4 ms·

Glad to see so many people pissed off. Nothing will change but it's good to see so much information and callouts of corporate welfare.

m3kw9 3y ago
Why pissed off? Intel is the one with experience and the US is desperate de-risking TSMC and control more of the chip as chips is one of the most important resources now and in future. Would they give it to Y-combinator startups? If Yes they would be a fraction of it, Intel earned this by being American and being the cornerstone of American Chip business for past few decades
- throwaway4good 3y ago
  Yes. I too miss when wintel ruled the day … the music was better too.
  - _ea1k 3y ago
    I don't think anybody thinks we are going back to that. But right now, CUDA rules the day in AI. It'd be nice to have a few strong competitors in that space.
- bluSCALE4 3y ago
  I'm opposed to it here as I am to it happening in China. Except that I felt Huawei phones were superior to everything else I had used from an OS perspective (They made lots of optimizations). I don't Intel as a company in good standing; they've committed personnel, product and corporate fouls. I'd rather see 20 million go to that kid that made his own CPU. I have faith he'd do more to better humanity than Intel.
- unyttigfjelltol 3y ago
  The US is spinning $1T new public debt every 100 days and there's no credible path to return to a sustainable trajectory. Plus, the poster child for federal corporate welfare-- Boeing-- has not done so well with that largesse, Intel is a rather sad candidate to carry that torch forward.[1] [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/04/opinion/pefco-export-import-bank.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/04/opinion/pefco-export-impo...
  - nwiswell 3y ago
    > The US is spinning $1T new public debt every 100 days and there's no credible path to return to a sustainable trajectory. How are you calculating this? The full-year deficit is running at less than $1T... You aren't counting it when Treasury rolls maturing bonds over into new debt, are you? That's normal and irrelevant. https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-deficit/ https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/natio... There's a few things worth mentioning, since after all that is still a big deficit. 1) Debt service costs are over $1T annually, as the end of many years of ZIRP finally starts to bite. There's no guarantee that we return to lower rates in the future, but it's likely, and that will reduce debt service burden over time. 2) Deficits are calculated inclusive of the costs of debt service, but do not include the impact of inflation on the public debt (which is substantial right now). 3) Deficits can absolutely be sustainable. The economy (i.e., GDP) grows over the long term, and the tax base grows with it. GDP is around $23.3T, and assuming long-run 3% growth, that would mean deficits of $700B are sustainable. Overall the fiscal picture is not great, but anyone acting like there's an acute crisis is probably doing it for political reasons.
    - unyttigfjelltol 3y ago
      Your link indicates a $1.7T deficit for FY23 which is not "less than $1T". That's roughly twice the figure you offer as " sustainable" ($700B). It's been widely reported [1] that the US debt reached $32T in June 2023, $33T in Sept 2023, $34T January 2024, achieving those milestones roughly every 100 days. The projections indicate an exponential increase, which doesn't help the case for sustainability. Sovereign debt and fiat ultimately are confidence games. Being unable to offer credible long-term math is a problem. [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/01/the-us-national-debt-is-rising-by-1-trillion-about-every-100-days.html https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/01/the-us-national-debt-is-risi...
      - nwiswell 3y ago
        You're right, I mistook the year-to-date figure for the full-year projection. That said, > It's been widely reported [1] that the US debt reached $32T in June 2023, $33T in Sept 2023, $34T January 2024, achieving those milestones roughly every 100 days. The projections indicate an exponential increase, which doesn't help the case for sustainability. These figures aren't interesting because they include debt that the government owes to itself (intragovernmental debt). The debt held by the public is presently around $27T. When actually considering long-run sustainability, you don't just consider the real GDP growth rate (as I did above). You really need to consider several factors: 1) Deficits 2) Nominal GDP (i.e., disregarding inflation) 3) Nominal interest rates If you have a ton of inflation, you can effectively reduce the debt burden in terms of a % of GDP, since the GDP grows with inflation and the debt does not. This is the data series that should interest you: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEGDQ188S https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEGDQ188S You'll note an explosive increase due to the extreme pandemic deficit spending (and during the financial crisis), but lately it's actually not an "exponential increase". The bottom line is it's not as though these are uncharted heights, or that we're presently on an uncontrolled exponential trajectory -- but, we have "run out of room", and if we have another crisis, we're going to be unable to engage in the kind of deficit spending that we have in the past without serious consequences.
- mortify 3y ago
  This isn't a mandate to accomplish anything. It's a pile of cash. Intel will do what it chooses with it and justify it later.
orangecat 3y ago
Yes this is corporate welfare, and sadly it's probably necessary. We need to be able and willing to blow the TSMC fabs if China invades Taiwan, and being able to credibly make that threat decreases the chance that they will invade.
- yard2010 3y ago
  China has their plan up to 2049. I doubt that something that other nations would do change it.

m3kw9 3y ago

Why pissed off? Intel is the one with experience and the US is desperate de-risking TSMC and control more of the chip as chips is one of the most important resources now and in future. Would they give it to Y-combinator startups? If Yes they would be a fraction of it, Intel earned this by being American and being the cornerstone of American Chip business for past few decades

throwaway4good 3y ago
Yes. I too miss when wintel ruled the day … the music was better too.
- _ea1k 3y ago
  I don't think anybody thinks we are going back to that. But right now, CUDA rules the day in AI. It'd be nice to have a few strong competitors in that space.
bluSCALE4 3y ago
I'm opposed to it here as I am to it happening in China. Except that I felt Huawei phones were superior to everything else I had used from an OS perspective (They made lots of optimizations). I don't Intel as a company in good standing; they've committed personnel, product and corporate fouls. I'd rather see 20 million go to that kid that made his own CPU. I have faith he'd do more to better humanity than Intel.
unyttigfjelltol 3y ago
The US is spinning $1T new public debt every 100 days and there's no credible path to return to a sustainable trajectory. Plus, the poster child for federal corporate welfare-- Boeing-- has not done so well with that largesse, Intel is a rather sad candidate to carry that torch forward.[1] [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/04/opinion/pefco-export-import-bank.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/04/opinion/pefco-export-impo...
- nwiswell 3y ago
  > The US is spinning $1T new public debt every 100 days and there's no credible path to return to a sustainable trajectory. How are you calculating this? The full-year deficit is running at less than $1T... You aren't counting it when Treasury rolls maturing bonds over into new debt, are you? That's normal and irrelevant. https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-deficit/ https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/natio... There's a few things worth mentioning, since after all that is still a big deficit. 1) Debt service costs are over $1T annually, as the end of many years of ZIRP finally starts to bite. There's no guarantee that we return to lower rates in the future, but it's likely, and that will reduce debt service burden over time. 2) Deficits are calculated inclusive of the costs of debt service, but do not include the impact of inflation on the public debt (which is substantial right now). 3) Deficits can absolutely be sustainable. The economy (i.e., GDP) grows over the long term, and the tax base grows with it. GDP is around $23.3T, and assuming long-run 3% growth, that would mean deficits of $700B are sustainable. Overall the fiscal picture is not great, but anyone acting like there's an acute crisis is probably doing it for political reasons.
  - unyttigfjelltol 3y ago
    Your link indicates a $1.7T deficit for FY23 which is not "less than $1T". That's roughly twice the figure you offer as " sustainable" ($700B). It's been widely reported [1] that the US debt reached $32T in June 2023, $33T in Sept 2023, $34T January 2024, achieving those milestones roughly every 100 days. The projections indicate an exponential increase, which doesn't help the case for sustainability. Sovereign debt and fiat ultimately are confidence games. Being unable to offer credible long-term math is a problem. [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/01/the-us-national-debt-is-rising-by-1-trillion-about-every-100-days.html https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/01/the-us-national-debt-is-risi...
    - nwiswell 3y ago
      You're right, I mistook the year-to-date figure for the full-year projection. That said, > It's been widely reported [1] that the US debt reached $32T in June 2023, $33T in Sept 2023, $34T January 2024, achieving those milestones roughly every 100 days. The projections indicate an exponential increase, which doesn't help the case for sustainability. These figures aren't interesting because they include debt that the government owes to itself (intragovernmental debt). The debt held by the public is presently around $27T. When actually considering long-run sustainability, you don't just consider the real GDP growth rate (as I did above). You really need to consider several factors: 1) Deficits 2) Nominal GDP (i.e., disregarding inflation) 3) Nominal interest rates If you have a ton of inflation, you can effectively reduce the debt burden in terms of a % of GDP, since the GDP grows with inflation and the debt does not. This is the data series that should interest you: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEGDQ188S https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEGDQ188S You'll note an explosive increase due to the extreme pandemic deficit spending (and during the financial crisis), but lately it's actually not an "exponential increase". The bottom line is it's not as though these are uncharted heights, or that we're presently on an uncontrolled exponential trajectory -- but, we have "run out of room", and if we have another crisis, we're going to be unable to engage in the kind of deficit spending that we have in the past without serious consequences.
mortify 3y ago
This isn't a mandate to accomplish anything. It's a pile of cash. Intel will do what it chooses with it and justify it later.

orangecat 3y ago

Yes this is corporate welfare, and sadly it's probably necessary. We need to be able and willing to blow the TSMC fabs if China invades Taiwan, and being able to credibly make that threat decreases the chance that they will invade.

yard2010 3y ago
China has their plan up to 2049. I doubt that something that other nations would do change it.