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

361–370 of 489 posts

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

#361

Post by res0nat0r »

Clubber wrote: post #289
rat87 wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it was a wise and practical decision. And the fillibuster has always been a stupid accident of the rules. It delayed civil rights bills by over a decade Everyone knew that McConnell was lying and would have overturned the fillibuster on judges the second a supreme court fillibuster started. And we would have gotten the same extremist supreme court that laughs at restaint and takes away fundamental rights

>No it was a wise and practical decision. Well the Democrats just lost all chance of any new gun control and will probably have some gun control repealed. Not only that, they lost the power of Democrat controlled states to enact gun control at the state level and will have much of state gun control repealed. They completely lost the right to abortion at the federal/constitutional level as well. What did they gain for…

The GOP in two years from now if they control Congress will ignore the filibuster and pass a national abortion ban at the federal level at the first opportunity. Anyone believing these folks haven't been lying or won't be complete hypocrites by now are living in an alternate reality.

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

#362

Post by pessimizer »

onepointsixC wrote: post #343
01100011 wrote: post #16

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.

So what is the most cost effective way to do so? China's pouring hundreds of billions in subsidies into fabs. South Korea is pouring hundreds of billions in subsidies. Tariffs alone would only allow for domestic balancing of those subsidies but lose you the global market. So again, what would you recommend instead.

China is going to insist on a lot of control over the companies that it subsidizes, and South Korea is just hopelessly corrupt. If we went the China route, that's fine, but instead we do welfare for billionaires again.

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

#363

Post by jobgh »

pessimizer wrote: post #352
jobgh wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I hate to refer you to a search engine, look for any major issue where the population differs in opinion to the donor class. An obvious place to start is with healthcare, where even slight majorities of Republicans wanted it socialized (at least before 2016) but picking out issues is a waste of time. The vast majority of the public has no influence on public policy. The elite consensus becomes policy 100% of the time…

>I hate to refer you to a search engine, look for any major issue where the population differs in opinion to the donor class.

That's not what I asked. I asked for an issue supported by voters, not population. A lot of people have opinions, but not many people vote, which skews actual legislation. There's also a conservative tilt because rural voters have disproportionate power.

The populist "it's the elite and their money controlling legislation" sentiment doesn't seem to correlate with reality from what I've read.

On healthcare, the support of socialization is complicated. Voters are iffy depending on how questions are phrased, so it's not totally clear on exactly what they want. It seems something like the ACA was pretty close, but even that was very controversial.

For example, I know you can get very high approval for M4A, but if you phrase questions in a more partisan manner, approval tanks. Something along the lines of "Would you support government provided healthcare that would ban private insurance?" would poll terribly, even though they're both referring to the same policy.

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

#364

Post by option »

jacobreg wrote: post #332
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…

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 v…

sorry, but the either-or false dichotomy is introduced here by your comment above.

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

#365

Post by mathattack »

jagged-chisel wrote: post #203
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...

Doing it for everyone makes management simpler. I suspect it leads to better academic performance, too.

You’re suggesting that buying free lunches for the 92% of students who don’t need it [0] is more efficient than just paying teachers more or hiring more intervention specialists or counselors?

[0] https://www.schooldigger.com/go/CA/schools/2961004596/school...

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

#366

Post by mathattack »

beachtaxidriver wrote: post #253
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...

When middle class people use a government service, the quality goes up.

You clearly haven’t seen what passes for a school lunch.

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

#367

Post by jobgh »

celdon25 wrote: post #355
jobgh wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I’ll do you one even better. We have a two-chamber legislature, and here is a prime example of what that actually means. https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/2187 Would have allowed for professionals in a given field to be accredited to make investments related to their profession. Or to put it another way, you would no longer need to already be rich to use the tools that the rich use to get richer…

Do you have data to substantiate a strong majority of support for this bill among voters, and adjusted for voting power? I'd assume a lot of voters would be indifferent to this issue. It seems quite complicated. It seems it's a tradeoff between freedom and saving uniformed people from losing their money.

I'll have to look into it more though.

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

#368

Post by mathattack »

SeanLuke wrote: post #222
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...

I'm all for free public education for poor kids. Is it really necessary to give free public education to all Palo Alto kids independent of financial status? Snark aside, the answer is: it's much simpler to manage a program that offers the same thing to everyone regardless of income than it is to manage a program that has to work out who deserves it. And offering it to all avoids stigma.

When 90+% of the kids don’t need it, wouldn’t it be better to use the money to hire more teachers?

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

#369

Post by option »

nwiswell wrote: post #214
mhneu wrote: post #183

This was what Andy Grove wanted - more investment in chip manufacturing. Good news. Grove was a visionary in many ways and his writing on this back in 2010 or so impacted my thinking. https://prospect.org/environment/andy-grove-trade-globalizat... In retirement, Grove became concerned about the decline of American manufacturing: When he was CEO, Intel not only performed its research and development in the United Stat…

> This was what Andy Grove wanted - more investment in chip manufacturing. He was also the former CEO of Intel, so you know, not exactly impartial on the subject.

he was also a self-made immigrant who came to USA, called it home and deeply cared about it

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

#370

Post by Jensson »

yieldcrv wrote: post #186
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…

You just need an external enemy. in this case China. You can bridge consensus on all sides when there is a boogeyman that isn't another American.

China provides free school lunches though, isn't it a problem if American schools can't compete?
Post reply on HN