Live data from Hacker News

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

notebookcheck.net

361–370 of 560 posts

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

#361

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…

[deleted]

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

#362
post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>so the logical conclusion is that American consumers will end up paying the tariffs. That’s been the point all along… they are significantly raising taxes on the bottom 90% of Americans and most are too stupid to even understand it. Gotta pay for those tax cuts for the wealthy somehow.

It has nothing to do with stupidity. Stop painting people as idiots because they exist in one of the most information hostile environments in human history. This isn't some natural state that's unrecoverable. The people you describe have been given a highly addictive media environment tailor made to engender outrage and drive behavior. It shouldn't be a shock when most people cannot resist it. The first step to chang…

And, imo key, is the fact that this goes both ways. I've had conversations with both blue-collar types as well as white-collar types where both groups fail to grasp nuances and economonico-historic context. It's TikTok turtles all the way down. Breaking through echo chambers is harder than ever and there are no incentives to do it.

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

#363
post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Nukes for Taiwan is the only solution. Nuclear proliferation and subsequent war is inevitable imo.

I'm pretty sure giving nukes to Taiwan would be seen as an act of war by China.

No need to give them. TW can absolutely make them on their own, in fact they had at least one active project to do that and were forced to stop by the US.

I wouldn’t be even slightly surprised to learn they have a few MIRVs stashed away, pointed at Beijing, just in case.

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

#364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has nothing to do with stupidity. Stop painting people as idiots because they exist in one of the most information hostile environments in human history. This isn't some natural state that's unrecoverable. The people you describe have been given a highly addictive media environment tailor made to engender outrage and drive behavior. It shouldn't be a shock when most people cannot resist it. The first step to chang…

> most information hostile environments in human history Is it though? East Germany comes to mind as well as the rest of the Cold War countries behind the Iron Curtain. China seems to be pretty hostile as well. In the US, it is still much easier to find real information that counters the propaganda than it is in any of those other countries. There's no Great Firewall to bypass. You don't even need to do anything anon…

[flagged]

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

#365
post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>so the logical conclusion is that American consumers will end up paying the tariffs. That’s been the point all along… they are significantly raising taxes on the bottom 90% of Americans and most are too stupid to even understand it. Gotta pay for those tax cuts for the wealthy somehow.

It has nothing to do with stupidity. Stop painting people as idiots because they exist in one of the most information hostile environments in human history. This isn't some natural state that's unrecoverable. The people you describe have been given a highly addictive media environment tailor made to engender outrage and drive behavior. It shouldn't be a shock when most people cannot resist it. The first step to chang…

Stupid is as stupid does.

I can think something is a good idea for any number of reasons, it can also still be stupid.

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

#366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there's one product we have domestic alternatives to it's semiconductors. We're a couple nodes behind TSMC. Using US only foundries or paying a premium for TSMC is not the end of the world.

Really? I was not under the impression that we had anything truly competitive. Could we make an iPhone, for example, using only U.S.-made chips?

At $499 today no. At $490k in 1-2yr maybe. At $4.9m/unit by 2032 at up to 1k unit/yr, sure you guys can.

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

#367
post #246
post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It has nothing to do with stupidity. Stop painting people as idiots because they exist in one of the most information hostile environments in human history. No. Someone refusing to spend 30 seconds understanding how a tariff works is the result of an idiot. My 10 year old figured out how they work in under 5 minutes. There’s literally no excuse for a grown ass adult to refuse to educate themselves on the subject. “…

I just googled "How do tariffs work?" I got hit with several college level vocabulary words describing tariffs in both the AI summary and my first result. It might be less of a problem, if we had adequately funded schools.

> It might be less of a problem, if we had adequately funded schools.

Just want to point out that giving more money to an underperforming school only makes it worse.

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

#368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think China would love to get a broad trade deal. Analysts in both Europe and the US generally agree that the Chinese government cultivates unbalanced trade as a matter of policy. (Indeed, one of the things that's supposed to happen as part of the US-EU "trade deal" is joint action on metals to counteract persistent Chinese overcapacity.)

A broad trade deal would be unbalanced in China's favour; they manufacture more and at lower cost. But the US isn't exactly selling the message of being the better partner right now.

Neither of them are acting like good partners right now, thus the trade disputes. Smart money has to be on the US getting a less crazy leader sooner than China stops pursuing its long-standing mercantilist ideas.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you mean by a broad trade deal? As of 2023, a large majority of imports from the US and close to a majority of imports from China were tariff-free. (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...) The remainder are on goods that the EU doesn't want entirely free trade in for some reason or another. I could definitely imagine a scenario where China follows in Trump's footsteps and bullies the EU into pushing their tariff-free percentage higher, but I wouldn't call that broad and wouldn't expect it to produce radical shifts in the import-export activity of EU businesses.

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

#369
post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>so the logical conclusion is that American consumers will end up paying the tariffs. That’s been the point all along… they are significantly raising taxes on the bottom 90% of Americans and most are too stupid to even understand it. Gotta pay for those tax cuts for the wealthy somehow.

It has nothing to do with stupidity. Stop painting people as idiots because they exist in one of the most information hostile environments in human history. This isn't some natural state that's unrecoverable. The people you describe have been given a highly addictive media environment tailor made to engender outrage and drive behavior. It shouldn't be a shock when most people cannot resist it. The first step to chang…

Sure instead of calling them stupid I’ll just tell them they’re addicted to toxic media and we need to regulate the media for their own good because of their inability to resist it.

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

#370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just because someone has a different point of view than yours does not make them stupid. He never suggested that. You defended these voters by saying they gladly accept the propaganda information diet, not that they have well-reasoned differences of opinion.

No, that's not my defense. You're putting words in my mouth. I'm saying that because they voted for someone that you disagree with for whatever reasons does not automatically make them stupid. They could have voted for someone for a totally different reason than tariffs. Now their guy is doing something they don't know anything about and now they are personally getting attacked. Whether they know anything about that…

Ugh I did put words in your mouth because I was reading nosignono's comment. Apologies.

Still, arbitrary_name seems consistent about not judging people for ideological differences but rather for choosing not to be accurately informed. I.e. he is not saying "they're dumb because I don't agree with tariffs" he's saying "they're dumb because after Trump promised to make us rich with tariffs, they didn't bother to check how duties are collected." You seem to agree with this to an extent.

> All I'm saying is stop painting with a broad brush in that anyone voting for a party is stupid.

I mean, it's four broad brushes right? The dupes, the single-issue voters, the identity voters, and the ones who believe in whatever his policy happens to be. I don't think it's fair to say they fall into a single bin but they're not all snowflakes who cannot be characterized en masse.

> I'll defend people voting for who they want or even voting against someone they don't want.

Okay but what about the ones who vote for what they don't want. The ones who voted Trump to release the Epstein files. Or to balance the budget. Or to end the Ukraine war day one? They took a look at his first term, listened to his campaign promises, and decided, "surely he will deliver!"

Post reply on HN