Trump turned the government into an investor. Democrats have shopping plans, too.

Semafor ^ | Ov. 22, 2026 | Eleanor Mueller

[GrootheWanderer]

The Trump administration has so far announced 43 equity stakes in firms producing everything from minerals to semiconductors, 36 of which were negotiated without explicit legal authority — and more are yet to come. The administration may be negotiating even more stakes under the radar, since SEC filings for unrelated deals mention the possibility of warrants.

Unwinding the administration’s investments would prove legally and politically difficult — but Democrats likely won’t want to, at least not right away. They’re already weighing how to use equity stakes for their own ends, signaling that Trump’s government intervention in the private sector may be the start of a permanent trend.

---

TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: brucecampbellsass; capitalism; cronyism; economics; enderwussie1970; fascism; groothetdstroll; hemustbestupid; socialism; sphinxter; tdsmidtermtrolls

[GrootheWanderer]

There's a word for government ownership of the means of production. A lot of people seem to have forgotten it. I'm sure they'll remember it once a Democrat is back in the White House and controls all those ownership stakes.

[sphinx]

Yup. Trump is greasing the skids and the MAGAbots are clapping. It’s supposed to be ok because Trump is a supergenius, etc. But next we’ll get a dose of the DSA scalphunting.

[escapefromboston]

Dems don’t need an excuse to do whatever they want.

[JayGalt]

Oversimplifying much?
Getting a share of profits as a stockholder is not owning the means of production. Rather it’s a very smart tactic to generate a reveue stream that may allow the funding of social security and even place that money into investor directed IRA as well as retiring the income tax.

[ConservativeMind]

We could provide tax incentives or grants or loans or capture stock.

All of these subsidize the targeted companies or industries.

I do not like owning companies, in concept, but Solyndra-type investments are a complete loss, while claiming to be needed, as well.

Stock gives you something to cash in, and helps assure some responsibility, at least. Excess money could be made.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

Absolutely. I don’t support it when Trump does it, and I won’t support it when Democrats do it.

[volare737]

It is a terrible idea.

It is a huge constraint and interference in free and fair competition in the marketplace,,,,,,as the government will favor companies in which the government has an equity stake,,,,not to mention preference/interference in mergers, legal battles, legislation, government contracts, etc.

[EnderWiggin1970]

Any investor who cares to retain freedom for the US should dump shares in companies that come under this kind of control from the government. And we should do our best to avoid patronizing them if they produce consumer products or we have a say (such as in corporate decisions) in the purchase of products that it produces.

[whitney69]

Previous administrations like Obama did a huge amount of investing and occassionally callled them bailouts. Such were:

Major Automotive and Financial Rescues (TARP)

General Motors (GM)
Chrysler
Ally Financial (formerly GMAC)
Financial Institutions & AIG

Clean Energy and Technology Loans (Department of Energy)

Tesla Motors
Solyndra
Fisker Automotive

FACT SHEET: Obama Administration Announces More Than $4 Billion in Private Sector Commitments and Executive Actions to Scale up Investment in Clean Energy Innovation

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/06/16/fact-sheet-obama-administration-announces-more-4-billion-private-sector

Report in March 2015:

Over the past 15 years, the federal government has provided $68 billion in grants and special tax credits to business, with two-thirds of the total going to large corporations.

https://www.goodjobsfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/docs/pdf/UncleSamsFavoriteCorporations.pdf

And Biden wasn’t free on this either:

CHIPS ACT Investments

Intel
TSMC Arizona
Samsung
Micron Technology
GlobalFoundries
BAE Systems
Amkor Technology

Additional CHIPS Act Grant & Loan Recipients

Other companies tracked through the Department of Commerce and Manufacturing Dive’s CHIPS Tracker that secured or negotiated federal awards include:
Microchip Technology
Texas Instruments
Wolfspeed
Polar Semiconductor
Analog Devices
Corning
HP
Microchip
SkyWater Technology
Helion and Commonwealth Fusion Systems (clean energy/fusion tech research grant

Some thesd wee actually given to build facilities in the states. So, is Trump doing anything out of the ordinary? Doesn’t appear so. Another hack hit piece. And the chip act had a huge effect on the formation of AI:

https://hai.stanford.edu/policy/what-the-chips-and-science-act-means-for-artificial-intelligence

wy69

[EnderWiggin1970]

Getting a share of profits as a stockholder is not owning the means of production.

It is very literally taking a share of ownership in the means of production!

[JayGalt]

Again with the rejiggering definitions to support a lousy hypothesis. The problem lies in conflating ownership & control. While any shareholder including the Government holding shares on the behalf of IS citizens the iis no practical aspect of control.
It is the control that is the issue in the concept of owning the means of production.
The government owning shares in one or many companies does not stack the deck or give unfair advantage to any company. There is no control or finger on the scale.
This emerging paradigm is smart business for the American people, whose tax dollars underpin the creation and maintenance of the platform these businesses are built on. Businesses give to charity and communities. Why not giving a share back to the American people?

[JayGalt]

Auto correct loses again
the behalf of IS citizens the iis
While any shareholder. including the Government holding shares on behalf of US citizens, has niminal minority ownership, thete is no practical aspect of control.

[JayGalt]

I think that is speculation. There more companies that the Government has a snall share in the less hance there will be any manipulation or unfair advantage.
We have so much outright fruad graft amd corruption that to postualte that owning a small share oof a company so that US citizens share in the profit, will give that company an unfair advantage is a far stretch. That company if it even sells to the Government will have to bid and that process is subject to oversight.

[JayGalt]

The U.S. government (under the Trump administration) holds direct minority equity stakes, preferred shares, or warrants in dozens of private and public companies across sectors like semiconductors, mining, defense, and steel in exchange for federal grants, loans, or CHIPS and Science Act funding.

I’d say that’s smart business. Postulating there will be abuse is just so much hyperventilating. We need innovative ideas to fund the government which do not rely on taxes. Tariffs, shares for grants that would be given anyway, as well as other business joint ventures are great ways to think outside the box and get America on a sound financial footing.

[volare737]

You are dreaming if you think the CEO or Board Of Directors of a company would not feel pressure or be influenced by the government in virtually every company endeavor. In addition to the financial and legal aspects I mentioned, there would also pressure on a company in social policy (Affirmative Action, DEi, wokeness, etc.)

Like all government programs that start out with the very best of intentions, it will be morphed from ‘crony capitalism’ to crony socialism by the democrats.

It is not surprising the democrats have been somewhat silent on this issue. It may be ok with Trump in office. But if the democrats take over in the future, they will grow and expand this concept on steroids!!

It is a great first step towards even more government interference and control of the private sector,,,,and yes, even socialism. As I said, it is a horrible idea.