it has to do with genetic susceptibility.

In regards Walker's policies and their effect on the environment & health-- perhaps I'm ignorant, so please inform me with specifics, not just vague accusations....As I pointed out earlier, there is very little effect of the environment on health matters-- just fantasies about what "could" happen IF the pollutants are concentrated enough.

[ManApplet]

Originally Posted by guidoLaMoto

Ah. An academician. This is why we're in so much trouble now with politically motivated research replacing researcg for curiosity's sake.

You may be interested in this anecdote...When I was an undergrad doing research in molecular genetics, the lab next to ours was run by a paleobotanist. This was 55 y/a when the alewives were fouling up L.Mich. beaches every spring. He colleted a few carcasses and analyzed them for Hg content...Then he analyzed some 100 million y/o fish fossils--- identical Hg levels.
.

I'd wager you will never show us this study nor any study that confirms your ^ claims.

Where did these fossils come from?

I'll add geology to your vast list of expertise.

When do you think lake Michigan was formed?

When you start with false premises everything that follows is illogical and non sequitur.

Ditto for the rest of your screed but I won't waste my time proving it to you.

I think everybody that reads you knows what your game is. I leaned it in just our few encounters. At least you are consistent

.
Do you realize Chicago's water supply is sucked in at the puming stations located a couple miles off shore and it goes directly into the city's water system, only a little F added. I don't know that Chicago's citizens are prone to any diseases out of the ordinary expectations.

Addendum to address the refs you sityed-- They pull those "safe numbers' out of their a..um...thin air. ZERO data to support the recommendartions....

...That reminds me of the famous Flint MI/ Pb in the drinking water news a few yrs ago--They never told us the levels measured, but IF they were 1000x higher than the legal limit, then a 30kg 9 y/o (who never got any bigger and absorbed all of the Pb in the water he drank and never excreted any of it, would have to drink 5 gal a day for 110 yrs to achieve a toxic level of Pb...The level considered toxic was ascertained based on ONE incidence of chemical warfare in Iraq aboout 30 y/a. We just have no other way of knowing how much one can ingest safely or how much it takes to cause problems....The only time we ever saw Pb toxicity before was when there was Pb in gasoline and people would siphon it and accidently swallow some with regularity....Most cases in kids were only diagnosed by incidentally seeing changes in RBCs under the microscope without ever showing any actual pathological symptoms. ...BTW- IQ scores have not gone up even one point since Pb was removed from paint and fuel 50 yrs ago.



Well, except for coal miner's lung a century ago, nobody gets sick from breathing "polluted" air. In fact, since the EPA instituted its Draconain exhaust regs 50 y/a (and about to get even stricter) asthma and COPD rates have increaased several fold. It ain't "air pollution" causing the proiblems. Never was. (In the interest of intellectual honesty-- I must admit that the rise in incidence of lung disease is due to better awareness, diagnositc techniques & looser diagnostic criteria.)

The several studies claiming particulate matter causes problems are completely bogus and a good example of the perversion of research for political causes. A good summary- http://www.scientificintegrityinstit...CJEE110317.pdf

And as long as we're at it-- https://junkscience.com/2023/01/no-n...a-in-children/ about the recent attempts to take away gas ranges.

Also, read my posts #50 & #52 here for more numbers to put the non-existant air polution problems into perspective https://www.city-data.com/forum/gree...-reduce-6.html

adieu

[badger74]

https://www.channel3000.com/news/mic...0bedd1cb8.html

[badger74]

Originally Posted by mrkool

I never believed for a minute that they would actually create the 13,000 good-paying jobs that they promised. And those duplicitous people proved me right.

In the end, did we actually get hosed for all the road-building, construction, buying out homeowners, etc., or did the Taiwanese company have to front at least some of the money, or reimburse us later? My wife claims that Scott Walker somehow ensured Foxconn would be held accountable if they didn't provide the jobs they promised. I am dubious.

Actually THEY paid for a lot of improvements. WI made out on the deal.
https://www.channel3000.com/news/mic...0bedd1cb8.html

[sub]

Originally Posted by ManApplet

As long as we seem to be getting all whimsical...the most recent addition to our pollution awareness is the PFAS. Teflon stuff, Fire Fighting Foam, Florine, polyfluoroalkyl substances. 'forever' as it were. Do not degrade in a timely fashion and bio accumulate, apparently everywhere. On the plus side the fishing is better because they slip right out of the water, drip dry in seconds, don't stick in the frying pan and are nearly impossible to burn.

Originally Posted by brrabbit

Drinking toxic water and breathing toxic air reduces your life span, and not only yours, but millions of other people. I'd hate if it happens not for the well-being of the whole state, but for good profit of some Chinese (not even American) investors.

All well and good, but that wasn’t really my point.

[ManApplet]

Originally Posted by badger74

Actually THEY paid for a lot of improvements. WI made out on the deal.
https://www.channel3000.com/news/mic...0bedd1cb8.html

And today Joe is fixing the fox hole Walker and Plumpy dug with their golden shovels. MAGA !!!

[guidoLaMoto]

Originally Posted by ManApplet

And today Joe is fixing the fox hole Walker and Plumpy dug with their golden shovels. MAGA !!!

Try doing a search of what the failed Foxconn deal actually cost WI taxpayers-- essentially nothing. Infrastructure improvements were mostly those due anyway, and Fed funding covered most of the rest. Ad.d in the new revenue from the many construction jobs provided for the new roads to nowhere, and the state made money, regardless of how disingenuous liberal news presents the story in their treatments...and now that Joe is bringing in a replacement deal, those roads won't be going nowhere any more-- assuming Joe's memory care nurses remind him of what he just announced a d this deal comes to fruition.

...and tax subsidies cost taxpayers nothing. They simply mean the state won't receive tax revenues that they wouldn't receive anyway without a deal...and the new jobs would add revenues, so ultimately, the state benefits. It's like a lost leader sale in merchandizing-- sell something at a slight loss just to attract buyers into the store so they'll also buy other stuff for an even bigger profit.

I'll be polite and not ask what political donations to the DNC made this new deal possible.

They're all crooks and our best hope is the deals somehow benefit us too. Trickle down political corruption.

[ManApplet]

Originally Posted by guidoLaMoto

Try doing a search of what the failed Foxconn deal actually cost WI taxpayers-- essentially nothing. Infrastructure improvements were mostly those due anyway, and Fed funding covered most of the rest. Ad.d in the new revenue from the many construction jobs provided for the new roads to nowhere, and the state made money, regardless of how disingenuous liberal news presents the story in their treatments...and now that Joe is bringing in a replacement deal, those roads won't be going nowhere any more-- assuming Joe's memory care nurses remind him of what he just announced a d this deal comes to fruition.

...and tax subsidies cost taxpayers nothing. They simply mean the state won't receive tax revenues that they wouldn't receive anyway without a deal...and the new jobs would add revenues, so ultimately, the state benefits. It's like a lost leader sale in merchandizing-- sell something at a slight loss just to attract buyers into the store so they'll also buy other stuff for an even bigger profit.

I'll be polite and not ask what political donations to the DNC made this new deal possible.

They're all crooks and our best hope is the deals somehow benefit us too. Trickle down political corruption.

I add 'not understanding money' to your list of attributes. Read it for yourself. https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/...-more-millions

[guidoLaMoto]

That's exactly what I meant about disingenuous treatment by the liberal press, splashing around helplessly in the shallow end of the intelligence pool...They, and you, fail to take into account the Fed contributions to cover state Infrastructure costs....and now that Joe is bringing in (we shouldn't believe it 'til we see it) Microsoft, the spending will not have been for naught.

You also seem to be ignorant of the multiplier effect of job creation (those construction jobs already provided by the completed infrastructure improvements). More income tax revenues and more sales tax revenues from the new income. That increased sales volume leads to more jobs in the stores & factories which generates even more tax revenue.