Thoughts on Government Bailing Out Companies or Industries?

I’m 100% against bailing out any corporation, business, etc that voted for or supported this regime…fck em

maybe they’ll learn after experiencing the consequences

every time I hear a farmer complaining I just laugh…u stupid MFers got screwed during Trump’s 1st term, then turned around and voted for more

FAFO

 

Intel did this to themselves with the stock buybacks and general disregard to innovation prior/during/after the pandemic. I mean don't we already have TSMC plants coming online soon in AZ anyways? Let true unfettered capitalism flow thru the veins of these companies, if you can't survive then die off and make room for the new. Corporate socialism needs to end point blank, period.

 

Intel needs to die. This isn’t anything new it has been a dumpster fire some time. It’s kind of yahoo. Two terribly mismanaged companies

 

the 2 most complacent corp, Intec and Boeing, needs to die

 

I believe in bailouts for strategic industries. Bailing out the car industry was the right decision and brought back huge returns to the government and the economy. In this case we aren't bailing out an industry, we are bailing out a specific company that is intel. Qualcomm, AMD, and Nvidia are doing very well. In regards to fab capabilities, as long as the fab is located in the US and are run by US employees, I don't care who owns them. In conclusion, I think we should let Intel fail.

 

I don't think they should be bailed out.
If we cannot bail out people. . . .then don't bail out companies.
The amount of Corporate welfare we give out is ridiculous

Every company that we bailed out should have to donate 50% of the Profit to social improvement.

Rocket River

 

Intel doesn’t need a "bailout" and it’s not going to die. It still controls about 60%+ of the CPU market. In the worst case, it would simply restructure to return to profitability. Its problems are that recent investments haven’t paid off due to yield issues, stronger competition from AMD, and bad timing. This includes overhiring during the COVID rebound and building up excess inventory.

To the OP: A government grant in exchange for a share in a large company isn’t a bailout, it’s an investment. That’s smarter government in my book, since we can directly measure the impact through the investment’s yield. More importantly, this falls under Congress’s responsibility, with the executive branch carrying out what Congress authorizes (and sometimes with leeway). It’s not supposed to be a unilateral "investment" power of the executive. That kind of arrangement would invite abuse and corruption.

What the admin is proposing here doesn’t fit the original structure of the CHIPS Act, which was meant to grant companies funding to start fabs on U.S. soil. They can go back to Congress to modify it, but they cannot simply cut a deal with Intel.

(Yes, they will simply cut a deal)

 

Intel could be allowed to sell its Fabs to APPLE. Apple is TSMC largest customer. Apple already designs its own chips. This would allow them to bring the majority of that production to the US, if you are worried about national security.

Otherwise, the CHIPS Act would have been fine for them. Trump doesn't want to give Biden ANY credit.

US Gov't should not be in the business of picking winners. What about AMD? Nvidia? Both competitors to Intel and hence, would be US gov't competitors. If they try to acquire companies that would help them gain advantages over Intel, would those be blocked? Corruption....

 

The U.S. gov reportedly already has an agreement to take 10% of sales from advanced AMD and Nvidia "AI" chips sold to China (that was once blocked for "national security" reasons)

A few things stand out here.

It is clearly not about national security, unless you are in the camp that NOW believes national security has a price tag.

The gov is already playing favorites... picking winners and losers. This kind of arrangement invites corruption and abuse. It also hurts smaller players that remain subject to tariffs and "national security" restrictions.

 

That is communism......

DD

 

Trump’s Economic Meddling Mimicks Marxists / Maoists

Unlike any leader of any free-market economy around the world, President Trump has seized control of private enterprise’s strategic decision-making and investment policies while invading corporate board rooms so that he may dictate leadership staffing, punish corporate critics, and demand public compliance with his political agenda. This is far more dangerous to capitalism than a city-run grocery store.


....Trump is imitating [the] Chinese Communist Party by extending political control ever deeper into the economy.

.......The political right used to complain about the “political correctness of the left.” Similarly, Trump’s history of cracking down on businesses for exercising their freedom of expression resembles the purges of Maoist China far more than American democratic norms.

For example, when Trump attack Coporate CEOs, such as Jeff Bezos, Ken Frazier, BoA;s Moynihan, Walmart's McMillan, the new INTC CEO and others.

Akin to Mao Zedong directing business decisions as a part of his wildly disastrous Great Leap Forward central economic planning initiative, Trump has plunged the US government headfirst into an unprecedented active role in directing private business decision-making and capital flows. Last month, he ordered Coca-Cola CEO James Quincey to replace cane sugar with other sweeteners that the firm uses, despite the lack of scientific evidence supporting such a move and despite the fact that the CEO of Coca-Cola is accountable to his board and shareholders, not Donald Trump.​

 

As with a lot of Trump's demands, do a little digging and you will find a big Trump donor, a link to one of the thousands of Trump family businesses or investments, or some other person with ties to Trump who will profit off the policies, demands, or threats against their competitors.

Trump has strong ties to the sugar industry, particularly through the Fanjul family, who are major sugar cane producers and Republican donors.