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

401–410 of 1001 posts

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

#401

Post by amelius »

DeathArrow wrote: post #362
ninetyninenine wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

If bad guys do something, it's bad. If good guys do the same thing, it's good.

We don't have slave camps with Uyghurs though.

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

#402

Post by appointment »

yo_yo_yo-yo wrote: post #265
foogazi wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

"US patriots" have fealty to an imagined version of the constitution that lets the Republicans do whatever they want. There is no reason to think this will change if the Republicans get even more fascist.

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

#403

Post by mindslight »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #264
branko_d wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Citizens got left behind because of corrupt government policy that took the gains from cheap imports, centralized them into newly-created money (to make sure inflation still happened), and then dumped most of that new money into cheap loans for the financial industry, driving asset inflation and other financialization. This was the so-called "fiscal responsibility" of the past three+ decades - profligate handouts for the rich.

A sane alternative would have been for the government to spend the surplus on deliberate policy goals such as infrastructure development, preserving the industrial base, scientific research, forward looking renewable energy and less polluting processes, restoring the expectation of full time employment to 40 hours per household, etc. Distorting prices in those sectors in service of deliberate goals would have been much better than making housing unaffordable and calling it progress.

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

#404

Post by qalmakka »

Detrytus wrote: post #129
world2vec wrote: post #52

Might be a silly question but considering the tensions between US and EU right now... What would happen to all these deals if ASML was was not allowed to sell their machines to US companies? I don't know enough to even speculate on these wild scenarios

US has many military bases across EU, after such hostile act they might as well take control over the Netherlands

It's a bit naive to expect US bases in Europe to still be there in the next 20 years. First, Trump clearly wants to pull out of Europe, because the current Republican party has basically no interest in Europe whatsoever (and it may even be seen as an enemy by them - it's the embodiment of all the "social state" fears they harbour). Second, if the US stop cooperating with the EU on security and forces Europe to rearm, they would probably become redundant and an easy target for populist movements - especially when Trump is out and will be replaced by a less appealing figure. Meloni, ... won't be able to sell Trump as a role model to their voters for long if he really plans on fucking up the European economy; if there's little to be gained it's easier for populists and nationalist in general to just paint him as an enemy.

As a European there's been a lingering feeling of anti-Americanism in Europe that's been somewhat dormant for the last 30 years. It's clearly awakening now, and it risks going mainstream too, which would basically make the position of US bases untenable unless there's a direct reward for them (like, having security guarantees)

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

#405

Post by CorrectHorseBat »

tnt128 wrote: post #314

The idea that the US protects Taiwan from a possible Chinese invasion over chips is one of those things that sounds believable but really isn't going to happen. From China’s perspective, the cost of war is much higher than the cost of developing these chips themselves. In the worst-case scenario, they would be 2-3 years behind the cutting edge, which is not mission-critical. Most electronics (civilian or military) do…

>The idea that the US protects Taiwan from a possible Chinese invasion over chips is one of those things that sounds believable but really isn't going to happen.

>From China’s perspective, the cost of war is much higher than the cost of developing these chips themselves.

You've got it completely backwards. China doesn't want Taiwan because it has the best chip manufacturing in the world. Taiwan has the best chip manufacturing in the world because China wants to invade them and they wanted to give the US a reason to defend them and China a reason not to. War with Taiwan will impact global chip supply even if China can produce their own, which their economy will feel.

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

#406

Post by huijzer »

tnt128 wrote: post #314

The idea that the US protects Taiwan from a possible Chinese invasion over chips is one of those things that sounds believable but really isn't going to happen. From China’s perspective, the cost of war is much higher than the cost of developing these chips themselves. In the worst-case scenario, they would be 2-3 years behind the cutting edge, which is not mission-critical. Most electronics (civilian or military) do…

> From China’s perspective, the cost of war is much higher than the cost of developing these chips themselves.

For China it’s not about the chips. It’s about getting rid of the humiliation that is having a small island, that was originally part of China, not be a part of China.

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

#407

Post by rob74 »

mu53 wrote: post #338
tnt128 wrote: post #314

The idea that the US protects Taiwan from a possible Chinese invasion over chips is one of those things that sounds believable but really isn't going to happen. From China’s perspective, the cost of war is much higher than the cost of developing these chips themselves. In the worst-case scenario, they would be 2-3 years behind the cutting edge, which is not mission-critical. Most electronics (civilian or military) do…

The US is not going to help defend Taiwan is a fair thesis, but reciprocally, China is not going to attack Taiwan. Even if Russia gets all of it's demands in the peacemaking process with Ukraine, that war has done permanent and lasting damage to it's economy and global position. For China to attack Taiwan, it would give up any hope of continuing it's healthy trends towards increased economic and political importance.…

The US is not going to defend Taiwan because of chips, but China is also not going to attack Taiwan because of chips - if they do, they'll attack it for the same reason Putin attacked Ukraine: an "us vs them" mentality helps keep dictators in power, and nothing creates such a mentality better than a war. We can only hope that China is sensible enough to see the downsides too, but the current international climate is not a real deterrent. And I have to admit China has a better claim to Taiwan than Russia to Ukraine - they never recognized Taiwan's independence, while Russia (together with the US and the UK) agreed in 1994 to guarantee Ukraine's security in exchange for it renouncing the ex-USSR nuclear weapons stationed on its territory (https://www.npr.org/2022/02/21/1082124528/ukraine-russia-put...) - and now they're "guaranteeing their security" by invading them.

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

#408

Post by _t9ow »

0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #365
cheema33 wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Current administration is fast tracking nuclear prolifiacian. This is correct. Gone are the days when countries could count on the US to provide some protection against illegal invasions. All nations without nukes have to be considering them seriously now. Sure, they signed the NPT. But agreements no longer mean what they used to. Russia violates most of the agreements it signs. US already trashed the Budapest memo…

>US already trashed the Budapest memorandum that it signed in 1996. We were supposed to provide security to Ukraine in exchange for them giving up nukes. This is a common misconception. If you read the memorandum (it's rather short) you'll see it isn't true. We only promised to seek UN Security Council action. We went far beyond that. https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/P...

> We only promised to seek UN Security Council action

And ended up voting with Russia anyway.

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

#409

Post by huijzer »

android521 wrote: post #344
mu53 wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US is not going to help defend Taiwan is a fair thesis, but reciprocally, China is not going to attack Taiwan. Even if Russia gets all of it's demands in the peacemaking process with Ukraine, that war has done permanent and lasting damage to it's economy and global position. For China to attack Taiwan, it would give up any hope of continuing it's healthy trends towards increased economic and political importance.…

Unfortunately, dictators don't care much about damage to it's economy as long as they continue to be in power. When they expand and occupy more land, they will look very good in their country's history book which is a huge motivation for dictators. That's the reason why nobody thought Putin would seriously consider invasion but he did. And China will definitely attack Taiwan when the timing is right. Even if a millio…

> Unfortunately, dictators don't care much about damage to it's economy as long as they continue to be in power.

I don’t know why you’re being downvoted but you are completely right. I would refer people who don’t believe this to Stephen Kotkin or Sarah Palin.

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

#410

Post by cutemonster »

qwertox wrote: post #395
android521 wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, dictators don't care much about damage to it's economy as long as they continue to be in power. When they expand and occupy more land, they will look very good in their country's history book which is a huge motivation for dictators. That's the reason why nobody thought Putin would seriously consider invasion but he did. And China will definitely attack Taiwan when the timing is right. Even if a millio…

Russia is out of the AI race. That has been lost and there's no way to reverse it. If Russia wouldn't have started a war, it could have focused on building huge datacenters. It has all the energy it would have needed, now all it can do with it is sell it to China for cheap.

What does Putin care about AI? From his perspective, a war and making Russia bigger, and being the supreme commander, is more fun.

Remember, he's old, probably a bit tech incompetent (compared to most people here).

> [Russia] could have focused on building huge datacenters.

Maybe that's what you think is important (or even what is important), but Putin is a different creature

Post reply on HN