And yet people do it all the time, so what are you talking about?

Have you asked Vietnam, Cambodia or Laos if they think China ever tried to colonize them? There are a few thousand years of tension there. And with Korea. And with India, predating the existence of a British Empire.

Taiwan declared independence from the mainland, and the mainland didn't try to take it back when they had the chance. Now, it's an independent nation and the mainland's feelings about it can either change or lead to an unnecessary war.

China's debt-based colonialism is no better than anyone else's approach, and is probably worse. At least British colonialism mostly left behind functional and stable democracies.

You don't think that anyone in the US will lend you money to buy solar panels?

Nah, a metaphor is a simile, metaphorically. I don't want my metaphors to be "like" anything. Stupid simile similes.

Oh, that's clever!

When did financing solar panels become "punk"?

Do these panels come with leather jackets and liberty spikes? Do they blast Black Flag when active? Do they only work in the Southeastern corner of Nigeria (who gets that reference?)?

Socialism is a state monopoly on the means of production. So, "socialism for corporations" would expand to, "a state monopoly on the means of production, for corporations". That's inherently contradictory. The things a corporation requires for production are taken away from it by the state, so the corporation can't function. At best, it would be a wholly owned subsidiary of the state.

Another thing that isn't is "socializing the costs, privatizing the profits". There are no private profits under Socialism - the costs are borne by the people and the benefits belong to the state.

Now, whether or not you were aware, that false and deceptive line of argumentation exists solely to make people think that we already have Socialism, in order to make a tyrannical dictatorship appear more palatable. But it is a lie. Socialism is founded and sold on lies.

Hmm, I'm pretty sure that tax credits and subsidies are known as "tax credits and subsidies". Given that Socialism is a state monopoly on capital, "state monopoly on capital, for capital", makes little sense. Nor would, "State ownership/control of land, labor, and capital, for capital".

Do you think that your local police department is responsible for dealing with both vagrancy and international cybercrime?

Here in GA where datacenters are required to arrange for power without increasing costs to other customers, and where prices have been frozen for five years?

I live here too. Did you vote for the PSC members earlier this month? The guy who got prices frozen lost his seat to someone who wants to increase prices.

The same State regulators that determine whether or not building a new datacenter can increase costs for other customers?

It depends entirely on the State's public utility regulators. In some States, data centers can cause costs to increase, in others they cannot. Why? Because of decisions made by the (usually) elected officials on the State's Public Utility Commission.

Amusingly, the article discusses politicians using electric prices as election issues, but often when the office they were running for had no authority over the matter. Virginia's SCC (their utility regulator) has its members appointed by the State legislature, so the Governor has no role. Likewise, as a State matter, the Federal government has no role, but the article relates criticism of Trump for not doing anything about something he has no authority over.

Usually called the "Public Services Commission", or something similar. The rules they set determine if a data center can increase consumer prices or if the center has to bear the full cost. In Georgia, it's the latter, though thanks to voter apathy and the low visibility of the commission, we just ended up with two new members who actively want prices to increase.

"Space enthusiasts (comme moi)".. can be too pretentious to just say, "like me"?

I lost interest in everything after that with a surprising quickness.

No, banks don't borrow to issue loans, they use money on deposit. That's how they "create" money. They take your $100 deposit, and lend out $90, which gets re-deposited and $81 gets lent out, each time 10% is kept in reserve (by law) and 90% is lent out. Your $100 still shows in your account and can be withdrawn, but I'll let you do the math on how much has been lent out by the time it's down to $0.01 (because I forgot the formula)