It's a "company town" mentality. Amazon needs the workers, so it makes sure that the workers need it.
That's completely different to EU/Government funding. That's a debate between two levels of government about who gets the political benefit of the funding. However, by definition, publicly funded facilities are examples of "Your taxes at work".
The public high school in California? They might add some extra stuff to spend that (whopping) $50k from Amazon, but it seems hard to believe that the state will allow a high school to just ditch the education code requirements. Especially a public school.
You can see it in stuff like young people saying "We need to conserve bandwidth, the ISPs can't handle it" (talking about 100GB/mo on mobile, which is apparently a huge number for some, but why defend the ISP).
And subscription models for everything, but "it's OK, X company is trustworthy."
I don't know where you're from, but as a Pole I do not share this sentiment at all. Seeing the EU flag displayed everywhere makes me proud to be an EU citizen and it's a great thing to see.
However even that is not true as the UK is finding out, as we are now scrambling to fill the funding gap that EU programs gave to anything from universities to farmers. All this while our corrupt government hands £37 billion to their corrupt friends for COVID "track and trace".
the EU also has contributed signifanctly to post world war 2 European peace.
You did not even know who Ursula Von Der Leyen was when you went to the polls - she was 'decided' as your leader in a back room, closed door meeting in which MEPs had no influence. When you cast your vote, you had no clue what her platform was, or what she would bring about as leader.
To suggest that this is somehow 'democratic' is a farce. The EU was designed to keep the plebes at bay.
Whether it's the fact that voters have almost no role in leadership selection, that leaders can be chosen arbitrarily, that there is no required vetting process, that MEPs cannot introduce legislation, have very limited power to censure leaders, there is almost zero voter awareness of the political apparatus, the individuals or contemporary issues, low voter turnout, that constitutional rights were ceded to the EU without referendum, or worse, that clear and unambiguous referendum results directed leaders to not cede power to the EU - they did it anyhow. The EU has barely any claim to democratic legitimacy, people promulgating it as such are propagandizing.
Literally French voters unambiguously rejected the Treaty of Lisbon - and it was ratified anyhow ceding major elements of sovereignty.
If they wanted democracy the commission would have direct elections and/or the MEPs would chose directly, and, there would be a lot of rules around campaigning etc. You wouldn't possibly be able to vote for the President of a Commission without knowing who they were. MEPs would certainly be allowed to introduced legislation and censure leaders.
So yes, it does take a lot of 'marketing' to convince people of the legitimacy of something when it doesn't have that legitimacy in many ways.
The EU had nothing to with keeping the peace in the Post WW2 order, that was 1) The Marshall Plan and the American Nuclear Umbrella 2) NATO and existential threat from the USSR and 3) The EEC.
The reason the EU wants their flag in the town council chambers is the same as Nike might want that, or the French Government might want their flag especially in parts of France that are not historically very French i.e. it's a form of marketing/propaganda, like anything else.
I don't like Amazon, so I don't buy from them. If people did that, they wouldn't have their weird company towns and creepy 'high school sponsorships'.
For obvious reasons there's no British equivalent.
Today's children think this country was a shithole prison before it joined the EU, while in reality it was a pretty strong economy quickly recovering from the trauma of communism with opportunities booming everywhere, good educational system and well functioning healthcare and social system. Not even 2 decades and the history is rewritten - that's not good.
No they don't.
Did you perhaps confuse this with the common signs indicating that the EU funded that particular project/institution?
The funding programmes generally literally just require you to put a poster up for smaller contributions, for >500k€ you need a "permanent" sign if its a building etc, for projects a mention in info material. If a single "this building was supported through EU fund ABC with XXXXXX €" sign (AFAIK the amount is allowed to be listed but not required, and anyways far from your "present in classes" claim, and far from the level described in the article) leads to people thinking that's all that was impossible otherwise, that sounds like an education problem. And is not that out of the ordinary for funding contributions - here it's not unusual to see that sign grouped with equal large signs of other (state, federal, ...) authorities providing funding.
Edit: ah yes, less than 1% is what Chzechia contributes TO the EU.
```
Intra-EU trade accounts for 84% of the Czech Republic’s exports (Germany 32%, Slovakia 8% and Poland 6%), while outside the EU 2% goes to both the United States and Russia.
In terms of imports, 76% come from EU Member States (Germany 29%, Poland 9% and Slovakia 6%), while outside the EU 8% come from China and 2% from the United States.
```
```
Total EU spend in Czechia – € 4.123 billion
(equivalent to 2.10 % of the Czech economy)
Total contribution to EU budget – € 1.720 billion
(equivalent to 0.88 % of the Czech economy)
Amazon is a private company.
Just, you know, two World Wars.
Edit: I see what you mean now. What I wanted to say was "before joining EU" (so pre-2004), I didn't mean 1950's or pre-war period.