Not even temporarily? For national security?
@RepThomasMassie
The CHIPS Act did not authorize the U.S. government to acquire stock in private corporations.
—
Is Massie saying this could be illegal? The way they’ve done it I mean?
The textbook definition of fascism is when you can’t tell where government ends and companies begin.
Massie can have a nice cup of STFU.
The problem with Massie’s position is that China will gladly give Intel a trillion dollars for part ownership. How does a private company resist that?
Taking a complete hands-off position in how a company operates opens the door to foreign companies from owning the US outright.
“””@RepThomasMassie Our government should not have ownership in private companies. There are so many specific problems with an arrangement like this, but fundamentally, this is not who we are as a country.””””
Massie sure sounds like Obama here. How many times did we hear Obama say: “this is not who we are”?
Explain Chrysler.
GM in 2008...
Banks in 2008...
I agree government should stay out but we’re talking national security here.
Does the Constitution forbid such actions by the government?
BS. Every bailout is technically the government getting inside a company. It’s been happening for a long time.
“Not who we are as a country” is another term like “ Islamophobia”. “homophobia”,”widely discredited or debunked “ used by political propagandists to shut down debate and shout down opposition to their misdeeds.
Whenever I hear those words I automatically know I’m being bluffed, baffled, bull shitted and hoodwinked by all that follows
How much did Jackass Joe give away to Rivian, free of charge? Chrysler was bailed out too. Difficult times, difficult decision.
Does the government not invest our monies in private companies?
Do you know the words to Da Camptown Races?
Heark back to the Preamble and go from there when assessing.
I would rather own shares than just give them grants or even tax cuts.
Seems a better deal than Fannie and Freddie. The UK has golden shares and State Owned Enterprises are not uncommon around the world.
Intel is too big to fail
/s
CIA’s In-Q-Tel (IQT) has been doing this for decades. One of its successes is Palantir.
If it not who we are as a country then why have we been doing it since we became a country?
As I understand things, which may be incorrect, Biden arranged to hand out grants to integrated circuit companies to build factories.
What Trump wants to do is to get 10% of Intel’s stock in return for the federal investment.
The reason Biden and Trump want integrated circuit companies to build factories in the USA is because the factories in Taiwan vital to our high-tech companies may be destroyed by the PRC since Xi craves Taiwan more than Putin craves Ukraine. Many people think Xi is just waiting to see if Putin gets all of what he craves.
Thugs do cause problems, especially when they run countries with powerful military forces.
It’s up to Congress to decide if Biden’s plan as improved by Trump goes forward.
WIKI
In United States history, the Report on the Subject of Manufactures, generally referred to by its shortened title Report on Manufactures, is the third of four major reports, and magnum opus, of American Founding Father and first U.S. Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton. It was presented to the Congress on December 5, 1791. In the report, Hamilton argued for industrial policy to support modern manufacturing technologies in the United States.
It laid forth economic principles rooted in both the mercantilist system of Elizabeth I’s England and the practices of Jean-Baptiste Colbert of France.
Hamilton reasoned that bounties (subsidies) to industry, which would rely on funds raised by moderate tariffs, would be the best means of growing manufacturing without decreasing the supply or increasing the prices of goods. Such encouragement by direct support would make American enterprise competitive and independent along with the nation as a whole. In part subsidies would be used for the following:
Encourage the nation’s spirit of enterprise, innovation, and invention.
Support internal improvements, including roads and canals to increase and to encourage domestic commerce.
Grow the infant nation to a manufacturing power that would be independent of control by foreign powers by relying on their goods for domestic, especially defense supplies.
Although Hamilton supported the promotion of domestic manufacturing at a time when the United States had little industrial development, he favored “subsidies and encouragements to invest rather than high tariffs” and believed that tariffs were not particularly effective in fostering industrial growth. According to Irwin, Hamilton aimed to support manufacturing without necessarily shielding it from foreign competition, recognizing that excessive protection could lead to inefficiency and reduce overall trade.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Report_on_Manufactures