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

431–440 of 489 posts

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

#431

Post by sofixa »

C-x_C-f wrote: post #144
pm90 wrote: post #20

WaPo article, which has more details about the bill and less details about what different “personalities” are saying: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/07/27/senate-ch... . Overall, it looks great. We absolutely need to fund more semiconductor manufacturing. Losing that ability to China/Taiwan was just a terrible strategic mistake. The US hasn’t lost this battle (over semiconductors) just yet. While curren…

This is always framed in terms of USA vs. China/Taiwan but what about Europe? AFAIK (I might know wrong) the consensus among macroeconomists is that "social market economies" like European ones are better suited (compared to "liberal market economies" like the USA) to investing in large scale manufacturing (see e.g. Varieties of Capitalism [0]—though it is a bit controversial). Though I do wonder if chip manufacturin…

The EU has a few fabs which aren't focusing on the cutting edge but older, industrial grade chips like Infineon, STMicroelectronics, Bosch.

And there's new legislation encouraging investment in the cutting edge stuff.

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

#432

Post by shaklee3 »

mhneu wrote: post #171
chmod600 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, perhaps feel that state governments are better suited to those kinds of assistance programs.

Unlikely, because many states then cut those assistance programs when given the opportunity. It's more likely that the 'state' argument is a way to achieve their ideological ends (cutting the program.) That said, this bill is a very positive development. Investing in local manufacturing and R&D is a great idea, and it will help the economy. Hopefully it will efficient and money will not be captured by rent-seekers or…

California renewed it for next year

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

#433

Post by sofixa »

al_mandi wrote: post #408
bloodyplonker22 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Losing that ability to China/Taiwan was just a terrible strategic mistake. More like losing that ability to Taiwan's TSMC and South Korea's Samsung. China's SMIC is very far behind and has insignificant market share. Additionally, it's rather insulting to non-communists when you mishmash together China and Taiwan.

Taiwan is right across the border from China. At any point, they can invade and take over.

Right across a strait*

An amphibious assault against a prepared enemy is never easy or straightforward. China doesn't yet have the necessary logistics ships to be able to supply a beachhead so Taiwan should be "safe" for at least a few years.

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

#434

Post by DubiousPusher »

remarkEon wrote: post #424
DubiousPusher wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the abstract There is nothing abstract in politics and that's just plain old "begging the question". > especially one as cut and dry as this one, which is don’t let your nation’s semiconductor supply fall under the control of a hostile foreign country Cut and dry to whom? And were it so cut and dry why is a subsidy the solution rather than any number of other legislative actions? > than it is to get alignment on…

>Cut and dry to whom? I think it's pretty cut and dry to people who pay attention to what fuels a modern economy: semiconductors. If you have a problem with the subsidies themselves that's a disagreement about implementation, and to an extent I would agree that some additional tariffs are in order - beyond the subsidies. >Free lunch for students is hardly an attempt to "solve poverty". Well sure, but any time someone…

> I think it's pretty cut and dry to people who pay attention to what fuels a modern economy

That's a value judgementon your part which happens to agree with what passes for wisdom in the natsec press and that's literally my entire point. Justifying a government action as status quo opinion is how a status quo is maintained and how an entire class of journalism and foreign policy acts as if the world is its oyster and as if there is no alternative. This is literally the hypothesis of manufacturing consent.

> Well sure, but any time someone disagrees with the policy of "free lunches" (as if there was such a thing) you get asked "what, do you hate poor people"?

You're not talking to "anyone", you're talking to me and I never made that point.

> I feel like I'm repeating myself here, and it seems odd to me because I would've expected folks on this website to understand this.

I'm not sure what other conversations you've had but I'm not arguing the merits of some semiconductor protectionism. I'm arguing against the OPs shrug that we should uncritically accept this spending because it's an outflowing of the Democratic process.

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

#435

Post by favflam »

tootie wrote: post #287
fleddr wrote: post #254

Fairly cynical comments on this thread, many trying to uphold American values like "free market", "protectionism is bad", "what about the consumer", "not from my tax money". I find those remarks pretty naive. Every major power block heavily subsidizes strategic industries, now and forever. It's in no way new or remarkable, nor does it violate some principle. Most of the above concepts are pure fiction. Semiconductors…

Here's my cynical take: This bill will subsidize a lot of jobs when we already have zero slack in our labor market. I think it's an excellent target for spending and would have a positive multiplier in normal times but in 2022 this seems likely to just goose inflation another inch. Unless we actually start seeing cyclical job losses finally hit right when this money starts being spent. Which is entirely possible.

If the government spends money on capacity increases, then inflation will go down, no?

Labor is tight, but once production is up the supply curve shifts and prices start going down.

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

#436

Post by sofixa »

toolz wrote: post #411
thereare5lights wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that literally no one starves in the U.S. for lack of food availability https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/fo... The metric of whether or not someone literally dies of starvation is a pathetic metric.

did you read the definition of the very lowest tier of "very low food security" metric? It's hilarious, 100 years ago people would laugh at such "hardships". Food availability isn't a problem in the U.S. for all but the extreme outliers. Now, education about nutrition is very likely a problem, but even the poorest of the poor can readily get the nutrition they need if they knew what they needed, but obviously even ou…

> It's hilarious, 100 years ago people would laugh at such "hardships"

And a 100 years ago a lobotomy against "mental illness" (like mood swings or chatty women) was considered acceptable. A high school diploma was an amazing achievement. What's your point and how does that relate to today?

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

#437

Post by thunkshift1 »

lettergram wrote: post #26

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.

There is no “free market” here.. other players in this field like samsung and tsmc are neck deep in govt funding. The question is are we ok handing over the top spot for such an important technology - most likely the most important technology right now- to foreign manufacturers?

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

#438

Post by imtringued »

remarkEon wrote: post #374
DubiousPusher wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm open to debate. But I think the OP is erroneous in presuming popular will is expressed in American National Security and Foreign policy and therefore using that to lend credence to this turn of events.

I don’t think that’s what was implied. In the abstract it seems much easier to get alignment on a national security question (especially one as cut and dry as this one, which is don’t let your nation’s semiconductor supply fall under the control of a hostile foreign country), than it is to get alignment on a much more ideological and philosophical question about how to solve poverty.

You solve poverty through land value taxes and a citizen's dividend and negative interest rates.

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

#439

Post by thereare5lights »

toolz wrote: post #411
thereare5lights wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that literally no one starves in the U.S. for lack of food availability https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/fo... The metric of whether or not someone literally dies of starvation is a pathetic metric.

did you read the definition of the very lowest tier of "very low food security" metric? It's hilarious, 100 years ago people would laugh at such "hardships". Food availability isn't a problem in the U.S. for all but the extreme outliers. Now, education about nutrition is very likely a problem, but even the poorest of the poor can readily get the nutrition they need if they knew what they needed, but obviously even ou…

> It's hilarious, 100 years ago people would laugh at such "hardships".

The metrics people used 100 years ago are of no concern to me and indeed the values those people held are more often than not abhorrent.

> Food availability isn't a problem in the U.S. for all but the extreme outliers.

When faced with data, you persist in this lie.

> Now, education about nutrition is very likely a problem, but even the poorest of the poor can readily get the nutrition they need if they knew what they needed

False, food deserts coupled with the fact that the more nutritious foods are much more expensive make it extremely difficult to do so.

> I fast for many days at a time _because_ it's healthy.

That's easy af to do when it's voluntary.

> We have an obesity epidemic in our poorest demographic. That says about everything that needs to be said, if you ask me.

This tells me that you've never been poor. One of the reasons people are obese is because all they can afford is the worst foods.

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

#440

Post by sofixa »

twawaaay wrote: post #345
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…

This is flawed logic. Security is what allows everything else to exist. You can't just say "Let's liquidate military and spend all that money on children". This would last only shortly until China or somebody else invades US. Now, I am not saying to not pay for meals. Investing directly in children is probably one of the better ways to improve future outlook of a country. I am just saying your logic is flawed and the…

> This would last only shortly until China or somebody else invades US.

Let's be realistic. Nobody can invade the US. Two oceans, vast territory, sparse population make that impossible from the get go. Not to mention the fact that what, 1/3 of the US population is armed to the death dreaming of the day they could make use of their arsenals. The sheer amount of troops required to keep the land and population under control, and the logistics to feed them all rule out pretty much any Earthly military power.

Nuke? Missile strikes? Naval blockade? All plausible, if difficult.

But an actual boots on the ground invasion? Impossible.

Post reply on HN