Is there a notable difference between these two in most places? There _should_ be but in practice it feels like more and more places function closer to an oligarchy than whatever form of “democracy” they espouse to practice.
In the United States, Red/Right leaning States typically receive more federal funding than Blue States. Red States get 'propped up'.
I bet a lot of people here criticizing that EU funding went to Poland are typically Right Leaning, and think they are making a some killer point about socialism, when back home they are also taking in the hand out money.
This is a poorly supported take, once you factor in the productive parts of the economy.
If you have a lot of farmland in a red state and the profits are reported in a blue state, then counting the reported profits on the corporate balance sheet will give a distorted picture of what is happening.
Look at e.g. General Mills, based in a blue state, but a great deal of what they buy are ag inputs from red states.
> Look at e.g. General Mills, based in a blue state, but a great deal of what they buy are ag inputs from red states.
Are the businesses from who they buy ag inputs in the red states not compensated at market rates for the raw materials they provide?
Do the red states also not receive massive taxpayer funded farm subsidies for the corn and wheat they grow from the federal government?
Minnesota's GDP is higher because it has a larger population and a more diverse and greater value-added economy than it's its ag focused neighbors.
It's GDP per capita is actually lower than its very sparsely populated neighbor, North Dakota, but the economic power of a jurisdiction ultimately comes from its population*productivity.
Wouldn't the red states be profiting off of blue states in your example? Why would General Mill's purchase of red states' outputs not show up as profits in the red states? This makes no sense.
Usually when something like this is reported, it is because of some other milestone.
Like, they have 6 weeks, on hand, in tanks already delivered.
But, all of the ships in-bound are now done.
After the war started, there was a record number of ships, already filled, already in-transit. But now they have all reached their destinations. So there is no more incoming.
Everyone always says as if it is obvious, go back in time and kill Hitler. That this would be a overwhelming good.
But, if you go back, and he was a baby. At that time, there is no indication of evil, so you would be a baby killer, but for good. You would look crazy.
So, extrapolate that to present. Killing someone today, might also be seen as a universal good, but nobody would know it yet.
Is todays crazy, really crazy? or just not obvious yet. And some would say, it is pretty obvious.
It isn't just governments.
This is also quietly being backed by some big corporations with money .
reply