Earlier quoted context omitted.
What special quality do "western" countries have that makes it a moral obligation to purchase from them over others? Why is it a moral good to keep value from the others?
Trust.
Care to elaborate?
AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more
541–550 of 761 posts
Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more
#542Earlier quoted context omitted.
If something happens to Taiwan, we won't regret being able to produce these chips domestically. If AI keeps growing like it does, it might even trigger a conflict.
Ah yes, Taiwán - that famously stable nation with no existential threats to its very existence. I don’t think this is an “if” situation, but rather a “when”. There is no question in my mind - it’s simply too attractive to China. It may not come through all out war, but they will eventually claim what they feel is theirs. They operate on much more manageable time scales.
The upside isnt huge to China. It is mostly their pride. The downside if not everything goes to plan is huge. Could end the communist party in China. I think it is a really though decision for the communist party if they should go all-in or not.
Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more
#543Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ironically my only opposition to US chips is that we’re less liable to protect Taiwan if China invades
I think this is the reality behind the past relative world peace; international dependencies. Russia got away with a lot of shit because most of Europe thrived on their cheap gas and oil. Many countries are in debt with each other or have valuable assets (gold, nukes) stashed with each other.
It was a stated goal of the EU - peace through trade.
Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more
#544Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cheap? 20% increase in cost of BoM equals at least ~100% increase for customer. Would you pay twice for AMD components? What would market do?
Does a 20% decrease result in a -50% discount? Why would it be nonlinear?
20% decrease would be only 80% price rise for the customer
Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more
#545Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a ridiculous argument. So then every single country, every single city, every street should build their own chips, their own iPhones, right? Because wouldn't want to be "a simple consumer" only!
The argument wasn't about chips specifically, but contributing in general. If your city has a workforce that produces something, you can use the money from selling that stuff to buy, for example, food. If you don't, in western countries, mostly the welfare state steps in. And that's okay, we humans are social animals and I wouldn't have it any other way. But the welfare state has to be backed by productivity. Food an…
You're applying macroeconomic theory to microeconomics and it isn't working. individuals will broadly try to maximize their own productivity and minimize their own costs. I'm not gonna pay an extra 20% for the same product everyone else is getting cheaper when my individual contribution to "national economic health" is a drop in the bucket. If that's what society wants then we'll have to tax and subsidize our way there. That's just how macro works
Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more
#546Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a ridiculous argument. So then every single country, every single city, every street should build their own chips, their own iPhones, right? Because wouldn't want to be "a simple consumer" only!
Is it ridiculous to expect an economy, such as the US, to produce things of value? The author of the post you are responding to has a valid point. Consumption alone isn't sustainable.
Nobody's arguing in favor of producing nothing. We're just saying there's something called comparative advantage and it's about maximizing efficiency. The US has no business manufacturing chips for strictly economic reasons. But when you consider national security concerns it looks different
Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more
#547If that is the cost of keeping the value within the western economies, we should pay. Plain and simple. I'd even argue it's cheap.
No, I am absolutely not going to pay a 20% premium on the market. I’m sorry but I won’t. If this is really crucial to national security then the government can subsidize the premium. And I know I’m not alone, price speaks louder.
Looks like you won't really have a choice
Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more
#548Earlier quoted context omitted.
If something happens to Taiwan, we won't regret being able to produce these chips domestically. If AI keeps growing like it does, it might even trigger a conflict.
Ironically my only opposition to US chips is that we’re less liable to protect Taiwan if China invades
I think realistically the US is unfortunately never going to protect Taiwan. There's no way I see it getting into an unwinnable hot war with China over territory so close to the mainland. If China sent troops to secure the Taiwanese fabs, how could the US possibly dislodge them without destroying the thing they want to protect? The focus on the CHIPS Act by both recent administrations seems an admission that they don't expect to rely on Taiwan's production long term. The question is will China sit back and let TSMC complete factories in the US, or will it invade Taiwan first? I've seen estimates that Beijing expects to surpass Taiwan's fab abilities in as soon as five years, so perhaps they don't even care about the US acquiring expertise that will be obsolete by the time it is built. Hopefully a knowledgeable individual can correct my extremely limited understanding of this issue.
Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more
#549Earlier quoted context omitted.
South Korea and Japan/Okinawa seem either just as good or better if the US wants to have bases near China. And the US already has 80k troops there
You have to take a look at a map to really understand Taiwan's importance. Taiwan isn't about military proximity. It's about access shipping access. Try open up a map. Despite China having a vast coastline, they do not have access to the open seas. Every one of their shipping lanes requires passage through another nation's waters. If a heavy conflict were to erupt, China's supply chains would be cut off via naval blo…
> If a heavy conflict were to erupt, China's supply chains would be cut off via naval blockade
Or possibly the 30+ fast attack submarines sinking every military or resupply vessel in the region, augmented by a colossal amount of rapidly-deployed naval mines.
Taiwan doesn't buy them much in this regard. Why would China be permitted to use sea freight at all in a "heavy conflict" scenario? Why not just sink these vessels near their origin - why allow Brazilian soybeans to even make it out of the hemisphere?
Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more
#550Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ironically my only opposition to US chips is that we’re less liable to protect Taiwan if China invades
Fwiw, I think theres so much demand that we could be building 10x as much and still depend on Taiwan. Chip fabs take a long time to build. Probably don't need to worry about that for at least a decade, if not two. Especially now with intel dying
True. We think about very narrowly when it comes to ICs. Mostly CPUs and GPUs, but there's a whole fleet of supporting ICs or other purpose built silicon which needs fabs, from simple capacitors, to power regulators and ASICs.
So, having them spread over is nice, but not enough.