37 ms·

I cannot even begin to imagine what madness has infected the Taiwanese government to allow this. I feel so sorry for a great, entrepreneurial people. US tariff

I cannot even begin to imagine what madness has infected the Taiwanese government to allow this. I feel so sorry for a great, entrepreneurial people. US tariffs will not matter when you are blockaded and Chester Nimitz is very much dead. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43123628 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43123628

suraci 2y ago
[flagged]
- jichiduo 2y ago
  exactly
- cornhole 2y ago
  Troll harder, wumao
- SecretDreams 2y ago
  I'm surprised by the level of brigading anything even remotely political experiences on this forum. I understood the setup is vulnerable to it by nature, but it's just so blatant.
tyre 2y ago
“Our continued protection of you is contingent on your investment in us”. Taiwan is hugely reliant on US defense guarantees. The US has a protectionist president who likes big numbers in announcements and a base riled up about American production capacity. Long-term this is bad for Taiwan since it reduces its leverage with the US in administrations with short-term geopolitics (or no real geopolitical talent.) In the short-term, they might not have much choice.
- jayd16 2y ago
  > The US has a protectionist president We do?
  - defrost 2y ago
    You do, assuming you're a US citizen. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism_in_the_United_St... or: https://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcbg/programs/growthpolicy/trump-biden-are-two-most-protectionist-presidents https://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcbg/programs/growthpol... etc.
  - bamboozled 2y ago
    Protectionist: an advocate of the policy of shielding a country's domestic industries from foreign competition by taxing imports. The T word...
- ethbr1 2y ago
  They only need to make this appear real for 4, maybe 2 years, and can then reevaluate. I'd guess they looked at their options and decided this was the best hedge.
  - yo_yo_yo-yo 2y ago
    Now that I’ve calmed down a bit, I agree with your assessment. The optics game is so important, but Taiwan is in an impossible situation. If I were China, I would give them relative economic independence if they limit advanced process silicon to other countries and let Huawei and others monopolize the advanced nodes. The US at present does not appear to be a dependable partner.
    - re-thc 2y ago
      > If I were China I wonder if China actually benefits from this drama and rather not claim Taiwan (despite what they say out loud). It's currently: - the best place to show military might (the "drills") - the best place to continue a proxy war with the US / EU - replaces Hong Kong as the gray area to do business
      - roenxi 2y ago
        China is huge, huge things don't do subtlety well over any long timeframe. It is hard enough to get people to do move in sync with clear communications, let alone when there are confusing signals. If China says they want control of Taiwan, the base scenario is they are serious. The only thing holding them back is how expensive it is to execute on that want. Although since the action is off the Chinese coast and China appears to be stronger than the US right now I don't see how this ends well for Taiwan.
        justahuman74 2y ago
        It's not just expense, it's generalized threat aversion. Even if China can control the waters around them, they may find them selves boxed in. It doesn't take a lot of sunken cargo ships for operators to refuse to run the boats
- pj_mukh 2y ago
  Curious why Taiwan would sign onto this, knowing how Ukraine is being treated vis a vis mineral rights. I realize Taiwan doesn't have any other options, but a "verbal offer" of future security guarantees from the Trump Admin aren't worth anything.
  - ein0p 2y ago
    I don't think there are any multi-trillion dollar deposits of any "minerals" there. If there were, Ukraine wouldn't be so poor. Even pre-war it was the poorest country in Europe per capita. One can argue that it was mostly due to their insane levels of corruption, but then again, if there were any multi-trillion dollar deposits of anything there, Western investors (including Hunter Biden, no doubt) would be all over them, and the country would be much richer than it was. I think the whole "minerals" thing is a play. Trump gives Zelensky the "deal" he cannot accept even theoretically. Zelensky predictably plays the tough guy by telling him to pound sand. Trump throws Zelensky under the bus and negotiates repayment of loans with his (now scared) successor. With respect to Taiwan, it is not really possible to "win" in any real sense against China in Taiwan. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a dimwit who can't even do cursory research on industrial capacities of the potential belligerents, not in terms of dollars, but in terms of units/tons/etc. That is where the comparison is very strongly not in our favor. Especially when it comes to shipbuilding. Best case if things kick off (which I hope to god they do not) - only Taiwan gets destroyed, a-la Ukraine. Worst case - both US and China really go at it directly, full bore, and then we will lose due primarily to our weak industrial base, and far more extended logistics. Moreover, a lot of other countries will totally provide "lethal aid" and intelligence to China, if it needs it, in hopes of taking the hegemon down a few pegs. Nothing personal - just business, such alliances happen in every major war. The extreme case one of the sides feels they're gonna lose and presses the red button, in which case everyone dies in a fire. All of these options are objectively extremely shitty and incompatible with prosperity, and in the extreme case, with survival. All of them mean millions of body bags for the parties involved, far more body bags than either country has ever seen. Both Biden and Trump administrations understood this, hence the strong-arming the re-industrialization, especially in higher end fields, which started under Biden. The era where you could just get your stuff made elsewhere for pennies and then charge $$$ for it is coming to an end.
- dataflow 2y ago
  > Taiwan is hugely reliant on US defense guarantees. What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across the ocean, let alone the current one? The US population does not seem ecstatic to enter something that could turn into WWIII, which makes me feel that even a president in favor of this would quickly fail to do anything.
  - Shank 2y ago
    > What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across the ocean The whole premise of TSMC is that losing TSMC would cause such a global economic collapse that defending Taiwan is the only option to prevent this from happening. All high-performance computing is dependent on TSMC right now.
    - shipp02 2y ago
      Intel/Samsung are behind. That is a fact. The question is, is it better to wage a massive war that will cost hundreds of billions of dollars and many lives than to make an equal investment into the semi-conductor industry.
    - re-thc 2y ago
      > The whole premise of TSMC is that losing TSMC would cause such a global economic collapse that defending Taiwan is the only option to prevent this from happening. TSMC just hits the media often. If Taiwan goes the global economy will have way more problems than just TSMC. There is a long list of companies in many supply chains that would be impacted (not just computing).
    - agumonkey 2y ago
      Is this all because US are afraid China will own the world through HPC/AI ? How many of us really depend on the latest cpu to survive ?
    - roenxi 2y ago
      We could be plunged back into the horrible era that was ... the 2010s! There wouldn't be a global collapse if TSMC was lost. It'd be an inconvenience that sets the semiconductor industry back a decade or so. Most advanced technology hasn't had time to have an impact on the global economy yet and 98% of people won't notice much in practice if all the TSMC foundries exploded tomorrow. There'd maybe be some shortages while other companies build new foundries - although even then it isn't a given people would care. China seems to be about to flood the market with manufacturing capacity.
- nomilk 2y ago
  Is it a given that the US would come to Tawian's defence now (let alone in a few years, when the US is presumably less dependent on Taiwanese chips)? I guess it comes down to how dependent on Taiwan's chips the US actually is (I don't know the answer to that). The US isn't dependent on Ukraine and it's pressuring them to hand over land. If it turns out the US isn't dependent on Taiwan it could show similar indifference if China were to attempt to take it.
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    My understanding is that there are currently only three important chip makers, including Intel with all of their issues. The world is largely dependent on TSMC, not only for the latest GPUs but also for embedded chips that we keep putting into everything from cars to toasters. For me the questions isn't whether the US would help Taiwan because we're dependent on them. I wonder whether we actually have the backbone to step in militarily at all, and whether out military is as combat ready as we like to think they are.
  - jopsen 2y ago
    > Is it a given that the US would come to Tawian's defence now In practice, probably yes, officially probably maybe. Giving a security guarantee would allow Taiwan to do provocative things, so hence, why there isn't a formal one. If it actually came to be today, I guess the US would at-least offer token support. To (a) embargo China, (b) ensure chip facilities Taiwan aren't surrendered intact. Both of which doesn't require winning a conflict, just making it painful.
    - nomilk 2y ago
      This is both very accurate and very depressing. 'Security guarantee' conjures thoughts of defending a population and its cities from destruction, whereas what it actually means is the opposite: to ensure all items of value are fully destroyed before they're taken.
      - jopsen 2y ago
        Maybe, it's also a good deterrent. And without it, Taiwan would probably press harder for nukes.
- justahuman74 2y ago
  A vast nuclear weapons program is cheaper than $100b
  - deagle50 2y ago
    It would not go unnoticed and would pretty much guarantee invasion.
    - throwaway48476 2y ago
      Sweden built a bomb in secret. Invasion planning would not go unnoticed either.
    - DeathArrow 2y ago
      I think US can try to covertly move some hundreds of nuclear missiles in Taiwan and succeed until China notices.
      - luthus001 2y ago
        Yes in theory and that's Taiwan's best bet. But the US would never go along with that because guarding Taiwan's democracy is not the main objective even as it is the main talking point. The main objective is US interests, which are not served by nuclear proliferation or by losing Taiwan as either a bargaining chip to extract concessions, or a chess piece in a proxy war to weaken China, the main rival to US global dominance. Taiwan's value as a bargaining chip or as an acceptable battleground to both sides for a controlled conflict, is unfortunately greater than it's value as a democracy
    - KoftaBob 2y ago
      They can ask for Israel's assistance, they managed to (relatively) covertly develop nuclear weapons without a major power getting in their way. Granted, the US president who was pushing the most for inspections of Israel's Dimona nuclear facility was JFK, who ended up no longer being a problem for them (how very convenient).
      - deleted 2y ago
- bamboozled 2y ago
  extortion
- cheema33 2y ago
  > Taiwan is hugely reliant on US defense guarantees. US provided security guarantees to Ukraine in 1996, when it signed the Budapest memorandum. Ukraine gave up its nukes in return. It appears that US doesn't honor its agreements. Trump also signed free trade agreement with Canada and Mexico in his first term. But trampled on it in his second term.
- nthingtohide 2y ago
  > “Our continued protection of you is contingent on your investment in us”. In 1971, Treasury Secretary John Connally famously remarked how the US dollar was "our currency, but your problem," referring to how the US dollar was managed primarily for the US' interests despite it being the currency primarily used in global trade and global finance.
- tootie 2y ago
  They may also calculate that a big announcement is all he wants and follow through is optional.
raincole 2y ago
If we give them the doubt of benefit: TSMC is just appeasing Trump and will delay the actual investment as much as possible. If we face the reality: Taiwan is a vassal state. The decision makers are simply owned by the US.
- swagasaurus-rex 2y ago
  Taiwan is only reliant on the U.S. because their neighbor threatens them with invasion frequently
- jopsen 2y ago
  > If we face the reality: Taiwan is a vassal state. The decision makers are simply owned by the US. The thing about US "vassel" states is they don't have to do what the US says. And sometimes won't! It's a classic Russian talking point that Ukraine has no agency. You're making the same argument for Taiwan. Taiwan doesn't have to accept a US deal they don't like. They could build nukes. They could opt to do nothing and run the risk of invasion. It's a democracy, Taiwan has agency. Even if, they have good reasons to make friends with the US.
  - raincole 2y ago
    > The thing about US "vassel" states is they don't have to do what the US says. And sometimes won't! Yes, and then the US will force its way. It's quite funny that you even mentioned nukes. Taiwan did attempt to build nukes and the US destroyed the project. https://edition.cnn.com/2025/03/01/asia/taiwan-cia-informant-nuclear-weapons-chang-hsien-yi-intl-hnk/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2025/03/01/asia/taiwan-cia-informant...
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > Taiwan did attempt to build nukes and the US destroyed the project We “destroyed” it inasmuch as we said we won’t be friends if you do this. We didn’t threaten to invade. America has resisted geopolitical balancing to date because we resisted the temptation of realpolitik. America’s allies are, on average, richer and more peaceful than her enemies. That’s now beginning to change. For the first time in modern history, we may see a system of alliances emerge that credibly counter American economic and military might.
safety1st 2y ago
Right now is a very interesting moment in that the future is crystal clear and yet so many people of all persuasions don't want to accept it for so many different reasons * The USA is going to claw back whatever economic largesse it has granted to the rest of the world, and ultimately renege on many of its security guarantees, with the underlying reason being that it can no longer afford to be world police and pay for all its entitlements * This is a net relative win for the US economically because once it claws back what it needs, it has a better ability to "go it alone" than any other country in the world. US stocks will continue to be the best buys out there * Ergo we are looking at another American century, or perhaps some kind of isolationist/Cold War-esque type of century since American political influence will decline, but China and Russia's colossal demographic problems will hinder them from making any serious bids for dominance Objectively - it looks like another American century, but one where the whole world is diminished due to global collapse in the birth rate, and some nations are just less diminished than others (unless I am severely underestimating the impact of automation and AI) And yes, many people will be unhappy, and there will be more war, and globalization has peaked
- SecretDreams 2y ago
  This is an interesting, if not unhinged, take. But at least it's written well.
- MattGaiser 2y ago
  > it has a better ability to "go it alone" than any other country in the world Except the rest of the world doesn't need to go it alone.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- hiddencost 2y ago
  Buddy. They gutted the NIH&NSF and delayed the flu vaccine decision. This is not going to work out for you.
- yo_yo_yo-yo 2y ago
  This analysis, if it can be called as such, misses the fact that the US is very, very politically divided, to the point where I can see elections results being regularly considered illegitimate. That perspective has been allowed to become reasonable, which is very, dangerous.
aiauthoritydev 2y ago
This is an announcement to make Trump happy. They are giving him all the good PR he wants.
- tayo42 2y ago
  I might have believed that a couple weeks ago. Mexico and Canada put a show on for the him about the tarrifs and they're still set to be in place tommrow. Why would anyone else play along now?
  - jopsen 2y ago
    No to mention that NAFTA was renegotiated under Trumps first term. Still it might be cheaper to just give him worthless wins with no follow thru.
    - alienthrowaway 2y ago
      News headlines in 6 months "Trump announces trillion dollar free-trade deal with Russia" that will be "totally fair" and not "taking advantage of the US" like Canada, Mexico and the EU.
wodenokoto 2y ago
Maybe the Taiwanese scorched factory policy could include overseas plants. Let’s not forget that Taiwan has a lot of production in China. Foxconn is taiwanese.
re-thc 2y ago
> I cannot even begin to imagine what madness has infected the Taiwanese government to allow this. It's jumping to conclusion. There aren't even any details in the announcement. It could be old / "mature" tech or a list of other things. The latest nodes likely will still stay in Taiwan. > US tariffs will not matter when you are blockaded and Chester Nimitz is very much dead. The alternative was a pressure to buy / save Intel. Much worse.
starspangled 2y ago
TSMC factories on Taiwan are small fry in the scheme of things and won't really move the needle much, in terms of strategy. Samsung and Intel are pretty comparable in manufacturing capability, within a couple of years really. And most chips you find in cars and ships and missiles and satellites and jets aren't leading-edge either. China is terrified of their access to the sea being blockaded. They'd gladly give up TSMC technology without a second thought and continue to bribe, beg, steal their way around sancations and barriers to semiconductor technology as they have been doing just fine up to now if they could occupy Taiwan for its strategic position to deny American access and defend the sea around their coast.
- yo_yo_yo-yo 2y ago
  You significantly underestimate the importance of compute superiority for data synthesis for command & control.
  - starspangled 2y ago
    No I don't, and anyway US-aligned semiconductor design and fabrication is still superior to Chinese if TSMC did not exist.
    - yo_yo_yo-yo 2y ago
      TSMC is the only card Taiwan has, hence your argument doesn’t hold water. But, I think I see where you’re going: the US preemptively destroying Taiwan’s fab capacity…
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > TSMC is the only card Taiwan has In the way Ukraine’s only card is its mineral wealth, sure. Taiwan is the Belgium of the American security system. If our guarantees are useless there, they’re useless everywhere and new global security guarantors are needed. If Taiwan falls, moreover, China has unconstrained access to the Pacific. That brings the next conflict closer to American shores. It also threatens American naval power globally given our reliance on Korean and Japanese shipyards.
ninetyninenine 2y ago
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 and technological competition. But it sees the U.S. as a declining power that refuses to accept a multipolar world. The U.S. labels China’s economic expansion “debt-trap diplomacy” while ignoring the IMF’s history of predatory loans. It bans Huawei and TikTok under “security concerns” while engaging in mass surveillance itself. It calls China’s South China Sea claims “aggressive” while surrounding China with military bases. From Beijing’s view, the U.S. preaches rules it doesn’t follow. Human rights? Washington ignores Saudi Arabia but obsesses over Xinjiang. Democracy? The U.S. supports coups when convenient. Free markets? Only when American firms win. China isn’t looking for war—it’s playing the long game. The U.S. can try to contain it, but economic gravity favors China’s rise. The more Washington pushes, the clearer its real motives become. But all this stuff is a bluff. China will spill blood for Taiwan, the US will not. When there is a standoff the US will back down and it's Taiwan getting fucked by everybody.
- DeathArrow 2y ago
  If bad guys do something, it's bad. If good guys do the same thing, it's good.
  - amelius 2y ago
    We don't have slave camps with Uyghurs though.
    - ninetyninenine 2y ago
      Those were the result of public terrorist attacks on China from domestic terrorists to a scale even larger than 9/11. People were slaughtered and those camps are an immune reaction to that slaughter from China. The media hides this from you. China did an extreme move here. It’s bad. It’s not slave camps but more education camps or indoctrination camps. It’s forced indoctrination into modern society. The thing with this is that it destroys cultures and eliminates freedoms but it is largely effective in the long run. Terrorist attacks no longer happen. People are not getting slaughtered by terrorist attacks anymore. Part of the question is which evil do you prefer more? There’s no easy answer. But western propaganda paints only one side of the story here. Arguably there’s less blood on government hands here for China. The resulting war after 9/11 killed far more innocents than the education camps. And it’s not just this. When you make progress and societal well being putting it as a priority ahead of individual freedoms you get china building an entire network of rail systems in less then a decade when California can’t even build a single high speed rail in 3 decades because it obstructs some nimbys freedom to have a good view.
snailmailstare 2y ago
Its a total waste to try to quietly appease. If they want something out of the current administration they need to humiliate it and then barely give it enough to save face.

suraci 2y ago

[flagged]

jichiduo 2y ago
exactly
cornhole 2y ago
Troll harder, wumao
SecretDreams 2y ago
I'm surprised by the level of brigading anything even remotely political experiences on this forum. I understood the setup is vulnerable to it by nature, but it's just so blatant.

tyre 2y ago

“Our continued protection of you is contingent on your investment in us”. Taiwan is hugely reliant on US defense guarantees. The US has a protectionist president who likes big numbers in announcements and a base riled up about American production capacity. Long-term this is bad for Taiwan since it reduces its leverage with the US in administrations with short-term geopolitics (or no real geopolitical talent.) In the short-term, they might not have much choice.

jayd16 2y ago
> The US has a protectionist president We do?
- defrost 2y ago
  You do, assuming you're a US citizen. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism_in_the_United_St... or: https://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcbg/programs/growthpolicy/trump-biden-are-two-most-protectionist-presidents https://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcbg/programs/growthpol... etc.
- bamboozled 2y ago
  Protectionist: an advocate of the policy of shielding a country's domestic industries from foreign competition by taxing imports. The T word...
ethbr1 2y ago
They only need to make this appear real for 4, maybe 2 years, and can then reevaluate. I'd guess they looked at their options and decided this was the best hedge.
- yo_yo_yo-yo 2y ago
  Now that I’ve calmed down a bit, I agree with your assessment. The optics game is so important, but Taiwan is in an impossible situation. If I were China, I would give them relative economic independence if they limit advanced process silicon to other countries and let Huawei and others monopolize the advanced nodes. The US at present does not appear to be a dependable partner.
  - re-thc 2y ago
    > If I were China I wonder if China actually benefits from this drama and rather not claim Taiwan (despite what they say out loud). It's currently: - the best place to show military might (the "drills") - the best place to continue a proxy war with the US / EU - replaces Hong Kong as the gray area to do business
    - roenxi 2y ago
      China is huge, huge things don't do subtlety well over any long timeframe. It is hard enough to get people to do move in sync with clear communications, let alone when there are confusing signals. If China says they want control of Taiwan, the base scenario is they are serious. The only thing holding them back is how expensive it is to execute on that want. Although since the action is off the Chinese coast and China appears to be stronger than the US right now I don't see how this ends well for Taiwan.
      - justahuman74 2y ago
        It's not just expense, it's generalized threat aversion. Even if China can control the waters around them, they may find them selves boxed in. It doesn't take a lot of sunken cargo ships for operators to refuse to run the boats
pj_mukh 2y ago
Curious why Taiwan would sign onto this, knowing how Ukraine is being treated vis a vis mineral rights. I realize Taiwan doesn't have any other options, but a "verbal offer" of future security guarantees from the Trump Admin aren't worth anything.
- ein0p 2y ago
  I don't think there are any multi-trillion dollar deposits of any "minerals" there. If there were, Ukraine wouldn't be so poor. Even pre-war it was the poorest country in Europe per capita. One can argue that it was mostly due to their insane levels of corruption, but then again, if there were any multi-trillion dollar deposits of anything there, Western investors (including Hunter Biden, no doubt) would be all over them, and the country would be much richer than it was. I think the whole "minerals" thing is a play. Trump gives Zelensky the "deal" he cannot accept even theoretically. Zelensky predictably plays the tough guy by telling him to pound sand. Trump throws Zelensky under the bus and negotiates repayment of loans with his (now scared) successor. With respect to Taiwan, it is not really possible to "win" in any real sense against China in Taiwan. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a dimwit who can't even do cursory research on industrial capacities of the potential belligerents, not in terms of dollars, but in terms of units/tons/etc. That is where the comparison is very strongly not in our favor. Especially when it comes to shipbuilding. Best case if things kick off (which I hope to god they do not) - only Taiwan gets destroyed, a-la Ukraine. Worst case - both US and China really go at it directly, full bore, and then we will lose due primarily to our weak industrial base, and far more extended logistics. Moreover, a lot of other countries will totally provide "lethal aid" and intelligence to China, if it needs it, in hopes of taking the hegemon down a few pegs. Nothing personal - just business, such alliances happen in every major war. The extreme case one of the sides feels they're gonna lose and presses the red button, in which case everyone dies in a fire. All of these options are objectively extremely shitty and incompatible with prosperity, and in the extreme case, with survival. All of them mean millions of body bags for the parties involved, far more body bags than either country has ever seen. Both Biden and Trump administrations understood this, hence the strong-arming the re-industrialization, especially in higher end fields, which started under Biden. The era where you could just get your stuff made elsewhere for pennies and then charge $$$ for it is coming to an end.
dataflow 2y ago
> Taiwan is hugely reliant on US defense guarantees. What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across the ocean, let alone the current one? The US population does not seem ecstatic to enter something that could turn into WWIII, which makes me feel that even a president in favor of this would quickly fail to do anything.
- Shank 2y ago
  > What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across the ocean The whole premise of TSMC is that losing TSMC would cause such a global economic collapse that defending Taiwan is the only option to prevent this from happening. All high-performance computing is dependent on TSMC right now.
  - shipp02 2y ago
    Intel/Samsung are behind. That is a fact. The question is, is it better to wage a massive war that will cost hundreds of billions of dollars and many lives than to make an equal investment into the semi-conductor industry.
  - re-thc 2y ago
    > The whole premise of TSMC is that losing TSMC would cause such a global economic collapse that defending Taiwan is the only option to prevent this from happening. TSMC just hits the media often. If Taiwan goes the global economy will have way more problems than just TSMC. There is a long list of companies in many supply chains that would be impacted (not just computing).
  - agumonkey 2y ago
    Is this all because US are afraid China will own the world through HPC/AI ? How many of us really depend on the latest cpu to survive ?
  - roenxi 2y ago
    We could be plunged back into the horrible era that was ... the 2010s! There wouldn't be a global collapse if TSMC was lost. It'd be an inconvenience that sets the semiconductor industry back a decade or so. Most advanced technology hasn't had time to have an impact on the global economy yet and 98% of people won't notice much in practice if all the TSMC foundries exploded tomorrow. There'd maybe be some shortages while other companies build new foundries - although even then it isn't a given people would care. China seems to be about to flood the market with manufacturing capacity.
nomilk 2y ago
Is it a given that the US would come to Tawian's defence now (let alone in a few years, when the US is presumably less dependent on Taiwanese chips)? I guess it comes down to how dependent on Taiwan's chips the US actually is (I don't know the answer to that). The US isn't dependent on Ukraine and it's pressuring them to hand over land. If it turns out the US isn't dependent on Taiwan it could show similar indifference if China were to attempt to take it.
- _heimdall 2y ago
  My understanding is that there are currently only three important chip makers, including Intel with all of their issues. The world is largely dependent on TSMC, not only for the latest GPUs but also for embedded chips that we keep putting into everything from cars to toasters. For me the questions isn't whether the US would help Taiwan because we're dependent on them. I wonder whether we actually have the backbone to step in militarily at all, and whether out military is as combat ready as we like to think they are.
- jopsen 2y ago
  > Is it a given that the US would come to Tawian's defence now In practice, probably yes, officially probably maybe. Giving a security guarantee would allow Taiwan to do provocative things, so hence, why there isn't a formal one. If it actually came to be today, I guess the US would at-least offer token support. To (a) embargo China, (b) ensure chip facilities Taiwan aren't surrendered intact. Both of which doesn't require winning a conflict, just making it painful.
  - nomilk 2y ago
    This is both very accurate and very depressing. 'Security guarantee' conjures thoughts of defending a population and its cities from destruction, whereas what it actually means is the opposite: to ensure all items of value are fully destroyed before they're taken.
    - jopsen 2y ago
      Maybe, it's also a good deterrent. And without it, Taiwan would probably press harder for nukes.
justahuman74 2y ago
A vast nuclear weapons program is cheaper than $100b
- deagle50 2y ago
  It would not go unnoticed and would pretty much guarantee invasion.
  - throwaway48476 2y ago
    Sweden built a bomb in secret. Invasion planning would not go unnoticed either.
  - DeathArrow 2y ago
    I think US can try to covertly move some hundreds of nuclear missiles in Taiwan and succeed until China notices.
    - luthus001 2y ago
      Yes in theory and that's Taiwan's best bet. But the US would never go along with that because guarding Taiwan's democracy is not the main objective even as it is the main talking point. The main objective is US interests, which are not served by nuclear proliferation or by losing Taiwan as either a bargaining chip to extract concessions, or a chess piece in a proxy war to weaken China, the main rival to US global dominance. Taiwan's value as a bargaining chip or as an acceptable battleground to both sides for a controlled conflict, is unfortunately greater than it's value as a democracy
  - KoftaBob 2y ago
    They can ask for Israel's assistance, they managed to (relatively) covertly develop nuclear weapons without a major power getting in their way. Granted, the US president who was pushing the most for inspections of Israel's Dimona nuclear facility was JFK, who ended up no longer being a problem for them (how very convenient).
    - deleted 2y ago
bamboozled 2y ago
extortion
cheema33 2y ago
> Taiwan is hugely reliant on US defense guarantees. US provided security guarantees to Ukraine in 1996, when it signed the Budapest memorandum. Ukraine gave up its nukes in return. It appears that US doesn't honor its agreements. Trump also signed free trade agreement with Canada and Mexico in his first term. But trampled on it in his second term.
nthingtohide 2y ago
> “Our continued protection of you is contingent on your investment in us”. In 1971, Treasury Secretary John Connally famously remarked how the US dollar was "our currency, but your problem," referring to how the US dollar was managed primarily for the US' interests despite it being the currency primarily used in global trade and global finance.
tootie 2y ago
They may also calculate that a big announcement is all he wants and follow through is optional.

raincole 2y ago

If we give them the doubt of benefit: TSMC is just appeasing Trump and will delay the actual investment as much as possible. If we face the reality: Taiwan is a vassal state. The decision makers are simply owned by the US.

swagasaurus-rex 2y ago
Taiwan is only reliant on the U.S. because their neighbor threatens them with invasion frequently
jopsen 2y ago
> If we face the reality: Taiwan is a vassal state. The decision makers are simply owned by the US. The thing about US "vassel" states is they don't have to do what the US says. And sometimes won't! It's a classic Russian talking point that Ukraine has no agency. You're making the same argument for Taiwan. Taiwan doesn't have to accept a US deal they don't like. They could build nukes. They could opt to do nothing and run the risk of invasion. It's a democracy, Taiwan has agency. Even if, they have good reasons to make friends with the US.
- raincole 2y ago
  > The thing about US "vassel" states is they don't have to do what the US says. And sometimes won't! Yes, and then the US will force its way. It's quite funny that you even mentioned nukes. Taiwan did attempt to build nukes and the US destroyed the project. https://edition.cnn.com/2025/03/01/asia/taiwan-cia-informant-nuclear-weapons-chang-hsien-yi-intl-hnk/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2025/03/01/asia/taiwan-cia-informant...
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > Taiwan did attempt to build nukes and the US destroyed the project We “destroyed” it inasmuch as we said we won’t be friends if you do this. We didn’t threaten to invade. America has resisted geopolitical balancing to date because we resisted the temptation of realpolitik. America’s allies are, on average, richer and more peaceful than her enemies. That’s now beginning to change. For the first time in modern history, we may see a system of alliances emerge that credibly counter American economic and military might.

safety1st 2y ago

Right now is a very interesting moment in that the future is crystal clear and yet so many people of all persuasions don't want to accept it for so many different reasons * The USA is going to claw back whatever economic largesse it has granted to the rest of the world, and ultimately renege on many of its security guarantees, with the underlying reason being that it can no longer afford to be world police and pay for all its entitlements * This is a net relative win for the US economically because once it claws back what it needs, it has a better ability to "go it alone" than any other country in the world. US stocks will continue to be the best buys out there * Ergo we are looking at another American century, or perhaps some kind of isolationist/Cold War-esque type of century since American political influence will decline, but China and Russia's colossal demographic problems will hinder them from making any serious bids for dominance Objectively - it looks like another American century, but one where the whole world is diminished due to global collapse in the birth rate, and some nations are just less diminished than others (unless I am severely underestimating the impact of automation and AI) And yes, many people will be unhappy, and there will be more war, and globalization has peaked

SecretDreams 2y ago
This is an interesting, if not unhinged, take. But at least it's written well.
MattGaiser 2y ago
> it has a better ability to "go it alone" than any other country in the world Except the rest of the world doesn't need to go it alone.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
hiddencost 2y ago
Buddy. They gutted the NIH&NSF and delayed the flu vaccine decision. This is not going to work out for you.
yo_yo_yo-yo 2y ago
This analysis, if it can be called as such, misses the fact that the US is very, very politically divided, to the point where I can see elections results being regularly considered illegitimate. That perspective has been allowed to become reasonable, which is very, dangerous.

aiauthoritydev 2y ago

This is an announcement to make Trump happy. They are giving him all the good PR he wants.

tayo42 2y ago
I might have believed that a couple weeks ago. Mexico and Canada put a show on for the him about the tarrifs and they're still set to be in place tommrow. Why would anyone else play along now?
- jopsen 2y ago
  No to mention that NAFTA was renegotiated under Trumps first term. Still it might be cheaper to just give him worthless wins with no follow thru.
  - alienthrowaway 2y ago
    News headlines in 6 months "Trump announces trillion dollar free-trade deal with Russia" that will be "totally fair" and not "taking advantage of the US" like Canada, Mexico and the EU.

wodenokoto 2y ago

Maybe the Taiwanese scorched factory policy could include overseas plants. Let’s not forget that Taiwan has a lot of production in China. Foxconn is taiwanese.

re-thc 2y ago

> I cannot even begin to imagine what madness has infected the Taiwanese government to allow this. It's jumping to conclusion. There aren't even any details in the announcement. It could be old / "mature" tech or a list of other things. The latest nodes likely will still stay in Taiwan. > US tariffs will not matter when you are blockaded and Chester Nimitz is very much dead. The alternative was a pressure to buy / save Intel. Much worse.

starspangled 2y ago

TSMC factories on Taiwan are small fry in the scheme of things and won't really move the needle much, in terms of strategy. Samsung and Intel are pretty comparable in manufacturing capability, within a couple of years really. And most chips you find in cars and ships and missiles and satellites and jets aren't leading-edge either. China is terrified of their access to the sea being blockaded. They'd gladly give up TSMC technology without a second thought and continue to bribe, beg, steal their way around sancations and barriers to semiconductor technology as they have been doing just fine up to now if they could occupy Taiwan for its strategic position to deny American access and defend the sea around their coast.

yo_yo_yo-yo 2y ago
You significantly underestimate the importance of compute superiority for data synthesis for command & control.
- starspangled 2y ago
  No I don't, and anyway US-aligned semiconductor design and fabrication is still superior to Chinese if TSMC did not exist.
  - yo_yo_yo-yo 2y ago
    TSMC is the only card Taiwan has, hence your argument doesn’t hold water. But, I think I see where you’re going: the US preemptively destroying Taiwan’s fab capacity…
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > TSMC is the only card Taiwan has In the way Ukraine’s only card is its mineral wealth, sure. Taiwan is the Belgium of the American security system. If our guarantees are useless there, they’re useless everywhere and new global security guarantors are needed. If Taiwan falls, moreover, China has unconstrained access to the Pacific. That brings the next conflict closer to American shores. It also threatens American naval power globally given our reliance on Korean and Japanese shipyards.

ninetyninenine 2y ago

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 and technological competition. But it sees the U.S. as a declining power that refuses to accept a multipolar world. The U.S. labels China’s economic expansion “debt-trap diplomacy” while ignoring the IMF’s history of predatory loans. It bans Huawei and TikTok under “security concerns” while engaging in mass surveillance itself. It calls China’s South China Sea claims “aggressive” while surrounding China with military bases. From Beijing’s view, the U.S. preaches rules it doesn’t follow. Human rights? Washington ignores Saudi Arabia but obsesses over Xinjiang. Democracy? The U.S. supports coups when convenient. Free markets? Only when American firms win. China isn’t looking for war—it’s playing the long game. The U.S. can try to contain it, but economic gravity favors China’s rise. The more Washington pushes, the clearer its real motives become. But all this stuff is a bluff. China will spill blood for Taiwan, the US will not. When there is a standoff the US will back down and it's Taiwan getting fucked by everybody.

DeathArrow 2y ago
If bad guys do something, it's bad. If good guys do the same thing, it's good.
- amelius 2y ago
  We don't have slave camps with Uyghurs though.
  - ninetyninenine 2y ago
    Those were the result of public terrorist attacks on China from domestic terrorists to a scale even larger than 9/11. People were slaughtered and those camps are an immune reaction to that slaughter from China. The media hides this from you. China did an extreme move here. It’s bad. It’s not slave camps but more education camps or indoctrination camps. It’s forced indoctrination into modern society. The thing with this is that it destroys cultures and eliminates freedoms but it is largely effective in the long run. Terrorist attacks no longer happen. People are not getting slaughtered by terrorist attacks anymore. Part of the question is which evil do you prefer more? There’s no easy answer. But western propaganda paints only one side of the story here. Arguably there’s less blood on government hands here for China. The resulting war after 9/11 killed far more innocents than the education camps. And it’s not just this. When you make progress and societal well being putting it as a priority ahead of individual freedoms you get china building an entire network of rail systems in less then a decade when California can’t even build a single high speed rail in 3 decades because it obstructs some nimbys freedom to have a good view.

snailmailstare 2y ago

Its a total waste to try to quietly appease. If they want something out of the current administration they need to humiliate it and then barely give it enough to save face.