| ▲ | londons_explore 3 hours ago |
| These guys had already signed a deal to build - giving them permission and probably an agreed price - the money was to persuade them to give that up. |
|
| ▲ | Avicebron 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| So like a subsidy? |
| |
| ▲ | rayiner 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | No, like a breakup fee in a commercial contract. | | |
| ▲ | jaapz 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | So a subsidy to stop building, instead of a subsidy to start building | | |
| ▲ | rayiner an hour ago | parent [-] | | No, it's compensation for backing out of a deal. In contract law, once a deal is signed, you're entitled to the "benefit of the bargain" if you perform your end of the deal. A breakup fee allows one side to get out of the deal, while compensating the other side for sunk cost into the project, opportunity costs from not having pursued other deals, etc. | | |
| |
| ▲ | Avicebron 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | ...the point being the hypocrisy of exercising that option in the name of removing subsidized power, not the literal financial mechanism. | | |
| |
| ▲ | thrance 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | More like a bribe. |
|
|
| ▲ | jacknews 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Trump literally just paid money (taxpayer money) for nothing |
| |
| ▲ | jazzyjackson 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I don’t understand what pot of money this is coming out of. Has Congress authorized taxpayer money be used for paying energy companies to halt projects? | | |
|
