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

US reportedly forcing TSMC to buy 49% stake in Intel to secure tariff relief

notebookcheck.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 560 posts

Re: US reportedly forcing TSMC to buy 49% stake in Intel to secure tariff relief

#121

Post by bigyabai »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #4
duxup wrote: post #2

This whole economy by corruption and coercion is not going to work out.

I don't see how it can't work at least short term, when the US is by a long margin the world leading military and economic power. Why else has the US been overspending on military for decades and planting military bases and nuclear submarines all over the world, to become the world hegemony, if not to bully everyone in doing its bidding when push comes to shove? I'm not defending the actions of the US, I'm just askin…

[flagged]

Re: US reportedly forcing TSMC to buy 49% stake in Intel to secure tariff relief

#122

Post by ben_w »

exasperaited wrote: post #40
duxup wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what you're thinking of.

Well, I am British and have studied a tiny bit of my own country's history... so I do. But consider who in the world really loves the British. You don't need much time to make a list. Or even a paper and pen. The main difference between the British Empire and the American Empire is that the American Empire is being led by a man who believes tariffs are a tax on foreign countries and retail prices can be cut by more t…

> and retail prices can be cut by more than 100% and remain positive.

I've missed this story. Can you elaborate?

Re: US reportedly forcing TSMC to buy 49% stake in Intel to secure tariff relief

#123

Post by fh973 »

YetAnotherNick wrote: post #103
cherryteastain wrote: post #32

Tariffs kinda make sense when you have a deficit in a widely available item. Big trade deficit with Bangladesh? Sure you can buy cheap textiles from Thailand or Vietnam or something. Unfortunately this approach does not work when you lack a viable domestic alternative and you're up against a monopoly. What will the US do if TSMC does not blink? Not buy TSMC made chips? Obviously that is impossible, so the logical con…

> Not buy TSMC made chips? Obviously that is impossible Why do you think that? Trump clearly wants them to use Intel's 18A which is likely similar to TSMC 2 year old N3P, which is not an impossible option.

Them? Nvidia and AMD? RTX 7xxx would then be based on an old Intel process? Would buy these?

Re: US reportedly forcing TSMC to buy 49% stake in Intel to secure tariff relief

#124

Post by duxup »

lazyeye wrote: post #116
duxup wrote: post #2

This whole economy by corruption and coercion is not going to work out.

This is how China has been operating since forever. They don't seem to be doing too badly.

This is one of those situations where much like manufacturing jobs in the us ... that's not what I want. I don't think most people want that.

I don't think becoming China would be a success.

Re: US reportedly forcing TSMC to buy 49% stake in Intel to secure tariff relief

#125

Post by watwut »

vaidhy wrote: post #36
oezi wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When all your military spending can't help you win against a third-world country (USA in Afghanistan) or a single country 1/3 your size (Russia in Ukraine), it really makes you wonder if all that spending is justified to uphold one big bluff.

Winning is different from taking over.. Russia wants to rule over Ukraine, not destroy it. US was all into destroying Afghanistan and Iraq. They had no intention of being there long term.

Russia destroys its colonies. It wants to destroy ukraine. And it wants cultural genocide.

Re: US reportedly forcing TSMC to buy 49% stake in Intel to secure tariff relief

#126

Post by threatofrain »

Herring wrote: post #101
phkahler wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well China has been forcing tech transfer for 30 years now.

Look at Intel's history. Concentration of power (monopoly) generally leads to corruption/abuse and stifled innovation. It's bad even for the monopolist . The second China becomes powerful enough to throw their military around like the US is when I start supporting tech transfers the other way. A more distributed power structure is much better for overall progress.

> The second China becomes powerful enough to throw their military around like the US

This would be late timing.

Re: US reportedly forcing TSMC to buy 49% stake in Intel to secure tariff relief

#127

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

notahacker wrote: post #91
nemomarx wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China seems to be working on catching up, and if you remove all of your soft power maybe they look more attractive?

Absolutely. Everything the OP mentions as a reason to continue trading with the US is also a reason for Europe to trade more with China. Historically the argument for not doing that is "look at their very different values and how they bully and threaten their neighbours , and remember that if you do business there their government will happily crush you with its arbitrary power as soon as you step out of line and eve…

More than what? Europe trades a tremendous amount with China in the status quo. The argument you mentioned is real, but the EU never subscribed to it in the first place; they've consistently stated (e.g. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/STATEM...) that trade with China is very important and they have no interest in decoupling, although they'd like to lower the trade deficit.

Re: US reportedly forcing TSMC to buy 49% stake in Intel to secure tariff relief

#128

Post by [deleted] »

vkou wrote: post #112
lostlogin wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Russia wants to rule over Ukraine, not destroy it. Can’t it be both? It’s hard to argue they aren’t trying to destroy it. It has been attempted in the past during the Holodomor. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

The context of post-civil war stalinism and food/industrial policy was a little different from modern Russian empire-building. Russia's end goal here is a cultural genocide.

[deleted]

Re: US reportedly forcing TSMC to buy 49% stake in Intel to secure tariff relief

#129

Post by ben_w »

neves wrote: post #100
ben_w wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US margin on economic power isn't all that great, by GDP/PPP it's a long way behind China. Though from the POV of economic coercion, the question is probably more like "what's the USA's import/export market like relative to all my markets including domestic?", which is going to vary wildly by industry. > Ally with China, Iran and Russia to fight the US? Replace Iran with the EU, and yes, some or all of them. > EU…

US is a lot richer than China. GDP/PPP does not count the number of citizens.

If per capita was what mattered, the US would be kowtowing to each of Luxembourg, Singapore, and Ireland. The US does not, because "per capita" isn't as important as "per government".

The mean wealth/income per person in the USA is indeed higher than China.

So what?

Re: US reportedly forcing TSMC to buy 49% stake in Intel to secure tariff relief

#130

Post by alfiedotwtf »

neves wrote: post #90
A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't see how it can't work at least short term, when the US is by a long margin the world military and economic power. The 90s were ~30 years ago. American economic and military capacity ain't what they used to be, and alienating your allies and friends is starting to look like a poor strategy.

USA spends more in their military than the rest of the world combined. Also the only country which used nuclear weapons of mass destruction. You must fear them.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN