3 ms·

The CHIPS act is expensive, but I doubt we would do nothing if Taiwan was invaded, so we would end up spending money on both. Let’s just save the money upfront

The CHIPS act is expensive, but I doubt we would do nothing if Taiwan was invaded, so we would end up spending money on both. Let’s just save the money upfront by scrapping CHIPS and be ready to defend Taiwan from Chinese invasion? Trump was one of the first presidents to recognize Taiwan with a direct phone call.

acdha 2y ago
I see it a bit differently: there’s no way to reliably deter a military invasion of Taiwan short of committing to a nuclear response - the Chinese military is too advanced to be stopped if they make a serious effort. That leaves the primary deterrent as economic: China depends on the global economy and would suffer significantly if they started a war of aggression. That becomes less of a deterrent when the President’s negotiating tactic with authoritarians is to give them what they want and envy their control over the country while his family members negotiate real estate deals. If the Chinese government thinks the United States won’t coordinate global sanctions, the risk is a lot lower. The CHIPS act doesn’t deter conflict, but it does reduce the damage if it happens. Losing Taiwan now cuts off the most advanced processors in the world but if they’re making them in Arizona that goes from no supply to short supply with a straightforward path to scaling capacity. That’s a big improvement and it’s a fraction of the cost of a conflict.
- deadbabe 2y ago
  Except the USA wouldn’t be satisfied with merely deterring conflict: they must ensure China doesn’t have any control over the most advanced processors in the world. And given that Trump is at the helm, nuclear conflict is a very real possibility China has to consider. Under the aggressive stance of this administration, the CHIPS act doesn’t seem necessary.

3 ms·

The CHIPS act is expensive, but I doubt we would do nothing if Taiwan was invaded, so we would end up spending money on both. Let’s just save the money upfront

by deadbabe 2y ago

acdha 2y ago
I see it a bit differently: there’s no way to reliably deter a military invasion of Taiwan short of committing to a nuclear response - the Chinese military is too advanced to be stopped if they make a serious effort. That leaves the primary deterrent as economic: China depends on the global economy and would suffer significantly if they started a war of aggression. That becomes less of a deterrent when the President’s negotiating tactic with authoritarians is to give them what they want and envy their control over the country while his family members negotiate real estate deals. If the Chinese government thinks the United States won’t coordinate global sanctions, the risk is a lot lower. The CHIPS act doesn’t deter conflict, but it does reduce the damage if it happens. Losing Taiwan now cuts off the most advanced processors in the world but if they’re making them in Arizona that goes from no supply to short supply with a straightforward path to scaling capacity. That’s a big improvement and it’s a fraction of the cost of a conflict.
- deadbabe 2y ago
  Except the USA wouldn’t be satisfied with merely deterring conflict: they must ensure China doesn’t have any control over the most advanced processors in the world. And given that Trump is at the helm, nuclear conflict is a very real possibility China has to consider. Under the aggressive stance of this administration, the CHIPS act doesn’t seem necessary.