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

481–489 of 489 posts

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

#481

Post by ch4s3 »

throwntoday wrote: post #450
ch4s3 wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TSMC straight out competed the 1st movers in the chip space. They’re not dominant because American companies moved their own factories to Taiwan. It was homegrown and they really nailed it.

TSMC were almost single-handedly bankrolled by Apple. Had Samsung not tried to establish themselves as a competitor to Apple in basically every product offering, they would be in first place.

Well, TSMC delivered on what Apple needed and Samsung spread themselves too thins. That's how it goes sometimes.

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

#482

Post by cudgy »

andreime wrote: post #460
cudgy wrote: post #457

Instead of subsidizing the semiconductor industry (and others) with free subsidies, why not invest the money in the companies and issue shares to every registered tax payer equally. At least then the citizens might see some benefits from yet another huge act of corporate welfare.

cause as individual investors you can't force the company to build fabs. company will make money for investors in other ways.

The investment could be a special class of stock that would be contingent upon building fabs with installments on completion of milestones or a penalty to the company applies. The penalty could be applied in many ways like direct tariffs on that company, penalty tax, direct cash penalty, or even nationalization of the company in extreme circumstances.

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

#483

Post by toolz »

thereare5lights wrote: post #480
toolz wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One of the reasons people are obese is because all they can afford is the worst foods. Obesity is caused exclusively by calorie surplus. You can literally eat pure sugar, twinkies, and sugary beverages exclusively at base metabolism maintenance calories and never become obese. As for your ignorant assumptions, I've been homeless for short periods of time in my life (in between jobs moving to a different city) and l…

> You can literally eat pure sugar, twinkies, and sugary beverages exclusively at base metabolism maintenance calories and never become obese. You changed your argument from nutrition to calories. > As for your ignorant assumptions, I've been homeless for short periods of time in my life (in between jobs moving to a different city) and lived far below the poverty line for like 8 years of my adult life. As for your ig…

well you can choose to remain ignorant if you want, the second link I provided was based off prices in california...not just california, but berkley - which is right next to the most expensive grocery city in california (oakland)

Not to mention I'm being extremely generous by using a salary that is 50% of the poverty line on top of only utilizing 30% of that for food and on top of that building meals that provide more nutrition than the average wealthy american gets by far.

but you've since left the domain of attempting reason, but I'm hoping that's just because you have too much ego on the internet but can still absorb information and utilize it later.

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

#484

Post by jdasdf »

vxNsr wrote: post #312
jdasdf wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would there be competition, and why would any company take that deal, when it cannot benefit from it?

Why wouldn't it benefit? the idea would to be prevent giving a handout to the shareholders through unethical means. When you sign a contract with someone you are bound by the contract, for some reason you and most company executives are having trouble understanding that. They all (you) think, "if I can take someone else's money and run, then I should, my word and agreements be damned." That anathema to a civil societ…

> Why wouldn't it benefit? the idea would to be prevent giving a handout to the shareholders through unethical means. When you sign a contract with someone you are bound by the contract, for some reason you and most company executives are having trouble understanding that. They all (you) think, "if I can take someone else's money and run, then I should, my word and agreements be damned." That anathema to a civil society.

Can you explain to me how shareholder benefit from such a deal when the deal is preventing them from benefiting from it? Why would shareholders (the owners of the company) ever voluntarily take such a deal?

No one is saying agreements shouldn't be fulfilled, but I'd like to note that you still haven't explained why the company should ever take such a deal, when it does not benefit the shareholders (you know, the ones the company is supposed to be working for)

>Stock buybacks and executive bonuses are things you give out when the company is doing well -- through its own means, not when you get charity from the government because you screwed up for 30 years and failed to invest and innovate.

Why do you believe that's the case?

Stock buybacks (like dividends) are merely ways to put cash from the right pocket (the companies bank accounts) into the left pocket (the bank accounts of the shareholders), shareholders own the cash all the same.

There is nothing immoral or wrong about them.

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

#485

Post by eropple »

mrkstu wrote: post #392
rurp wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh to live in such a world... Unfortunately the Supreme Court is not a compiler that returns rulings from some objective process. The justices have massive leeway to decide how to interpret every part of the constitution, and they do so to align their rulings with their own personal and political goals. If we swapped this court with 9 other judges they would return very different rulings on the exact same cases.

In this instance though, the majority's 'political goals' are textualism and originalism- where the intent of the written words is paramount. This at least has the virtue of limiting the power of their unelected personal policy outcomes- which we see much more often with the putative conservatives voting with the liberals against their presumed personal opinions on what they'd like the outcome to be. You see that qui…

Gorsuch I'll give you as, while intensely conservative, probably pretty honest about it, but Alito is a whole-cloth mythmaker on his own in the vein of a Scalia. He's about as much of a "textualist" as Thomas is, and both will search for any wild port in a storm (see Dobbs itself for plenty of them) to get to the point he wanted to get to.

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

#486

Post by thereare5lights »

toolz wrote: post #483
thereare5lights wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can literally eat pure sugar, twinkies, and sugary beverages exclusively at base metabolism maintenance calories and never become obese. You changed your argument from nutrition to calories. > As for your ignorant assumptions, I've been homeless for short periods of time in my life (in between jobs moving to a different city) and lived far below the poverty line for like 8 years of my adult life. As for your ig…

well you can choose to remain ignorant if you want, the second link I provided was based off prices in california...not just california, but berkley - which is right next to the most expensive grocery city in california (oakland) Not to mention I'm being extremely generous by using a salary that is 50% of the poverty line on top of only utilizing 30% of that for food and on top of that building meals that provide mor…

> well you can choose to remain ignorant if you want, the second link I provided was based off prices in california...not just california, but berkley - which is right next to the most expensive grocery city in california (oakland)

You don't even fully read the links you provide.

> Cost estimates based on Safeway and Berkeley Bowl prices advertised in January 2013.

> Note that costs are for portions used in the menu; your up-front cost will be higher if you purchase all items on the list as packaged.

Furthermore, this is only for one person. This menu doesn't work for little kids because they need formula. It doesn't work for teenagers because they're ravenous eating machines. And if they're particularly active kids, then this doesn't even meet the caloric needs.

This menu is for an adult that is relatively sedentary. If you're talking about working class people that do manual labor, this is completely inadequate.

> but you've since left the domain of attempting reason, but I'm hoping that's just because you have too much ego on the internet but can still absorb information and utilize it later.

Right back at ya.

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

#487

Post by koheripbal »

DubiousPusher wrote: post #412
koheripbal wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but that's a feature not bug. People who have been involved in politics and have experience with budgets and governing SHOULD be the ones making decisions. Next time you get heart surgery, ask for the fringe thinking fresh college grad and see how that goes.

I'm not talking about crackpots. I'm talking often qualified people who don't match the entrepreneur, small business owner, veteran, firefighter, nurse template that local bourgeoisie party leaders tend to endorse and find funding for. IMO, this preference has lead to a clear preference for statism and state violence amongst our elected officials as the people who rise through the rabks tend toward an implicit trust…

So you're an anarchist?

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

#488

Post by DubiousPusher »

koheripbal wrote: post #487
DubiousPusher wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not talking about crackpots. I'm talking often qualified people who don't match the entrepreneur, small business owner, veteran, firefighter, nurse template that local bourgeoisie party leaders tend to endorse and find funding for. IMO, this preference has lead to a clear preference for statism and state violence amongst our elected officials as the people who rise through the rabks tend toward an implicit trust…

So you're an anarchist?

Maybe. I haven't really read enough about anarchism as a political philosophy to say. But I do see that politicians have in common a basic fundamental belief in the institutions of the state. The Democrats give more credence to the civil bureaucracy and the Republicans give more credence to the martial bureaucracy but they overlap a lot.

And in my experience this has a lot to do the low level party operatives whose hands are on the scale at the primary level.

How many marginalized people actually ever make it into office? Virtually none and so that is a perspective that is completely unrepresented. It's stalwart statists all the way down, they mostly just disagree on what the state violence should be used to enforce.

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

#489

Post by [deleted] »

djmips wrote: post #390
WebbWeaver wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we not frame this as a battle or even a war? The US lost this capability a long time ago due to labor costs and natural resource consumption. From the labor cost and natural resource consumption a operation of this size can easily fail. We need more partners in this not just a handout. This action should have little to no input on any globalized leverage system. For this to be successful we need more partners

Can someone else corroborate that is something the US lost because of labor costs? We are constantly told it's R&D and infrastructure costs. How much of that is labor costs? It almost feels like labor costs is a good story to salve the ego when the US was simply beat on tech and tech investment.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN