Nor is there money to fund such a project.
Nor is there money to fund such a project.
The billions are coming from Federal COVID money. The state caused Flint's problem by discontinuing water from Detroit and pulling from a local river without adding a required chemical.
This decision was made by an emergency manager appointed by the then governor to save money. This manager took power away from the elected mayor and city council.
1 industrial job may lead to : - 1-2 jobs in private services in the same area - 1-2 jobs in public services in the same area - industrial activity that can be taxed later - in the case of electric batteries, there may even be some environmental benefits that have value - once the facility is located to some location, it may be expected to grow over time, creating even more jobs and taxable corporate profits
In other words, each direct job can easily be around 4 jobs total. Future taxes from 4 jobs + corporate profits (and other taxes) + expected growth + the value environmental benefits may very well be worth the $750 up front investment.
Also, there are not going to be environmental benefits, the only difference is that the batteries would be getting built somewhere else.
>Michigan just gave General Motors $2 billion to build two EV battery plants, one in Lansing and the other in Detroit which will create 3,000 jobs.
This is fake news, Michigan state did not give money out to GM.
>The state caused Flint's problem by discontinuing water from Detroit and pulling from a local river without adding a required chemical.
>This decision was made by an emergency manager appointed by the then governor to save money.
Voted almost unanimously by the city council. Everyone loves to leave that detail out.
Yes, seems like its just $666Mil (such an odd number lol)[1].
[1] https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2022/03/michigan-lawma...
It's ironic as well given how they spend a trillion in the military which seems like an unprofitable investment. They coax kids into joining the army to get or pay for an education, instead of the much cheaper and more profitable option, just pay the kids' education directly.
Capitalism is the best system ever invented to get money into the hands of people. It's done more to take people out of poverty than any other system in human existence. Capitalism isn't to blame here.
>It's ironic as well given how they spend a trillion in the military which seems like an unprofitable investment.
Military is federal, Flint water is municipal. This is basic civics. The military is not designed to be a profitable investment.
>They coax kids into joining the army to get or pay for an education, instead of the much cheaper and more profitable option, just pay the kids' education directly.
They do both, federal government backs student loans, grants, etc. that literally pay for kids' education directly. And again, most education is State, not federal.
I would like some citation for this one. Pretty large claim. For example China brought out 2/3rds of their population from poverty to middle class, pretty large number. Now there can be a debate on whether Chinese system is communism or not, but it definitely is not capitalism the way people in US like to define it.
Yes... Thanks to capitalism. Communismn killed tens of millions in China when they attempted to reconstruct the country from an agrarian economy into a communist society through the formation of people's communes.
>Now there can be a debate on whether Chinese system is communism or not,
There is no debate. There are billionaire capitalists in China.
>but it definitely is not capitalism the way people in US like to define it.
It is 100% the way people in the US define capitalism. Sure it has it's Chinese spin, but it is undoubtedly capitalism.
Thanks to capitalism!
>And capitalism is only like 250 years old.
And the rate of humanity leaving poverty in that time span is greater than any other time in history.
>You could have made your same argument 500-1000 years ago about feudalism pulling people out of poverty
Err, no? If anything, that pushed even MORE people into poverty. No one sane would ever make that argument.
>yet I doubt anybody would be all that happy to switch to a feudalist system and would heavily criticize any claims that feudalism was the main driving factor behind improvements in technology and living standards.
Because you're inventing a fictional strawman. Feudalism did the opposite of your claim.
And other countries that do give out money are capitalistic?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_ex...
Hint, it’s capitalism. High tax rates to pay for social programs but it’s still capitalism.
Not the most capitalistic wealth creation