4 ms·

> china doesn't want to control taiwan due to any economic reasons That's absolutely not true if only for the existence of TSMC.

adgjlsfhk1 2y ago
if China invades Taiwan, there won't be much of TSMC left standing by the end.
- nosianu 2y ago
  I hear that statement repeated a lot, but I'm not so sure. What is the incentive? If China invades, anyone involved in destroying that asset will have a huge problem for themselves afterwards, China won't forgive. On the other hand, see what happened in Ukraine, where in the initial invasion there was quite a bit of collaboration of some Ukrainians, for example Antonov leadership ("Antonov's leadership sabotaged defense of Hostomel airport" -- https://english.nv.ua/nation/antonov-s-leadership-sabotaged-hostomel-defense-efforts-news-50316938.html https://english.nv.ua/nation/antonov-s-leadership-sabotaged-...). If they will have to live under China's rule, the incentive for the individuals is to cooperate with them and be richly rewarded for it. Who wants to sacrifice themselves - and likely their families too - to benefit some outsiders? Who are leaving you behind to fight for yourself? Which at that point is against your own interest if you don't think you can win. Especially when the invaders are from one's own greater "tribe", so that it is not as bad as being invaded by another people (like the French or the Americans in Vietnam).
  - adgjlsfhk1 2y ago
    this is forgetting that the US exists. The US doesn't want China to invade Taiwan or to control TSMC. if China invades, is very much in the US interest to fly everyone important at TSMC and their families to the US, and to blow up the buildings. it's also in the TSMC employees interest because living in a warzone sucks. Furthermore, this policy is a dissinsentive for China to invade since it means that invading won't provide an economic benefit.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - nosianu 2y ago
      > this is forgetting that the US exists. I did not forget this. I think you overestimate what the US can and is willing to do there, and also what the incentives would be for people to escape to the US. This is not Vietnam in the 1970s, staying right there may very well be the preferred choice, even if China takes over. Especially if they make a very nice offer in advance. Should Trump win that may look even worse.
      - EmptyCoffeeCup 2y ago
        You're thinking too literally. The USA do not need any co-operation with from the operators of TMSC to deny China the asset. They have enough bombs. The Americans will want the experience of the operators. If those operators refuse to go to America, they'll be unalived with the plant itself.
  - baybal2 2y ago
    [dead]
Qwertious 2y ago
Not only have Taiwan said that if Taiwan invades, "we're going to blow up TSMC", but sabotaging semiconductors is absolutely, utterly trivial to do by anyone in the dozens/hundreds of steps needed to produce the cutting-edge semiconductors that make the difference between TSMC and China's domestic fabs. You can wreck production yields by using the wrong color of paint in the break room or running a fan outside the building, no that is not an exaggeration. But, maybe there's some economic value in invading Taiwan. What's the economic cost, though? Well, besides the collapse of the semiconductor industry that China is quite reliant on. What else? Sanctions up the wazoo. Sanctions from the US, sanctions from Europe and from major US allies, sanctions from anyone in the South China Sea most likely. Taiwan doesn't have any natural resources, their knowledge workers can just leave (and the US will offer green cards and evacuation to everyone involved in the chips needed by the US army, if China tries to invade), their economy will plummet when imports drop from sanctions, and also China will be at war, and war is terrible for the economy.
- simgt 2y ago
  > China will be at war, and war is terrible for the economy If you're not looking only at poor metrics like the GDP or balance of trade, is it the case when it's not happening on your soil? As long as the natural resources are available, it seems like a good way to recenter the economy on what is actually important for survival.
- maxglute 2y ago
  >"we're going to blow up TSMC" No, only US writings have suggested TW should blow up their fabs, or threatened that US would. To which TW media has told US chuckle heads to knock it off because they're clearly not going to destroy their golden goose that can lay eggs for PRC or US. Economic value is also denying US who is even more disproportionately affected by removal of 90% of high end nodes, which are already largely denied to PRC. I wouldn't expect any TW knowledge workers to be able to leave, the runways are going to be cratered, the ports and coasts saturated with mines and overwatching drones. PRC going to make sure their only future is going to be tied to mainland prosperity. PRC trade to west bloc in general like 5% of GDP... it's not nothing but it's not substantial. If you told Xi he could renunify with TW in exchange for 5% of GDP, he would have loled and smashed that button yesterday. War is bad for the economy, but it could be even worse for your adversaries. Imagine if US enters fight and lost, entire geoeconomic order would shift. Entire economic order could also shift if US doesn't fight (i.e. abdicate certain 1IC security commitments).

adgjlsfhk1 2y ago

if China invades Taiwan, there won't be much of TSMC left standing by the end.

nosianu 2y ago
I hear that statement repeated a lot, but I'm not so sure. What is the incentive? If China invades, anyone involved in destroying that asset will have a huge problem for themselves afterwards, China won't forgive. On the other hand, see what happened in Ukraine, where in the initial invasion there was quite a bit of collaboration of some Ukrainians, for example Antonov leadership ("Antonov's leadership sabotaged defense of Hostomel airport" -- https://english.nv.ua/nation/antonov-s-leadership-sabotaged-hostomel-defense-efforts-news-50316938.html https://english.nv.ua/nation/antonov-s-leadership-sabotaged-...). If they will have to live under China's rule, the incentive for the individuals is to cooperate with them and be richly rewarded for it. Who wants to sacrifice themselves - and likely their families too - to benefit some outsiders? Who are leaving you behind to fight for yourself? Which at that point is against your own interest if you don't think you can win. Especially when the invaders are from one's own greater "tribe", so that it is not as bad as being invaded by another people (like the French or the Americans in Vietnam).
- adgjlsfhk1 2y ago
  this is forgetting that the US exists. The US doesn't want China to invade Taiwan or to control TSMC. if China invades, is very much in the US interest to fly everyone important at TSMC and their families to the US, and to blow up the buildings. it's also in the TSMC employees interest because living in a warzone sucks. Furthermore, this policy is a dissinsentive for China to invade since it means that invading won't provide an economic benefit.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - nosianu 2y ago
    > this is forgetting that the US exists. I did not forget this. I think you overestimate what the US can and is willing to do there, and also what the incentives would be for people to escape to the US. This is not Vietnam in the 1970s, staying right there may very well be the preferred choice, even if China takes over. Especially if they make a very nice offer in advance. Should Trump win that may look even worse.
    - EmptyCoffeeCup 2y ago
      You're thinking too literally. The USA do not need any co-operation with from the operators of TMSC to deny China the asset. They have enough bombs. The Americans will want the experience of the operators. If those operators refuse to go to America, they'll be unalived with the plant itself.
- baybal2 2y ago
  [dead]

Qwertious 2y ago

Not only have Taiwan said that if Taiwan invades, "we're going to blow up TSMC", but sabotaging semiconductors is absolutely, utterly trivial to do by anyone in the dozens/hundreds of steps needed to produce the cutting-edge semiconductors that make the difference between TSMC and China's domestic fabs. You can wreck production yields by using the wrong color of paint in the break room or running a fan outside the building, no that is not an exaggeration. But, maybe there's some economic value in invading Taiwan. What's the economic cost, though? Well, besides the collapse of the semiconductor industry that China is quite reliant on. What else? Sanctions up the wazoo. Sanctions from the US, sanctions from Europe and from major US allies, sanctions from anyone in the South China Sea most likely. Taiwan doesn't have any natural resources, their knowledge workers can just leave (and the US will offer green cards and evacuation to everyone involved in the chips needed by the US army, if China tries to invade), their economy will plummet when imports drop from sanctions, and also China will be at war, and war is terrible for the economy.

simgt 2y ago
> China will be at war, and war is terrible for the economy If you're not looking only at poor metrics like the GDP or balance of trade, is it the case when it's not happening on your soil? As long as the natural resources are available, it seems like a good way to recenter the economy on what is actually important for survival.
maxglute 2y ago
>"we're going to blow up TSMC" No, only US writings have suggested TW should blow up their fabs, or threatened that US would. To which TW media has told US chuckle heads to knock it off because they're clearly not going to destroy their golden goose that can lay eggs for PRC or US. Economic value is also denying US who is even more disproportionately affected by removal of 90% of high end nodes, which are already largely denied to PRC. I wouldn't expect any TW knowledge workers to be able to leave, the runways are going to be cratered, the ports and coasts saturated with mines and overwatching drones. PRC going to make sure their only future is going to be tied to mainland prosperity. PRC trade to west bloc in general like 5% of GDP... it's not nothing but it's not substantial. If you told Xi he could renunify with TW in exchange for 5% of GDP, he would have loled and smashed that button yesterday. War is bad for the economy, but it could be even worse for your adversaries. Imagine if US enters fight and lost, entire geoeconomic order would shift. Entire economic order could also shift if US doesn't fight (i.e. abdicate certain 1IC security commitments).