Live data from Hacker News

Senate passes bipartisan bill to subsidize U.S.-made semiconductor chips

washingtonpost.com

101–110 of 489 posts

Re: Senate passes bipartisan bill to subsidize U.S.-made semiconductor chips

#101

Such a monumental scam and a gross theft from taxpayers. Companies making billions of dollars in profits don't need free money. I could be onboard with a subsidized loan, but handouts are not needed. FWIW, I work at a company that stands to benefit from this bill. Does the US need to secure reliable semiconductor supply chains free of China? Sure. This is not the most cost effective way to do it.

It's as simple as this: If companies could manufacture chips profitably in America, they would be. American Laws & Regulations prohibit domestic semiconductor manufacturing without Government subsidies.

Another way of looking at this is that under regulation of competing industries in other countries requires intervention (be it via tariff or subsidy).

I think people here have argued the strengths/weaknesses of each approach. The best solution is likely some nuanced mix of the two, but nuanced policy is hard to create and I rather we eat the costs of any of the two approaches that are more likely to be adopted today rather than continue to take no action.

Re: Senate passes bipartisan bill to subsidize U.S.-made semiconductor chips

#102

I disagree that subsidizing R&D to a few companies is going to make us more competitive. Look at GE or Boeing, it didn’t work out. What works is a free market. Raise import costs on CPUs and you’ll incentivize building in the US and more companies to form. It costs $0 tax dollars and brings in revenue and high paying jobs. Similar to what we did with car manufacturing.

> What works is a free market.

If such a thing existed then you would be right.

Re: Senate passes bipartisan bill to subsidize U.S.-made semiconductor chips

#103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no such thing as "the free market" - it's this mythologized idea that people keep pushing, usually to damage workers so they can ship jobs offshore. If anything, the more something resembles a "free market", the worse it is - you don't think Intel wouldn't poison the water supply if it juiced the Q4 earnings? It's always more economical to just dump the toxic waste into the local river. If anything these sub…

Lol the whole point of the US design was to allow the free market internally. Externally it was designed to be protectionist. I agree “free market” today is insane. Initially the federal governments only source of revenue was tariffs, so it would protect domestic production. This makes the US independent and wealthy. You can’t have an international “free market” system unless you don’t want to protect domestic produc…

> Lol the whole point of the US design was to allow the free market internally

Dear reader, this was not true in any shape.

Re: Senate passes bipartisan bill to subsidize U.S.-made semiconductor chips

#104
post #21

Such a monumental scam and a gross theft from taxpayers. Companies making billions of dollars in profits don't need free money. I could be onboard with a subsidized loan, but handouts are not needed. FWIW, I work at a company that stands to benefit from this bill. Does the US need to secure reliable semiconductor supply chains free of China? Sure. This is not the most cost effective way to do it.

Cost is not the only consideration. I fear for people who only focus on one issue and ignore the rest. Rarely do we see congressional leaders agreeing on this scale. I would say they find that reliance on China to be a threat to National Security. US and China communications is zero and even lower than it was during the Cold War. Pelosi story on visiting Taiwan should give you an idea of the stakes that are play. Chi…

> Rarely do we see congressional leaders agreeing on this scale.

There has been widespread bipartisan support for the military-industrial complex for as long as Eisenhower (correctly) warned about the military-industrial complex.

Partisan disagreements just tend to make the headlines more often.

Re: Senate passes bipartisan bill to subsidize U.S.-made semiconductor chips

#105
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, chips just become 20% more expensive in the US and the consumer loses... and the US still doesn't gain supply chain security. I don't think tariffs will work when the alternative requires massive outlay of capital and decades to recoup. Not to mention, there is no reality where manufacturing these chips in the US costs less than Taiwan, for example. There is no reason to build a fab in the US with the current eco…

Intel had profits of $20B last year. They could easily build a new modern fab every year if they wanted to. But it makes more sense for them to spend tax payers money instead.

Easily as in "if they feel like wiping out all their profits", which is not really how public companies tend to feel.

Re: Senate passes bipartisan bill to subsidize U.S.-made semiconductor chips

#106
post #25

Such a monumental scam and a gross theft from taxpayers. Companies making billions of dollars in profits don't need free money. I could be onboard with a subsidized loan, but handouts are not needed. FWIW, I work at a company that stands to benefit from this bill. Does the US need to secure reliable semiconductor supply chains free of China? Sure. This is not the most cost effective way to do it.

Clearly, handouts are needed to force/incentivize these companies to build new fabs in the continental US. Otherwise they would have built them under their own gumption by now. When there is no clear benefit for the company to fab chips in the continental US, and a lot of clear negatives (cost, regulations, etc) - you have to do something to outweigh the cons. If the US had been an amazing place to fab chips already,…

> Clearly, handouts are needed to force/incentivize these companies to build new fabs in the continental US. Otherwise they would have built them under their own gumption by now.

I don't have a problem with government subsidy for jumpstarting industry, but it's absurd to give the money to Intel and AMD. They profited massively from offshoring their production. If we are going to spend money (and I agree we must), it should be invested in new competition so that Intel and AMD have to spend their largess on fixing their business model to compete.

Re: Senate passes bipartisan bill to subsidize U.S.-made semiconductor chips

#108
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US still produces a lot of computer chips… Intel is still a very large player in chips and dominate in some areas. Even TI which has tons of fabs (not highest end) as well. I don’t really understand this.

TI's fabs are mainly focused on analog, so the requirements are a bit different. IIRC we have 3 130-65nm layers for digital in our mixed signal designs which is roughly on par with a the process technology Intel used in 2005.

The majority ICs used for products and such do not need bleeding edge node sizes.

Re: Senate passes bipartisan bill to subsidize U.S.-made semiconductor chips

#109

I disagree that subsidizing R&D to a few companies is going to make us more competitive. Look at GE or Boeing, it didn’t work out. What works is a free market. Raise import costs on CPUs and you’ll incentivize building in the US and more companies to form. It costs $0 tax dollars and brings in revenue and high paying jobs. Similar to what we did with car manufacturing.

Tariffs on products we don't have immediate domestic manufacturing capacity for will hurt the economy in the short term, which is not a great move during a period of rising inflation. It's a tough decision though, because it does feel like the better move for the long term.

I agree tariffs are the right long-term move. I think they just have to be implemented gradually. Just increase it by 4% per year for the next 10 years.

Re: Senate passes bipartisan bill to subsidize U.S.-made semiconductor chips

#110

Banning Proof of Work cryptocurrencies from being traded on licensed exchanges would achieve the same improvement of chip availability, as well as saving a huge amount of electricity, for $0. I guess sensible measures like this don't boost the share portfolios of politicians' spouses though.

Are the kind of chips being used to mine crypto the same kind that are keeping Ford from building trucks?

They are not, but they are made in the same fabs.
Post reply on HN