4 ms·

The US government isn’t (or at least shouldn’t be) profit-motivated anyway, so it isn’t obvious what their incentives are WRT Intel’s stock.

nyc_data_geek1 1y ago
Shouldn't be, yes. Isn't? Have you seen the rhetoric around tariffs? A lot of people thought they wanted the government run like a business, so welcome to the for-profit government society.
pbhjpbhj 1y ago
They can buy enough stock to shift the price, then use that as a lever to control their own investments prices (and thence profits). Like they've done with tariffs.
- bee_rider 1y ago
  That sounds more like an abuse of government powers for individual gain than any legitimate government interest. If that was the plan it would make just as much sense to short a company and then announce a plan to put them under greater regulatory scrutiny.
  - janc_ 1y ago
    You think they haven't done that sort of things yet?
    - bee_rider 1y ago
      Well, I wouldn’t be able to prove it if challenged. And anyway, it seems better overall to not start building the case that that’s just something we expect politicians to do. A shocking surprise needs to be a surprise for it to work. Call it strategic naivety if you want.
      - nolist_policy 1y ago
        Donald Trump's erratic tariff policies are surprising. Donald anounces tariffs and the markets react. He postpones tariffs and the markets react again. Only Donald and his friends know what he will announce next.
        bee_rider 1y ago
        > Donald Trump's erratic tariff policies are surprising. This feels like a misreading of what I wrote. The discovery that he is using tariffs to make a personal profit should be surprising. > Donald anounces tariffs and the markets react. He postpones tariffs and the markets react again. Only Donald and his friends know what he will announce next. That wouldn’t surprise me at all, I just don’t think a hypothesis about how he could abuse his power will be very compelling to anybody who doesn’t already think he’s prone to corruption. If anything, I think it starts inoculating people to the idea.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
jerf 1y ago
They want a source of chips for the wars they want to conduct that is not either controlled by the party they want to go war with, or way way closer to the party they want to go to war with than they are. Buying a chunk of Intel is a way of making sure they do the things the government wants that will lead to that outcome. Or at least so the theory goes; I've got my own cynicism on this matter and wouldn't dream of tamping down on anyone else's. Right now if the US wants to go to war with China, or anyone China really really likes, they can expect with high probability to very quickly encounter major problems getting the best chips. AIUI the world has other fab capacity that isn't in Taiwan, and some of it is even in the US, but they're all on much older processes. Some things it's not a problem that maybe you end up with an older 500MHz processor, but some things it's just a non-starter, like high-end AI. Sibling commenters discussing profits are on the wrong track. Intel's 2024 revenue, not profits, was $53.1 billion. The Federal Government in 2024 spent $6,800 billion. No entity doing $1.8 trillion in 2024 in deficit spending gives a rat's ass about "profits". The US Federal government just spends what it wants to spend, it doesn't have any need to generate any sort of "profits" first. Thinking the Federal government cares about profits is being nowhere near cynical enough.
- bee_rider 1y ago
  Sure, but this is an interesting independent of the government holding Intel stock. The US government always ought to have the interest of US companies in mind, their job is to work in the interest of the voters and a lot of us work for US companies.
- paxys 1y ago
  This is generally true even setting side the "war with China" angle. Intel is a large domestic company employing hundreds of thousands in a very critical sector, and the government has every incentive to prevent it from failing. In the last two decades we've bailed out auto companies and banks and US Steel (kinda) for the same reason.
- lebimas 1y ago
  Concisely put. This is exactly the reasoning. The US is preparing for a potential war with China in 2026 or 2027, and this is how it is beginning preparations.

nyc_data_geek1 1y ago

Shouldn't be, yes. Isn't? Have you seen the rhetoric around tariffs? A lot of people thought they wanted the government run like a business, so welcome to the for-profit government society.

pbhjpbhj 1y ago

They can buy enough stock to shift the price, then use that as a lever to control their own investments prices (and thence profits). Like they've done with tariffs.

bee_rider 1y ago
That sounds more like an abuse of government powers for individual gain than any legitimate government interest. If that was the plan it would make just as much sense to short a company and then announce a plan to put them under greater regulatory scrutiny.
- janc_ 1y ago
  You think they haven't done that sort of things yet?
  - bee_rider 1y ago
    Well, I wouldn’t be able to prove it if challenged. And anyway, it seems better overall to not start building the case that that’s just something we expect politicians to do. A shocking surprise needs to be a surprise for it to work. Call it strategic naivety if you want.
    - nolist_policy 1y ago
      Donald Trump's erratic tariff policies are surprising. Donald anounces tariffs and the markets react. He postpones tariffs and the markets react again. Only Donald and his friends know what he will announce next.
      - bee_rider 1y ago
        > Donald Trump's erratic tariff policies are surprising. This feels like a misreading of what I wrote. The discovery that he is using tariffs to make a personal profit should be surprising. > Donald anounces tariffs and the markets react. He postpones tariffs and the markets react again. Only Donald and his friends know what he will announce next. That wouldn’t surprise me at all, I just don’t think a hypothesis about how he could abuse his power will be very compelling to anybody who doesn’t already think he’s prone to corruption. If anything, I think it starts inoculating people to the idea.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

jerf 1y ago

They want a source of chips for the wars they want to conduct that is not either controlled by the party they want to go war with, or way way closer to the party they want to go to war with than they are. Buying a chunk of Intel is a way of making sure they do the things the government wants that will lead to that outcome. Or at least so the theory goes; I've got my own cynicism on this matter and wouldn't dream of tamping down on anyone else's. Right now if the US wants to go to war with China, or anyone China really really likes, they can expect with high probability to very quickly encounter major problems getting the best chips. AIUI the world has other fab capacity that isn't in Taiwan, and some of it is even in the US, but they're all on much older processes. Some things it's not a problem that maybe you end up with an older 500MHz processor, but some things it's just a non-starter, like high-end AI. Sibling commenters discussing profits are on the wrong track. Intel's 2024 revenue, not profits, was $53.1 billion. The Federal Government in 2024 spent $6,800 billion. No entity doing $1.8 trillion in 2024 in deficit spending gives a rat's ass about "profits". The US Federal government just spends what it wants to spend, it doesn't have any need to generate any sort of "profits" first. Thinking the Federal government cares about profits is being nowhere near cynical enough.

bee_rider 1y ago
Sure, but this is an interesting independent of the government holding Intel stock. The US government always ought to have the interest of US companies in mind, their job is to work in the interest of the voters and a lot of us work for US companies.
paxys 1y ago
This is generally true even setting side the "war with China" angle. Intel is a large domestic company employing hundreds of thousands in a very critical sector, and the government has every incentive to prevent it from failing. In the last two decades we've bailed out auto companies and banks and US Steel (kinda) for the same reason.
lebimas 1y ago
Concisely put. This is exactly the reasoning. The US is preparing for a potential war with China in 2026 or 2027, and this is how it is beginning preparations.