A road built and maintained by taxpayers is much cheaper (to a shipping company) than building, maintaining, and operating a railway. Making taxpayers responsible for the infrastructure you use is one way to make your business much more profitable.

Yes, but that’s all subsidized by taxpayers, so it’s more expensive overall but cheaper for YOU.

“All billionaires will be summarily executed and their assets will be distributed to the citizenry, and the Heritage Foundation will be declared a terrorist organization, and all current and past leaders, funders, employees, and judges endorsed by them will be immediately sent to a prison camp in El Salvador” seems like a winning message.

And anything the president wants only needs an executive order, it seems, so it should be pretty easy to implement.

because they teach people and the govt thinks thought that education is was important

What it will mean in practice is that every objective fact has to be balanced with a right wing talking point.

I have no idea what you are trying to say. Batteries have an environmental impact, but so does fracking for natural gas. You have the impact up front making a battery, but charging it with renewables does not have continued environmental impact. But if you use gas, you’re going to have to use an awful lot of it over that time period to offset the clean power you’re able to use when you have a battery. And that gas has a very high environmental impact, continually, over that entire time period.

I didn’t say batteries have NO impact, but they have less impact than continually mining and burning fossil fuels.

You make the batteries once, and the pollution due to production is spread over the 10-15 year lifetime of the battery. During that time gigawatt hours of clean power sloshes in and out of them. This in contrast to having to produce enough gas to make all of those gigawatt hours once, then throw the gas away as co2 and get more, along with the attendant pollution.