it sure doesn't look like there is much water there in Nevada to build a billion dollar factory, and fill up all those batteries.......



(Michigan would be much better).

Wastefulness. My beloved Detroit is not the only de-industrialized midwestern city that has pre-existing infrastructure and proximity to the largest supply of fresh water in the world: The Great Lakes. No offense to the great state of Nevada, but why there?

Tax incentives? Right-To-Work (for less)? Perhaps I'll learn more in this thread.

1. A low regulation environment. It's the desert, so the state of Nevada pays remarkably little attention to what its companies do with it. So long as they aren't dumping raw sewage into the rivers, the state lets companies do their thing.

2. Land is cheap. Dirt cheap. You can still buy raw land in northern Nevada for $500 an acre.

3. Close proximity to a highly educated and technically skilled workforce (Silicon Valley is only a few hours away by freeway) that can be poached if needed. The desert shots are deceptive. Carson City is 25 minutes from Lake Tahoe and it's not a bad place to live. There are a lot of people who live at the lake and drive down to Reno or Carson City for work every day. It's not hard to convince people to move there.

4. Easy access to raw materials and transportation hubs. Many of the raw materials come in from Asia, and this company will be especially China-dependent. It's a short and straight rail shot from the Port of Oakland to Reno, and materials offloaded from container ships in Oakland one afternoon can be sitting in Reno the following morning. This goes the other way too...products created in Reno can be at the ports in under a day.

Tax incentives are certainly help too.

The Tesla battery factory is in the north. It's not a done deal, either. The state has already ponied up a shedload of incentives for Tesla.

http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/nevada/faraday-selects-north-las-vegas-electric-car-plant

Hope it works out! The area could use the jobs and I the electric cars would be a great thing.

Here's one of the auto plants we taxpayers invested in not so long ago:



If we're going to invest in it, why don't the taxpayers own it? More trickledown BS.

Last edited Thu Dec 10, 2015, 12:29 PM - Edit history (1)

The last new Packard that was really a Packard rolled off the line in 1956. In 1957 and 1958, Packards were rebadged Studebakers. After that, there were no more built.

Packard Automotive Plant

I'd be interested in seeing a link if you have one.

slightly off topic: My Mom and Dad met in that building.

a Caribbean.

That is the old Packard plant from the 1950's.


However, here is a photo of Detroit from this past Thanksgiving weekend, if you really want to see what Detroit looks like today:



Photo from Felicia Fullwood, https://www.facebook.com/felicia.fullwood.9

at:
https://www.facebook.com/feliciafullwoodphotography/?hc_location=ufi

That hasn't employed anyone in a long time.

Currently owned by a foreign investor.

Looks to me like someplace that could be doing something useful but isn't.

Your argument that the taxpayers aren't supporting directly it is a dodge.

It doesn't in any way justify giving a chinese company a special "incentive" to tear up another chunk of land -- one which obviously cannot support an auto plant -- to build a new auto plant.

How about we do some of that liberal recycle/reuse?

who is getting reward and how much is it?

no way china did this out of altruistic intent.

Their reward will depend on how well their cars sell.

And while I am no fan of tax relief auctions for new employers, it doesn't look like NV is getting too muych tax revenue from the site now does it? Location deals generally offer tax relief rather than cash. At most they may have to spend some money running utilities and the like, but that's the price of any kind of growth.

then yes, it will certainly be a vast improvement over what is currently there.

in american companies? If american taxpayers are going to hand money off to employ other americans -- just what do we need the chinese company for?

BTW, I don't have any problem with the way that land is being used now. It looks to be very self-sustaining to me.

but for some reason (tax breaks etc), american companies are not yet ready to set up shop here. and until we dump the teabaggers from congress, we won't be able to change the structure that rewards them going overseas.

might be sitting on a couple trillion in foreign banks?

I do like the way the blame for the last 40 years is shifted to the baggers in congress.

That's precious.

who do you blame for this if not the republicans?

compete against Tesla?

It's the american way.

1% win as 99% loose .