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

The US Government Is Now a Shareholder in 26 Companies

moeonmargin.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 131 posts

Re: The US Government Is Now a Shareholder in 26 Companies

#91

Post by 627467 »

coffeemug wrote: post #53
alephnerd wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. This is called industrial policy, and there is bipartisan support for this. 2008 changed thinking on both sides of the aisle around leveraging state power to build industries. Plenty of us Obama and Biden alums are industrial policy fans, and there is a similar cohort across the aisle.

The issues with this are precedent/slippery slope. Today it's a small stake in a small number of companies, but empirically government initiatives almost always grow. Once entrenched, I would be willing to bet that the government will take larger and larger stakes in a bigger and bigger number of companies until this model becomes a non-trivial, potentially dominant, share of the economy. I can see myself becoming a…

Anything is a slippery slope if you resign to it. It's not like governments have never been willing (or forced) to privatize or reduce their roles in markets. We are exchanging ideas on a government initiative

Re: The US Government Is Now a Shareholder in 26 Companies

#92

Post by ryanisnan »

exe34 wrote: post #45
ryanisnan wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a reductive take - attack the argument or move on.

I did. you failed to understand.

I'll bite, because this is HN and I think there's more space for genuine discussion here, not because I desire to be right.

First, addressing my first point about how this is "the modern equivalent of an ad hominem attack". The commenter is complaining as if Claude basically came up with this entire thing itself. Very very seldom is that actually how things get created, at least in my experience. Yes there's the potential for someone to say something stupid like "Claude, generate me a blog post about something", and Claude can do it. But that's such a weird way to relate to any content that was in-part authored by AI. That just isn't how virtually everyone I know is using the tools, so it's a disingenuous take.

Second, I find your dismissal of the aptness of using the phrase "ad hominem" attack reductive here because yes, AI is not a human, but two points here:

1) I'm going to give the true OP the benefit of the doubt, that they used AI as a tool for helping develop and hone their thoughts, and AI wasn't just set off in a black box

2) AI can produce novel ideas, and can produce the output of thought, even if it isn't producing it the same ways our brains think

Re: The US Government Is Now a Shareholder in 26 Companies

#93

Post by iamnothere »

throwaway27448 wrote: post #81
alephnerd wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. This is called industrial policy, and there is bipartisan support for this. 2008 changed thinking on both sides of the aisle around leveraging state power to build industries. Plenty of us Obama and Biden alums are industrial policy fans, and there is a similar cohort across the aisle.

We desperately need a third party to displace one of these two. Having a state interest in industry is of course a great idea—telecoms, power generation, a base level of healthcare providers, pharmaceuticals, base level tech manufacturers are obvious things that should be state owned—but this just seems like an extension of the defense industry corruption (the "military industrial complex") that's plagued our country…

Exactly, few would oppose a stake in rare earths mining or something, but the more likely endgame of this is a government stake in companies like Google and Palantir. Which will inevitably lead to even more influence and “special access” privileges.

Edit: others have pointed out that the government likely already had investments in most of these tech firms through In-Q-Tel, which is also a potential issue, but that’s funding for small growing companies. It’s another matter entirely when government owns a percentage of our mature technology infrastructure.

Re: The US Government Is Now a Shareholder in 26 Companies

#94

Post by meetingthrower »

I like the idea of getting a slice of the action for the country. I mean, to have a nice slice of profits or something would be really nice. You know the equity is nice in that only pays off if there are profits. What would be even nicer is just a nice permanent claim on profits, like 20% or something like that....don't we call that a tax rate? /s

Re: The US Government Is Now a Shareholder in 26 Companies

#95

Post by SoftTalker »

throwaway27448 wrote: post #80
asimpson wrote: post #39

The investments listed here in the article make this seem like an effort to shore up or incentivize industries or companies that are integral to national defense. One example, in the ongoing US-China trade war one of the strongest moves China did was put [export controls on rare earth minerals][1] which are essential components across technology, defense, and healthcare to name a few. The government investing in thes…

Seems like it'd be a lot cheaper to work with china rather than pretend like they're going to attack us.

When it comes to China it's best to remember the Boy and the Rattlesnake Story.

Re: The US Government Is Now a Shareholder in 26 Companies

#96

Post by iamnothere »

everdrive wrote: post #12
thisislife2 wrote: post #2

Have we come full circle now with China inspired by American Capitalism to create their own model of it, that now inspires the Americans to imitate the Chinese?

Yes, we've been copying the Chinese in a few cases in the past 6 years. I think they're the early warning signs of cultural dominance. Sort of like how a tin-pot African dictator in the 1980s would have an over-the-top western-style military uniform.

Coming soon, electronic billboards with photos of people who didn’t pay their student loans.

Re: The US Government Is Now a Shareholder in 26 Companies

#97

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

coffeemug wrote: post #53
alephnerd wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. This is called industrial policy, and there is bipartisan support for this. 2008 changed thinking on both sides of the aisle around leveraging state power to build industries. Plenty of us Obama and Biden alums are industrial policy fans, and there is a similar cohort across the aisle.

The issues with this are precedent/slippery slope. Today it's a small stake in a small number of companies, but empirically government initiatives almost always grow. Once entrenched, I would be willing to bet that the government will take larger and larger stakes in a bigger and bigger number of companies until this model becomes a non-trivial, potentially dominant, share of the economy. I can see myself becoming a…

Yeah, this is how you get an oligarch system.

Re: The US Government Is Now a Shareholder in 26 Companies

#98

Post by cyanydeez »

bit-anarchist wrote: post #87
mghackerlady wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

those are on two completely different sides of the political compass

Not really. Specially Italian Fascism.

we're definitely noticing things under Democrats we'd say "sure, let the government figure out" and things under All republicans: "No, fuck that, you're just assholes trying to turn children into well heeled religious fundamentalists".

It's obviously clear attitude is everything.

Re: The US Government Is Now a Shareholder in 26 Companies

#99

Post by unsnap_biceps »

iamnothere wrote: post #93
throwaway27448 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We desperately need a third party to displace one of these two. Having a state interest in industry is of course a great idea—telecoms, power generation, a base level of healthcare providers, pharmaceuticals, base level tech manufacturers are obvious things that should be state owned—but this just seems like an extension of the defense industry corruption (the "military industrial complex") that's plagued our country…

Exactly, few would oppose a stake in rare earths mining or something, but the more likely endgame of this is a government stake in companies like Google and Palantir. Which will inevitably lead to even more influence and “special access” privileges. Edit: others have pointed out that the government likely already had investments in most of these tech firms through In-Q-Tel, which is also a potential issue, but that’s…

I'm against the government having stake in any private company. It incentivizes the wrong behaviors. Regulations need to be written by a neutral party. Policy decisions need to be fair and balanced between the players in the market, not favoring one that they "own".

Re: The US Government Is Now a Shareholder in 26 Companies

#100

Post by Auracle »

choult wrote: post #28
dachworker wrote: post #20

Corporate taxes don't work and taxing the rich is super hard. Could this be a way for the state to suplement tax revenue?

No, not enough money in it. Tax the rich.

The rich already pay most of the income tax in our country. We probably have the most progressive tax system in the world.
Post reply on HN