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

Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 657 posts

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#291

Post by shortsunblack »

BeetleB wrote: post #56
light_hue_1 wrote: post #17

In the past 15 years Intel has spent almost $100 billion on stock buybacks. They don't need the money. This is a pure transfer of wealth from taxpayers to the rich. And they're getting more like $20 billion not once you include loans, etc. The wealthy make massive amounts of money, take it out for themselves, and then complain that they don't have capital. That's pure junk. And then we wonder why Biden's approval rat…

The new CEO banned buybacks. I never understood the anti-dividend and anti-buyback mindset. I've given quite a bit of money to partially own a business (and I don't mean publicly traded shares, but literally buy a portion of a business). I have an agreement with the operator that I'll get N% of proceeds (as long as the business can handle that percentage). Are you saying that I, as an owner, am not entitled to it? Th…

Buybacks and dividends are not the same thing. Buybacks get preferential tax treatment and are in their entirety manipulative (that's why they were banned under SEC rules until Reagan deregulated capital markets) to the market it serves. Dividends are predictable, have a consistent rate across the years and are pretty much impossible to game the market with, as they return value to shareholders over a longer time period, avoiding temporary volatility.

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#294

Post by bluGill »

bumby wrote: post #266
hollywood_court wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine we’d have that skilled workforce if companies paid enough. I’m a former construction contractor who reinvented myself as a software developer. Each time I run into one of my former peers in the construction industry I hear the same complaints from them. “We can’t hire any good help.” Yet they are still paying the same non living wages that they have for 30 years.

Not saying this with snark, but how many of those former peers work for companies with a clear pipeline to train people? Usually when I hear complaints like "We can't hire or keep good help" it's correlated with a company who isn't willing to invest in developing their workforce.

Not sure where in construction he was, but I've worked framing crews before, and the boss would hire anybody (not disabled) who said they were willing to work hard. It isn't hard to teach someone the basic tasks and most people could catch on in just an hour. Most people though realized it was physically hard work and quit in a week (even though this should be obvious).

Plumbers and electricians have a good start from nothing apprentice program. They are sometimes hard to get into, but I know a few people who have gotten in over the years.

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#295

Post by xyst »

zer00eyz wrote: post #235
nyokodo wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Whether we look back in 20 years and think "wow glad we took that hit upfront" is anyone's guess Globalization is breaking down quickly. Chips are crucial to national security and our economy. The supply chain for advanced chips is heavily dependent on East Asia which is a geopolitical powder keg and a demographic time bomb. The only thing more expensive than whatever we end up with is chips unavailable at any pric…

>> Globalization is breaking down quickly. Food. Fuel. Renewables is shifting one of these, but the other will not go backwards, its that or billions will starve.

Billions are already starving. You just never hear about them. Millions are starving today on American streets. Yet we do nothing but sit on our hands, play hot potato between generations, point fingers, start culture wars, start class wars.

It’s all quite boring. Nobody is interested in solving the issue. Only a rat race to see who can con the next person(s).

Some days this monologue from Westworld rings true:

“ I think humanity is a thin layer of bacteria on a ball of mud hurtling through the void. I think if there was a God, he would’ve given up on us long ago. He gave us a paradise and we used everything up. We dug up every ounce of energy and burned it. We consume and excrete, use and destroy. Then we sit here on a neat little pile of ashes, having squeezed anything of value out of this planet, and we ask ourselves, “Why are we here?” You want to know what I think your purpose is? It’s obvious. You’re here along with the rest of us to speed the entropic death of this planet. To service the chaos. We’re maggots eating a corpse”

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#296

Post by bluGill »

autoexecbat wrote: post #174
hollywood_court wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine we’d have that skilled workforce if companies paid enough. I’m a former construction contractor who reinvented myself as a software developer. Each time I run into one of my former peers in the construction industry I hear the same complaints from them. “We can’t hire any good help.” Yet they are still paying the same non living wages that they have for 30 years.

The type of work does matter. If I had the choice between a low-pay office job and a low-pay physical labor job, many would pick the office.

That depends. When I was young and the weather was nice the physical labor job sounded really nice. However physical labor also means when it is -1C and raining, or 40C with no clouds. Now that I'm older my body isn't willing to do that and the office job is a lot nicer (but my doctor keeps telling me to stay active)

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#297

Post by tgma »

amateuring wrote: post #282
tgma wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose at least the theory is $100/person invested in chips will collectively benefit us more as we will not lose the strategic advantage in chipmaking. Surgical planned economy to cover the gaps in market economy and tragedy of the commons situations.

planned economies only enrich the planners

Strictly speaking that is manifestly false (the "only" part). At the very least, in practice they usually enable a bunch of unnatural markets/behaviors (usually falling under "corruption") that enrich many ancillary parties in addition to the planners, even if they don't enrich the general population (last I checked the west was filled with plenty of Marxist-adjacents who make arguments of such sort, so I suppose it it is not a given for everyone). To be clear, I am not advocating for the grant per se; just describing a theory the other side might be operating under.

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#298

Post by Aloisius »

BeetleB wrote: post #147
light_hue_1 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I never understood the anti-dividend and anti-buyback mindset. I'll try to explain it. Companies use stock buybacks to give away massive amounts of capital. Capital that they clearly need for their long term health. Then, because they're important to the economy when they have a downturn they come to taxpayers and ask for massive amounts of cash. This is for example what happened to the airlines which then got over…

You start a business and have partners who have bankrolled you. They own a percentage of the company. At some point, you want to buy out their share. But the government just banned it. You can only dilute your share, never increase your ownership stake. Does that make sense? Because that's what banning stock buybacks will achieve. > Companies use stock buybacks to give away massive amounts of capital. It's one use of…

> Companies also do buybacks to get a greater ownership stake.

Greater ownership stake in what? Companies, at least in the US, can't own themselves. Stock buybacks merely reduce outstanding shares effectively increasing the percentage of the company owned remaining shareholders.

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#299

Post by rhelz »

pwthornton wrote: post #274
rhelz wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How did this happen in the first place? By not pursuing protectionist public policies. > the taxpayer is on the hook for $8.5B $8.5B is a big price tag, but whether the government should spend it or not depends on whether or not the investment pays off.

This is way bigger than trade policies. Intel was the world leader in chip-making until fairly recently. Steve Jobs wanted them to build the iPhone chips because they were a generation or two ahead of any other fab in the world. Today, Intel is no longer leading the world in chip fab process. Intel at the time wasn't interested in fabing ARM chips, and the rest is history. Intel and American fabs fell behind for a nu…

> Intel at the time wasn't interested in fabing ARM chips, and the rest is history.

Fun fact, in the late 90's, Intel was the biggest manufacturer of ARM chips. I was there at the time, and I wrote lots of software to aid in their design.

What happened to Intel was twofold: The first problem was that Robert Noyce, Andy Grove, And Gordon Moore died. Each one was a once-in-century intellect, and it took Intel a while to be able to find somebody who could remotely fill those shoes.

The second problem was Intel was making so much money on x86 chips, that dedicating any fab capacity to anything else--including chips for Apple's iPhone, would for years have had such a huge opportunity cost, that the shareholders would have sued, and with cause. Because literally (not metaphorically) anything they would have manufactured instead would have had a drastically lower profit margin, and the stock would have tanked.

I suspect that the only reason Intel made a foray into ARM chips in the first place was to head off anti-trust accusations, and once the political heat was off, they dropped them like they were hot.

By the time the market shifted, almost a generation of mediocre management had left Intel less paranoid, and therefore, less likely to survive.

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#300

Post by smallerfish »

btbuildem wrote: post #244
lenerdenator wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The goal of a corporation is to generate value for shareholders, and we don't give any incentives for them to do otherwise.

I ask again, who are these "shareholders" and why do we continue to play along with this monumental scam?

Do you have a 401k? You are.
Post reply on HN