He just nationalized Intel. That's what conservatives are afraid of far left governments doing.
post
I negotiated this Deal with Lip-Bu Tan, the Highly Respected Chief Executive Officer of the Company.
That i tried to get fired less than two weeks ago.
Could you imagine how many times the word "socialism" would be blasted on Fox News if Biden did this?
It wouldn't, they are one big criminal family after all.
You're as bad as centrists/swing voters
I'm worse, I'm not ever voting at all in US elections. Being a Russian citizen and never having set foot in the US.
But they are one big criminal family. I mean, yes, in the 90s Clinton and the democratic party really had sort of a plan of battle, but they dropped the ball completely. It's unfortunate, because had they not, maybe our world would really be similar to more utopian lines from sci-fi.
Fucking hilarious that this is party that starts seizing the means of production.
It was never, ever even once about states rights. It was never about fighting communism. It’s all racism, always has been.
They are open enough about thinking some kind of late USSR, fixed against its deadlocks and broken feedback, would be the best system for them. I mean, having a one party system is very attractive, LOL.
And yeah, that crowd is about seizing whatever they want to build their idea of a better nation, with re-industrializing and so on. There are pits on the road, though.
And, honestly, never in history were many US politicians willing for the USSR to die as it did. They would, of course, ridicule the broken system and ideology, but the whole idea seemed more understandable than most European nations. And flattering.
It was never, ever even once about states rights. It was never about fighting communism. It’s all racism, always has been.
It's honestly funny, so - in Eastern Europe, when comparing ourselves to the USA, it's very easy to get sympathetic to these points. Also to color blindness and being against affirmative action, and such.
Because information travels non-linearly. From here many people really think that the racism problem is solved in the US, and it's just lazy Blacks not willing to work honestly, and that last point is racist, but if you say that American racists still think it's wrong for a white person to marry a black person, those same people won't believe you, it's not part of their own kind of racism, or that American racists actually exist in huge enough numbers, they think it's like calling others fascists here, something devalued by common usage. They'd be livid.
So - what I'm thinking is that USSR's dead hand was, in fact, not its nuclear shield, but its ideology and state architecture, and some people want to break their own bad, but functional system in favor of their imaginary picture of USSR. Which is just as detached from reality. USSR's checks and balances had a downside of stalling development and conserving the balance of power, nothing big got actually done. It would seem that they might actually come to the same result with far less blood, jump to 1960s USSR without a passing through 1920s-1950s, but wasting a few decades on that with a pretty clear end result would seem a bad idea.
That's about political systems, arguing against my imagination on what they think. With re-industrialization I agree completely. In general, oursourcing labor is directly opposed to labor rights, and labor rights are what guarantees political rights.
Us Treasury is providing capital... Hardly seizing anything.
Maybe if intel was ran into the ground by idiots. They wouldn't need to be bailed out by feds.
"Free" market.
Since Wall Street, never really was.
You're more right than you may know.
An actual city wall existed on the street from 1653 to 1699. During the 18th century, the location served as a slave market and securities trading site, and from 1703 onward
Functionally, there's no such thing. In a system that gives the most power to the company that makes the most money, that company will seek to maximize its profits. Part of maximizing profits is eliminating competition. So in a "free" market, the most successful will subvert the freedom of their competition thus eliminating the freedom in the market.
Self-correction in a market is an illusion crafted people either desperate to salvage a broken system, or those who seek to exploit them.
That's why free market is how we call a market where anti-monopoly laws exist, work and are enforced in full.
While what you are talking about isn't called market, it's called jungle.
Self-correction in a market is an illusion crafted people either desperate to salvage a broken system, or those who seek to exploit them.
Self-correction exists when anti-monopoly laws exist, work and are enforced in full. It doesn't exist when they don't, because self-correction relies upon competition providing a choice and the consumer using it.
Also trade unions and customer associations are part of what we call free market. Both are voluntary, in public interest, and work when they exist. No coercion involved, thus no violation of market laws.
Also on large enough scale of the market and small enough scale of all businesses it may sometimes seem, that anti-monopoly laws are not needed. Especially since when anti-monopoly laws work, the market appears such.
Lol at all the conservatives screeching about "socialism" and "communism" and how they will be the downfall of our country, then slurping up Trump nationalizing part of Intel 🤣
They don't believe in anything, just brain dead simpleton cultists who would happily stick their tongue into a rat trap if Trump told them to do it.
so, AMD for me from now on then.
Yes, but also because they're just better chips and you probably should have only been getting them to begin with. Way more power efficient, smaller process, less heat, easier to upgrade, better multi core performance, lower price; you just get a better CPU.
Note that better multicore perf is not true through the entire stack, because Intel chips have p core making them have better multicore perf in a lot of price-competitive offerings.
But the current platform is quite dead, you won't get upgrades for it
This is Small Government!
i just got an amd card in response :)
Right when I was thinking of buying an intel cpu and gpu to support the company and do my little part in helping increase competition in the cpu and gpu sector. Guess I will stick with amd this time around.
The way This Guy capitalizes Random Words drives me INSANE.
If you wanna be president of the United States, you should at least learn the language.
Also "Thank you for your attention to this matter." has such "Facebook local area group" energy, like a Boomer shouting into the void about teenagers always loitering at the bus stop.
Isn't he mimicking the typography of oldish "wild west style" newspapers and other print? Both with different fonts, and varying capitalization, and sizes. Yelling at you from monochrome photos.
(Never been in the USA.)
Say goodbye to 10% of your tax dollars
Years of failed management rewarded with government bailout.
I missed something, what did Intel get in return for 10% of their company?
So how did they get all that stock for free?
When Biden was president the Democrats passed the Chips Act, which has grants for chipmakers to build in the US. When Trump took power he basically stopped issuing these grants to companies that were set to get them.
My understanding is that basically Intel will give 10% of itself if Trump stops blocking the grants it was already set to get. I guess Intel's thinking is that if they make the US a part owner, then Trump won't obstruct the company so much.
This might sound like good news (kind of) in that the government is getting equity in return for the money, but I doubt Trump will enforce the original requirements and purpose of the grants, so Intel probably won't end up finishing many of the factories it was supposed to build. It also sets a precedent that you can't rely on goverment grants to do things as future parties may change the terms of the deal retroactively, even after you already started.
I don't understand why they would want to build in the US? There's plenty of places with cheaper labour.
In case of war the country needs national supply of chips to put in rockets, planes, everything really.
If you make everything in Taiwan and that's the place that's getting blockaded by enemy Navy...
Is there some massive geopolitical issue hovering like a guillotine over Taiwan? ;)
For that matter, it was the same problem the US then faced back when it was getting much of their electronics from Japan, as the Soviet threat loomed so large.
Because Biden paid them with grants to build in the US. It's that simple.
Beyond that there's stability and the likelihood of not being invaded or facing natural disasters.
There's meant to be government, legal, and financial institution stability too.
As well as intellectual property defense, trade secrets and NDAs.
Material supplies are meant to be stable too.
When you're investing in something as specialised as chip manufacturing, labour is a fraction of your concern. Both short and long term.
Are you happy now, communists? We're nationalizing companies.
yeah I have no idea what the fuck is happening anymore. the GOP is full pedo-junta on business...
So, I haven't checked project 2025, but there is a Christian nationalist plan that wants to take over everything called Seven Mountains Mandate. You can just read the link, but the idea is to take over what they consider all major parts of society, including business and have a Christian Dominion.
Until I read your comment, I thought this was satire and not the actual tweet. What in the fuck
Probably heard it once and thought it was cool or saw a couple of memes with it and now it’s his brain worm.
If you had been sued as often as this guy, you'd probably be muttering random legalese in your sleep and unconsciously letting it leech into your vocab, too
The United States will not seek direct representation on Intel's board
If they want change, they don't to vote on the board. They can just pass laws in Intel's favour.
Taxpayers are now all Intel shareholders. I can't understand what benefit this provides them.
How is it a great deal for Intel?
buying stock with the people's money just in time for a recession
As far as government bail outs go, I think taking a portion of the company in exchange is an excellent idea. THIS orange asshole is doing it for all the wrong reasons, and will VERY likely fuck up literally everything about it, but the idea is sound.
I wonder what things would look like today if the government had taken some portion of control over all the auto manufacturers, airlines, banks, etc it has bailed out over the years instead of just giving them unsecured loans
I wonder what things would look like today if the government had taken some portion of control over all the auto manufacturers, airlines, banks, etc it has bailed out over the years instead of just giving them unsecured loans
Would look like normal capitalism of the early XIX century, give or take. Bad, but not atrocious. Bailouts definitely wouldn't be abused as much, because, eh, they wouldn't be free.
And the old argument that public sector management is inefficient - well, it's not always a bad thing. It would then make sense for the government to re-privatize some of those shares, and use others for a source of income and a lever. And the companies bailed out this way would sink in power (which is good for competition), but not completely (which is good for their employees and economical stability). And, of course, I'll repeat about source of income. Perhaps there will be no more raising taxes with such a system in place. Perhaps even some taxes it'll be possible to simplify - any complex tax system works in favor of those who can afford to apply expertise, so those richer, and not poorer.
Also partial or full nationalization may sometimes work to good outcomes, while nationalized companies are less efficient, they also tend to retain institutional knowledge better, have more people working long on the same positions, follow labor regulations. For the telephone company or the train company or the central heating company or the public bus company it makes sense to be nationalized.
you raise interesting questions. how do you stop some asshole president from using infinite taxpayer money to manipulate the price of a stock?

top 100 comments