Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 489 posts

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

#331

Post by jobgh »

InvisibleCities wrote: post #269
tablespoon wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It should be noted that the US decided not to extend the universal free school meals program, because it was "too expensive" at $11B. They also stopped the expanded and early payment of family tax credits, causing a double-whammy hit to poor families (then pile on inflation/food prices, and gas prices). But $50B to large monopolistic companies isn't "too expensive," and we can afford that. That's misleading framing…

This has nothing do with people’s civic engagement levels, and everything to do with money. The semiconductor industry gets a massive subsidy because they spend tens of millions of dollars on lobbying - impoverished schoolchildren get left to starve because they don’t.

You honestly think tens of millions in lobbying efforts cause a tens of billions return on investment? Why is it so insanely cheap?

Maybe our elected representatives simply agree that national security is a priority just like the people who voted them into office?

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

#332

Post by jacobreg »

tablespoon wrote: post #247
Someone1234 wrote: post #129

It should be noted that the US decided not to extend the universal free school meals program, because it was "too expensive" at $11B. They also stopped the expanded and early payment of family tax credits, causing a double-whammy hit to poor families (then pile on inflation/food prices, and gas prices). But $50B to large monopolistic companies isn't "too expensive," and we can afford that . Unfortunately 52 senators…

> It should be noted that the US decided not to extend the universal free school meals program, because it was "too expensive" at $11B. They also stopped the expanded and early payment of family tax credits, causing a double-whammy hit to poor families (then pile on inflation/food prices, and gas prices). But $50B to large monopolistic companies isn't "too expensive," and we can afford that. That's misleading framing…

The point isn't that its one or the other, the point is that spending on social programs is much cheaper than national security programs and makes a more meaningful difference in more peoples lives. The point is that either-or is a false dichotomy, we can have good social safety nets and still have robust national security. The reason we don't have both isn't that we can't afford both, its that much of this country views poverty as a moral failing and intentionally neglects the poor because "they deserve it".

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

#333

Post by ekianjo »

Someone1234 wrote: post #129

It should be noted that the US decided not to extend the universal free school meals program, because it was "too expensive" at $11B. They also stopped the expanded and early payment of family tax credits, causing a double-whammy hit to poor families (then pile on inflation/food prices, and gas prices). But $50B to large monopolistic companies isn't "too expensive," and we can afford that . Unfortunately 52 senators…

> because it was "too expensive" at $11B

Schools meals are pure cost, they don't bring anything back. It's not like we have mass starvation going on at the moment either.

Also, why "free meals" when parents can afford to pay for it? If you have parents who are under a certain threshold of revenues, give their kids free meals, but let's not do a one-size fits all policy, this is not 1950 anymore.

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

#334

Post by DubiousPusher »

BobbyJo wrote: post #308
DubiousPusher wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> More accurately: there's more consensus around national security spending than social spending. Is there? Or is there just more consensus among the elite and Ivy League educated who dominate security discussion and policy?

I mean, these people are voted in.

True, the natsec Republican your polity elected did have to overcome a natsec Democrat or visa-versa.

I encourage you to attend some meetings of your local party Republican or Democrat (whichever is dominant) and see how the people you get to elect are chosen. What you'll find is the folks controlling that process are deeply under the influence of a status quo and that most unorthodoxy there is very quickly marginalized.

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

#335

Post by andrekandre »

lettergram wrote: post #67
analognoise wrote: post #54

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…

im not sure thats true, but putting that aside, why do you feel it cant scale across national borders?

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

#336

Post by DubiousPusher »

goatlover wrote: post #311
DubiousPusher wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> More accurately: there's more consensus around national security spending than social spending. Is there? Or is there just more consensus among the elite and Ivy League educated who dominate security discussion and policy?

And what do the voters think?

That's a good question. Seems like a good place to start though.

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

#337

Post by jobgh »

hanniabu wrote: post #296
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democracy doesn't mean everyone gets what they want. You are not the only constituent with a voice.

In today's democracy you only get what you want if what you want is coincidentally the same as what their donors want.

What are some examples of legislation that has broad support among the voters adjusted for voting power, and is ignored by our representatives?

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

#338

Post by chmod600 »

Retric wrote: post #258
chmod600 wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The name of our country is the United States . The state was intended as the primary unit of general government. Lots of land is outside of cities, and that can't be left ungoverned. And many counties have very few people, which make a lot of government functions impractical or insufficient. So states are still a reasonable unit after 250 years.

Over 4 million Americans aren’t living in States. United States is a name, but it consists of more than just States.

Good point.

Not enough to claim that the federal government must take responsibility for all assistance programs, however.

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

#339

Post by tacotacotaco »

jprd wrote: post #277
mathattack wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m all for healthy free lunches for poor kids. Is it really necessary to give free meals to all Palo Alto kids independent of financial status? https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2022/06/19/palo-alto-uni...

Yes! Why would a human being feel that feeding children is NOT their responsibility? Clearly you have never had to be the "free lunch kid", or idealize your childhood independent of the cruelty of "different". You are extremely privileged. The idea that we'd limit what kids we fund for meals, education, etc. is just gross and bifurcates any moralistic or democratic ideals. The US has a serious problem with "bootstrap…

I was at the house of the owner of a company I worked for. I mentioned my amusement at seeing a school bus in this very rural area on the way to his house. He complained that he didn’t have kids so he didn’t see why he should have to pay for that. I replied that, as my employer, he was benefiting from my public school education. That ended that conversation.

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

#340

Post by [deleted] »

Someone1234 wrote: post #129

It should be noted that the US decided not to extend the universal free school meals program, because it was "too expensive" at $11B. They also stopped the expanded and early payment of family tax credits, causing a double-whammy hit to poor families (then pile on inflation/food prices, and gas prices). But $50B to large monopolistic companies isn't "too expensive," and we can afford that . Unfortunately 52 senators…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN