Investing in America 2025
Posted3 months agoActive3 months ago
blog.googleOtherstory
supportivepositive
Debate
40/100
GoogleUs InvestmentEconomic Growth
Key topics
Google
Us Investment
Economic Growth
Google announces its 'Investing in America 2025' initiative, sparking discussion on corporate investment in the US economy and the role of tech giants in national development.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
30m
Peak period
35
0-12h
Avg / period
8.3
Comment distribution50 data points
Loading chart...
Based on 50 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Oct 7, 2025 at 6:00 PM EDT
3 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Oct 7, 2025 at 6:30 PM EDT
30m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
35 comments in 0-12h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Oct 12, 2025 at 1:42 PM EDT
3 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45509454Type: storyLast synced: 11/20/2025, 4:26:23 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
Seems pretty clear to me :)
EDIT: to be clear, I think investing in struggling, predominately red states is totally fine and good. I'm more taking issue with the way this information is presented. The red/blue text gradient, the "investing in America" focus, etc. It feels specifically crafted to appeal to a certain mindset. Contrast this with, say, the roll-out of Google Fiber in Kansas, etc. where the focus was on technology not patriotism.
I know the governors of Wyoming gave land away to NCAR and Microsoft talking about how they were going to "diversify Wyoming's economy," and then every employee of those data centers was a contractor out of Colorado. The current governor has kept up the hype, now claiming that AI will be good for the local energy companies despite the fact that the proposed centers are going to be connected to out-of-state energy pipelines.
When you look at top campaign contributions and see Google and Microsoft at the top, you understand why the gubernatorial class keeps their ears plugged.
Trump just cut a bunch of money to blue state projects. Did the last admin do that to the red states? 60% of Biden’s infrastructure bill went to red states.
And some companies care about hiring in America and always have. This is an article about Google which dropped DEI the second it could. Clearly it didn't really care.
Fun fact, my comment said nothing against DEI and you assuming I did more or less summarizes modern political discourse on both sides. Even implying something isn't 200% amazing means you must be utterly opposed to it's very concept.
Fun fact, my comment said nothing in support of DEI and you assuming I did more or less summarizes modern political discourse.
DEI was not implemented "for the last administration" like you implied. My comment was not even really about DEI, it was criticizing you for implying something that wasn't true. And you seem to know it yourself with the way you subtly shifted the conversation from "the last administration" to "under both Obama and Biden", pushing the age of these policies back another 12 years.
And if Harris is elected in 2028, they'll flip again. I've never seen such blatant cowardice and treachery.
I'm a mere observer of American politics, but both Polymarket and electionbettingodds.com have Gavin Newsom in the lead to be the candidate, and JD Vance to win the election.
https://polymarket.com/event/democratic-presidential-nominee...
https://www.electionbettingodds.com
If they're even considering Harris again though, I have no hope whatsoever.
Newsom may be a minor improvement, but they really need to do some soul searching if they think neoliberal policy is going to win an election in 2028.
It really is quite astonishing to see how disconnected they are from their base. They should really have future elections in the bag with the way demographics and polls are looking.
We've spent far too long where things were the other way around, with the wrong side giving the orders.
I mean, that sure sounds like what we have now, but it hasn't exactly proven itself to be a great thing for society.
> There's no company who can directly kill me unless, again, they get aid from some government.
Companies can spend a lot of money to buy this government aid. Heck, companies can more or less buy governments altogether.
Even in your example, the reason why he's filing this false report is because if he were to take matters into his own hands, he would face retribution.
Oh you sweet summer child
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic
https://www.realbusinessrescue.co.uk/advice-hub/companies-wo...
No state, no power.
What happens when a corporation has more power, influence, control, and private security than a country?
This reminds me of discussing things with libertarians. "It's bad when a government does it, but when a private corporation does it, it's actually okay guys, it's the free market and all."
I thought that Google was doing more than ~30B in data centers, and some of the write ups talk about over the next 2 years.
I don't understand the objective if it isn't comprehensive.
Finally, unemployment is OVER!
https://www.arkansasedc.com/news-events/newsroom/detail/2025...
10 more comments available on Hacker News