21–30 of 257 posts
When these types of things are funded one always gets the sinking feeling that the money is just getting stolen and/or wasted by savvy insiders who know how to write grants or who know the right people. In fact, I think that's a reasonable assumption and some proof is required to show that it is not the case.
While I have some sympathy for the policy makers attempting to do this they do appear to be oblivious that to the outside world, especially their allies, the meta-lesson is any critical industry will eventually be onshored by the printing of hundreds of billions to price you out if necessary. This isn't a recipe for long term peaceful co-operation. It's ridiculous to criticise China on one hand, and then emulate ever…
1) Employers are responsible for employee health coverage, inflating employee costs by a significant degree. The rationale for this model among the investor class is that it makes employees dependent on their employer and limits the power of unions, but for example in Germany, there's free state-supplied health care (paid for by higher taxes on individual and corporate profits).
2) Four decades of neoliberal trade policy and corporate profit maximization have created a situation of fragile global supply chain dependence and a lack of skilled experienced labor in many manufacturing sectors. High-skill manufacturing jobs have been replaced with low-skill service jobs and the brain drain into the financial sector has left the industrial sector in second place.
3) Construction and operation of new manufacturing facilities relies on a robust domestic infrastructure system, but American infrastructure (railroads, electricity grids, ports, etc.) is woefully decrepit in many areas and lags behind China and Europe. Again the reason is nobody wants to pay for it, and the issue is not 'overregulation' it's that it would require higher taxes and corrupt government contractors divert government funds into their own pockets instead of into the projects, resulting in constant cost overruns and low-quality outputs (reminscent with what went on with Iraq and Afghanistan reconstruction contracts).
It turns out worshipping at the feet of Milton Friedman & Co. wasn't such a good idea after all.
While I have some sympathy for the policy makers attempting to do this they do appear to be oblivious that to the outside world, especially their allies, the meta-lesson is any critical industry will eventually be onshored by the printing of hundreds of billions to price you out if necessary. This isn't a recipe for long term peaceful co-operation. It's ridiculous to criticise China on one hand, and then emulate ever…
When these types of things are funded one always gets the sinking feeling that the money is just getting stolen and/or wasted by savvy insiders who know how to write grants or who know the right people. In fact, I think that's a reasonable assumption and some proof is required to show that it is not the case.
It's been a long time since the US did industrial policy.
When these types of things are funded one always gets the sinking feeling that the money is just getting stolen and/or wasted by savvy insiders who know how to write grants or who know the right people. In fact, I think that's a reasonable assumption and some proof is required to show that it is not the case.
It's hard to fake a building going up.
Surprisingly few people engage with the main points of the article. It is pointed out how much money are spent, but the article is about how profitable those fabs will be. The author is conservative in judgments, but they ask a few questions worth considering, mainly: are the fabs big and efficient enough to offset the slower build, which is also more expensive, for lower volumes of production.
The world’s largest deposit of ultra pure quartz, which is needed for the very high end processors, is in North Carolina. The renaissance is real, or is about to be.
I just assumed they had processes for eliminating any and all contaminants.