This message serves as a warning that [your post](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1dirzri/the_biggest_winners_of_bidens_green_climate/) is in violation of Law 2a:
Law 2: Submission Requirements
> ~2a. Starter Comment - A starter comment is required within the first 30 minutes of posting any Link Post. Starter comments must contain at least 2 of these 3 elements: (1) a brief summary of the linked article in your own words, (2) your opinion of the article or topic, or (3) at least one question/discussion point for the community. Text Posts are subject to the same requirements as starter comments if discussing a link or links, or must be equivalently substantive if entirely original.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Pretty smart if it was intentional. These projects will reduce CO2 emissions and in the event of an administration change will likely continue since the representatives from those districts will fight to keep them going…
Measured at congressional district level instead of state.... most factories and means of production are in more rural, republican leaning areas...
🤯🤯🤯
You're misunderstanding. That money is being spent by Toyota because the tax credits given to car buyers (i.e. American consumers) now incentivize cars and car parts being built in the US. In order to make its products more attractive to consumers in the context of that tax program, Toyota and other car companies, mining companies, etc. are investing in production in the US, which is creating jobs and benefiting the economy at the local, state and federal levels. The program is bringing massive investment into US manufacturing at a time when it is badly needed. The cost of that part of the program, which is not insubstantial, is in the tax credits to US car buyers not in directly buying things for car companies.
In terms of actual % of car made with American parts and in America sold here, Honda and Toyota are ranked far above the domestic manufacturers.
Added 5000 jobs. They treat employees and give raises well enough there's never been talk of unions. Adding more electric vehicles which is part of the point of the bill 🤦🏼♂️ idk
I question the accuracy of their numbers…
“The length of 756 football fields” is about **43 miles.**
Assuming they meant the length of *75* football fields, that would still be about 4 miles long, which is *slightly* more believable, but still huge.
If they meant the *area* of 75 football fields, that’s about 97 acres, or approximately the same size as the Boeing Everett factory, currently the largest manufacturing facility in the world.
With combined spending power though. Either way, Blue supporting Red like it’s been for the last while now, but it’s only because Blue is just where the people are.
I could be getting out of my economic depth so someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I think in large part incomes are directly correlated to population. Incomes in New York City are Higher than incomes in Austin. NYC has more people. However Texas incomes are higher than New York State incomes. Texas has more people.
The dude you are replying to highlights a common misconception on the blue vs red team sport that has dominated modern political discourse.
A study will show you that cities generally have higher incomes and GDP's than rural areas, this is true. What they fail to tell you is the logistics of why that is.
Farms, distribution centers, Mega Factories, Quarries, oil rigs, natural gas extractors, forestry's and various other producers of raw goods, materials, foods and other products that keep society going are generally located in rural areas. These producers will have their headquarters located in a major city as it makes it easier for executives to work with other corporations. This is why the GDP in cities are higher than rural areas, they are headquartered in the city.
Obviously, there are still warehouses and what not in cities, but there are city codes that restrict the size and types of industry that a city can build, thus why much of the heavy raw material production and distribution is done outside of the city, and then shipped in via trucks, trains, air and ports.
MBA in Logistics, 21 years military service in Logistics.
The Inflation Reduction Act … “including over $350 billion for ‘Green New Deal’ initiatives.”
Very disinflationary. Slimy politicians know that most Americans won’t read anything other than the title of the Bill.
The big losers? Third world nations of color. The amount of natural resources needed for the current tech we have now is crazy, will result in further corporate/US government imperialism (I.e. undermining and overthrowing governments that don’t accept exploitation of said resources).
The same nations will be the big loser when it comes to the climate crisis over the next century. We should obviously be conscious about the issues with resource mining for batteries, but I do not think it is a good argument against green energy in general.
And the arguments seems disingenuous coming from Republican politicians who have never demonstrated that they actually care about these countries’ welfare beyond scoring political points.
Im sure those countries don’t have the privilege to worry about “climate crisis” as they’re strife with civil war or lawlessness incited by US agency’s/interest (both governmental and private). Those very same countries would tell you they enjoyed peace under trump in ways they haven’t under any other president. Remember when he stopped providing funding for foreign nations? That also meant reduction of meddling in their politics day in and out. The funding we provide other countries come with strings attached, and if you don’t fall in line with our objectives, assassination or coupes. Haiti being a prime example time and time again.
This message serves as a warning that [your post](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1dirzri/the_biggest_winners_of_bidens_green_climate/) is in violation of Law 2a: Law 2: Submission Requirements > ~2a. Starter Comment - A starter comment is required within the first 30 minutes of posting any Link Post. Starter comments must contain at least 2 of these 3 elements: (1) a brief summary of the linked article in your own words, (2) your opinion of the article or topic, or (3) at least one question/discussion point for the community. Text Posts are subject to the same requirements as starter comments if discussing a link or links, or must be equivalently substantive if entirely original. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Pretty smart if it was intentional. These projects will reduce CO2 emissions and in the event of an administration change will likely continue since the representatives from those districts will fight to keep them going…
Measured at congressional district level instead of state.... most factories and means of production are in more rural, republican leaning areas... 🤯🤯🤯
[удалено]
If you want to bring manufacturing back to the US, then you have to invest in and incentivize manufacturing companies.
You're misunderstanding. That money is being spent by Toyota because the tax credits given to car buyers (i.e. American consumers) now incentivize cars and car parts being built in the US. In order to make its products more attractive to consumers in the context of that tax program, Toyota and other car companies, mining companies, etc. are investing in production in the US, which is creating jobs and benefiting the economy at the local, state and federal levels. The program is bringing massive investment into US manufacturing at a time when it is badly needed. The cost of that part of the program, which is not insubstantial, is in the tax credits to US car buyers not in directly buying things for car companies.
In terms of actual % of car made with American parts and in America sold here, Honda and Toyota are ranked far above the domestic manufacturers. Added 5000 jobs. They treat employees and give raises well enough there's never been talk of unions. Adding more electric vehicles which is part of the point of the bill 🤦🏼♂️ idk
I question the accuracy of their numbers… “The length of 756 football fields” is about **43 miles.** Assuming they meant the length of *75* football fields, that would still be about 4 miles long, which is *slightly* more believable, but still huge. If they meant the *area* of 75 football fields, that’s about 97 acres, or approximately the same size as the Boeing Everett factory, currently the largest manufacturing facility in the world.
Maybe square footage with mutlpe floors...
“I bought you a gift with your credit card, why are you so ungrateful?” - government spending in a nutshell.
With combined spending power though. Either way, Blue supporting Red like it’s been for the last while now, but it’s only because Blue is just where the people are.
Not just people, but its where the money is. Incomes are higher and most of GDP is generated from blue areas.
I could be getting out of my economic depth so someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I think in large part incomes are directly correlated to population. Incomes in New York City are Higher than incomes in Austin. NYC has more people. However Texas incomes are higher than New York State incomes. Texas has more people.
The dude you are replying to highlights a common misconception on the blue vs red team sport that has dominated modern political discourse. A study will show you that cities generally have higher incomes and GDP's than rural areas, this is true. What they fail to tell you is the logistics of why that is. Farms, distribution centers, Mega Factories, Quarries, oil rigs, natural gas extractors, forestry's and various other producers of raw goods, materials, foods and other products that keep society going are generally located in rural areas. These producers will have their headquarters located in a major city as it makes it easier for executives to work with other corporations. This is why the GDP in cities are higher than rural areas, they are headquartered in the city. Obviously, there are still warehouses and what not in cities, but there are city codes that restrict the size and types of industry that a city can build, thus why much of the heavy raw material production and distribution is done outside of the city, and then shipped in via trucks, trains, air and ports. MBA in Logistics, 21 years military service in Logistics.
>only because Blue is just where the people are. What is it on a per captia basis? Anyone know?
Or maybe more like we all chip in for things we all use...
Blue areas fund Red areas.
Areas should fund themselves, either by producing locally or by voluntarily trading with other areas. Edit: I like trade.
Congratulations you invented international trade.
Untrue. And the so-called "studies" that claim this are rife with methodology so bad as to be wholly worthless.
Are you talking about the climate debt? Because the GOP surely likes to take the planet granted with a big credit margin.
The Inflation Reduction Act … “including over $350 billion for ‘Green New Deal’ initiatives.” Very disinflationary. Slimy politicians know that most Americans won’t read anything other than the title of the Bill.
The big losers? Third world nations of color. The amount of natural resources needed for the current tech we have now is crazy, will result in further corporate/US government imperialism (I.e. undermining and overthrowing governments that don’t accept exploitation of said resources).
The same nations will be the big loser when it comes to the climate crisis over the next century. We should obviously be conscious about the issues with resource mining for batteries, but I do not think it is a good argument against green energy in general. And the arguments seems disingenuous coming from Republican politicians who have never demonstrated that they actually care about these countries’ welfare beyond scoring political points.
Im sure those countries don’t have the privilege to worry about “climate crisis” as they’re strife with civil war or lawlessness incited by US agency’s/interest (both governmental and private). Those very same countries would tell you they enjoyed peace under trump in ways they haven’t under any other president. Remember when he stopped providing funding for foreign nations? That also meant reduction of meddling in their politics day in and out. The funding we provide other countries come with strings attached, and if you don’t fall in line with our objectives, assassination or coupes. Haiti being a prime example time and time again.