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

TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 1001 posts

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#261

Post by jayd16 »

tyre wrote: post #136
yo_yo_yo-yo wrote: post #121

I cannot even begin to imagine what madness has infected the Taiwanese government to allow this. I feel so sorry for a great, entrepreneurial people. US tariffs will not matter when you are blockaded and Chester Nimitz is very much dead. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43123628

“Our continued protection of you is contingent on your investment in us”. Taiwan is hugely reliant on US defense guarantees. The US has a protectionist president who likes big numbers in announcements and a base riled up about American production capacity. Long-term this is bad for Taiwan since it reduces its leverage with the US in administrations with short-term geopolitics (or no real geopolitical talent.) In the…

> The US has a protectionist president

We do?

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#262

Post by starspangled »

yo_yo_yo-yo wrote: post #121

I cannot even begin to imagine what madness has infected the Taiwanese government to allow this. I feel so sorry for a great, entrepreneurial people. US tariffs will not matter when you are blockaded and Chester Nimitz is very much dead. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43123628

TSMC factories on Taiwan are small fry in the scheme of things and won't really move the needle much, in terms of strategy. Samsung and Intel are pretty comparable in manufacturing capability, within a couple of years really. And most chips you find in cars and ships and missiles and satellites and jets aren't leading-edge either.

China is terrified of their access to the sea being blockaded. They'd gladly give up TSMC technology without a second thought and continue to bribe, beg, steal their way around sancations and barriers to semiconductor technology as they have been doing just fine up to now if they could occupy Taiwan for its strategic position to deny American access and defend the sea around their coast.

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#263

Post by baby_souffle »

shigawire wrote: post #255
icegreentea2 wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that's the problem eh? Both for the OP's projection, but also identifies the element that most centrist/technocratic political parties are missing. You need to address the nativist tendencies in your country. You can't just bulldoze through them. You need to address the wealth inequality. And yes, I think you -are- allowed some degree of "clawback", especially if it helps address the other two issues. I think A…

>You need to address the nativist tendencies in your country. You can't just bulldoze through them. >You need to address the wealth inequality. I'd suggest that you solve the former with the latter. The nativist tendencies are stoked by economic insecurity.

The people who have the most to lose from addressing inequality are the people hoping to buy time blaming migrants.

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#264

Post by WillPostForFood »

branko_d wrote: post #217
safety1st wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right now is a very interesting moment in that the future is crystal clear and yet so many people of all persuasions don't want to accept it for so many different reasons * The USA is going to claw back whatever economic largesse it has granted to the rest of the world, and ultimately renege on many of its security guarantees, with the underlying reason being that it can no longer afford to be world police and pay fo…

This assumes USA was taken advantage of by globalization, which is not actually the case - USA benefitted disproportionally from it. USA's GDP growth is substantially based on the consumers (~70% compared to ~50% in the EU and other comparable countries), and that wouldn't have been possible if they could only consume what was produced in the USA. But there were losers, mainly in manufacturing, and USA didn't assist…

Globalization for the US was trading industrialization for financialization. Yay for the paper GDP gains, but most citizens got left behind - though they can by cheap imported cloths with their shrinking paychecks.

Can't build chips, can't make ships, can't make furniture, can't make clothes, can't make enough weapons to supply Ukraine, let alone for any real war. Globalization hollowed the capacity of the country.

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#265

Post by yo_yo_yo-yo »

foogazi wrote: post #231
yo_yo_yo-yo wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This analysis, if it can be called as such, misses the fact that the US is very, very politically divided, to the point where I can see elections results being regularly considered illegitimate. That perspective has been allowed to become reasonable, which is very, dangerous.

> I can see elections results being regularly considered illegitimate. You think we’ll still have elections?

> You think we’ll still have elections

If you throw away democracy do you still have a USA to speak of?

I think the answer to that is no, though perhaps I am mistaken that every US patriot has fealty to the constitution.

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#266

Post by jopsen »

xuki wrote: post #178
bee_rider wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if they don’t really believe we’d come to defend them regardless of the incentives, at this point. In that case, might as well try to avoid the tariffs. If they send enough engineers over, we won’t actually learn how to make the chips. Then when the next election happens they can re-evaluate. If China invades in the next four years, I guess… I dunno, at least they’ll have gotten some people out. It is a pret…

The US will NOT engage in a hot war against China for Taiwan, that's for certain, regardless of who is president at that time. Why would they risk nuclear war for a bunch of people who are really far away from the US continent?

You don't risk nuclear war by shooting a few conventional missiles and establishing a blockade.

(A) China would suffer intensely under a blockade.

(B) A few missiles could ensure chip facilities are surrendered intact.

(C) Even a short conflict where a few missiles hits boats invading Taiwan would ensure the rest of the world never trades with China.

Point being: The US doesn't have to win, don't have to fight with everything, just make the invasion hard and isolate China in a new cold war.

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#267

Post by defrost »

jayd16 wrote: post #261
tyre wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Our continued protection of you is contingent on your investment in us”. Taiwan is hugely reliant on US defense guarantees. The US has a protectionist president who likes big numbers in announcements and a base riled up about American production capacity. Long-term this is bad for Taiwan since it reduces its leverage with the US in administrations with short-term geopolitics (or no real geopolitical talent.) In the…

> The US has a protectionist president We do?

You do, assuming you're a US citizen.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism_in_the_United_St...

or: https://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcbg/programs/growthpol...

etc.

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#268

Post by abrookewood »

dev1ycan wrote: post #260
yo_yo_yo-yo wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now that I’ve calmed down a bit, I agree with your assessment. The optics game is so important, but Taiwan is in an impossible situation. If I were China, I would give them relative economic independence if they limit advanced process silicon to other countries and let Huawei and others monopolize the advanced nodes. The US at present does not appear to be a dependable partner.

They've said so as much that they plan to give it a similar to hong kong style government if they wilingly join, and from the latest trump Q&A it almost confirms that once America has TSMC fabs running in their country they won't care to protect Taiwan. Being a realist Taiwan joining China willingly under those conditions before they basically technology transfer to America and make themselves worth much less (In Chi…

A Hong-Kong style government doesn't mean as much as it used to.

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#269

Post by ninetyninenine »

yo_yo_yo-yo wrote: post #121

I cannot even begin to imagine what madness has infected the Taiwanese government to allow this. I feel so sorry for a great, entrepreneurial people. US tariffs will not matter when you are blockaded and Chester Nimitz is very much dead. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43123628

The U.S. frames its deteriorating relationship with China as a fight for “human rights” and “democracy,” but from China’s perspective, that’s just a cover for a larger campaign to contain its rise. The real issue? The U.S. fears losing global dominance and is using trade wars, tech bans, military encirclement, and financial pressure to slow China down.

China doesn’t want direct military conflict—it prefers economic and technological competition. But it sees the U.S. as a declining power that refuses to accept a multipolar world. The U.S. labels China’s economic expansion “debt-trap diplomacy” while ignoring the IMF’s history of predatory loans. It bans Huawei and TikTok under “security concerns” while engaging in mass surveillance itself. It calls China’s South China Sea claims “aggressive” while surrounding China with military bases.

From Beijing’s view, the U.S. preaches rules it doesn’t follow. Human rights? Washington ignores Saudi Arabia but obsesses over Xinjiang. Democracy? The U.S. supports coups when convenient. Free markets? Only when American firms win.

China isn’t looking for war—it’s playing the long game. The U.S. can try to contain it, but economic gravity favors China’s rise. The more Washington pushes, the clearer its real motives become.

But all this stuff is a bluff. China will spill blood for Taiwan, the US will not. When there is a standoff the US will back down and it's Taiwan getting fucked by everybody.

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#270

Post by raincole »

jopsen wrote: post #246
raincole wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we give them the doubt of benefit: TSMC is just appeasing Trump and will delay the actual investment as much as possible. If we face the reality: Taiwan is a vassal state. The decision makers are simply owned by the US.

> If we face the reality: Taiwan is a vassal state. The decision makers are simply owned by the US. The thing about US "vassel" states is they don't have to do what the US says. And sometimes won't! It's a classic Russian talking point that Ukraine has no agency. You're making the same argument for Taiwan. Taiwan doesn't have to accept a US deal they don't like. They could build nukes. They could opt to do nothing an…

> The thing about US "vassel" states is they don't have to do what the US says. And sometimes won't!

Yes, and then the US will force its way. It's quite funny that you even mentioned nukes. Taiwan did attempt to build nukes and the US destroyed the project.

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/03/01/asia/taiwan-cia-informant...

Post reply on HN