211–220 of 765 posts
Ironic, Western politicians thought opening up to trade with China would lead to it adopting a Western model of government. Instead it's lead to the USA adopting the Chinese one.
We're living in the time of irony. Up is Down, Left is Right, Right is Left. Republicans have become Socialist. Free Speech absolutist now against Free Speech.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
that's not a grant. That's just buying stocks.
It's effectively a grant. The US government isn't buying existing shares. Intel is issuing new shares and selling them to the US government - so actual money is being transferred to Intel (and existing shares are being diluted as a result).
Genuine question- How does Govt picking winners and losers going to help? Intel is no Too big to fail Bank. Why save Intel of all chip manufacturers? Wouldnt it be like 25 years too late, with Intel and its heydays !? Would Govt now ensure parity by investing in "marquee" entities across different industrial domains?
There is only 1 winner and 1 loser: Intel. It's the only chip manufacturer "left" in the US. The argument is national security: the US expects China to invade Taiwan and this will kill TSMC in the process. Whether this will happen or not can be debated, but this is what the government expects.
Edit: I think it's a misconception that China cares much about fabs in Taiwan. It wants unification.
Genuine question- How does Govt picking winners and losers going to help? Intel is no Too big to fail Bank. Why save Intel of all chip manufacturers? Wouldnt it be like 25 years too late, with Intel and its heydays !? Would Govt now ensure parity by investing in "marquee" entities across different industrial domains?
You are asking why save Intel of all chip manufacturers, and the answer is because there aren't any other major chip manufacturers in the US. AMD no longer has a fab. TSMC dominates the global market and basically has no competition. In the event that Taiwan is invaded, the US would suddenly have a huge problem getting access to any kind of high end chips, be they CPUs or GPUs. This would be a major problem economica…
180,000 wafers a year. Globally they do 17 million. They announced first profit yesterday.
Genuine question- How does Govt picking winners and losers going to help? Intel is no Too big to fail Bank. Why save Intel of all chip manufacturers? Wouldnt it be like 25 years too late, with Intel and its heydays !? Would Govt now ensure parity by investing in "marquee" entities across different industrial domains?
There is only 1 winner and 1 loser: Intel. It's the only chip manufacturer "left" in the US. The argument is national security: the US expects China to invade Taiwan and this will kill TSMC in the process. Whether this will happen or not can be debated, but this is what the government expects.
Ironic, Western politicians thought opening up to trade with China would lead to it adopting a Western model of government. Instead it's lead to the USA adopting the Chinese one.
Some examples: VOC, BBC, national airlines, etc.
List across countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government-owned_compa...
US specific: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-owned_enterprises_of_the...
Forgive me...how is this different than taxes? And wouldn't it be better to oh, I don't know, enforce the standard corporate tax rate?
The distorts incentives and destroys the free market.
This is worse than I expected. They're apparently putting in no new money and retroactively demanding stock in exchange for grants that were already awarded. If Intel can't afford to build 14A and we're putting in no net new money... then Intel still can't afford 14A? Unless they were lying.