CBS reporting $52 billion for domestic semiconductor manufacturing. The Senate passed the Chips Act 64-33, and now it goes to the House. 92% of advanced microchip manufacturing happens in Taiwan, and the entire world is dependent on it for technology. That's a very insecure position and we should absolutely invest in domestic production and supply chains.
Interesting move. The argument to reduce risk from a Taiwan/China conflict feels solid, but most of the supporters of this are talking about the need to keep up with Japan, Europe, and other areas also investing in semiconductor production, which would also provide alternate sources to buy from. Suspect there is a case of them not focusing on the Taiwan aspect for diplomatic reasons though. Opposition seems to come from two directions. Sanders, who believes this is lower priority than other things that should be getting done, and Republicans arguing that any increase in government spending is bad.
The original bill had more funding for basic R&D in general (which federal funding as a % has been falling for a while) with only a smaller part going to subsidize some the most profitable corps in the world to build here but over time (ie lobbyists got more time to work their magic) the balance slid the other way. What are you gonna do when you need Rs to pass anything? Overall still a good bill and worth passing.
I believe it is something like $30B in direct transfers for manufacturers to onshore chip production with another $20B in tax subsidies if benchmarks are hit (not included in price tag most folks/the media are using). The other $20B goes to R&D and supply chain hardening. Again, IIRC.
They talked about it on today’s Pod Save the World but I was listening on break so also doing half a dozen other things. https://crooked.com/podcast/china-picks-a-fight-with-pelosi/
I should have added that the same bill grants $200B for research, "especially into artificial intelligence, robotics, quantum computing and a variety of other technologies." (NY Times)
Oh, right. The reason is the same reason I support him. He is actually representing the people, not corporations.
forgot the link - https://www.scmp.com/tech/policy/ar...bill-unites-bernie-sanders-conservative-right And this is where SCMP (South China Morning Post) sits on the reliability scale
Odd that neither one of you heard people complain about the shortage of new cars and the huge increase in the price of used cars the last year. I’ve heard quite a few folks complain about it.
I did hear complaints. In fact, I sold my truck last year because the dealer kept harassing me and finally gave me the price I was asking. traded it in and bought a new car. That doesn't change WHY Sanders didn't like the idea. Which is the question I asked. BTW, while I do lean left, you will find I am not a Democrat. I will vote based on what I think is right. If you blindly follow the party, you are as bad as trump followers.
Okay, now fill in the blank: “According to the Federal Reserve, other market analysts and the industry itself the production cuts in new automobiles (thus driving up demand for used) was due to a shortage of ____conductors.” https://www.clevelandfed.org/en/new...ctor-shortages-vehicle-production-prices.aspx
You're still talking about corporations making obscene amounts of money and now want the taxpayers who are already struggling just to fucking pay rent and buy food, to subsidize an industry so they can make more profits without give a fuck about the poeple. I'm still with Bernie. Fuck used cars.
1) So you admit that you have heard people complain about the shortage of semiconductors you just couldn’t connect the dots. 2) This bill will only raise taxes on corporations and those making over $400k/yr. You and Bernie can go cry me a river over their terrible tax burden.
1) I admitted that I have heard dealerships complaining about the lack of semiconductors. If there are dots connecting used cars and semiconductors, not I did not connect them 2)That is not the reason Bernie is against the bill - which was my original question.
1) What? Are you really so obtuse as to not see the connection between a limited supply of new cars (due to a semiconductor shortage) and rising demand/prices for used cars or are you pulling a @Federal Farmer and just arguing to argue at this point. 2) What? You said this bill would tax ordinary people to give money to corps when in fact it will tax corps and the rich to provide both jobs and supply chain security for ordinary people. Again, are you just too stubborn to admit you are wrong?
Dude. Get over yourself. I asked a question. That question was "why is Bernie against the bill". I found the answer. The reason Bernie gave, I agree with. If there are other issues that Bernie did not bring up, please, present them.
Okay so you are just a Bernie Believer and will gobble down whatever he gives you. Even when demonstrably false. Got it Girl Federal Farmer.
I agree with his platform, yes. What is demonstrably false? If you have something showing his assessment of the bill is wrong, please present it without being an ass about it.
Blame consumers who insist on a fancy suite of electronic gadgets, when all you need is mechanical fuel injection and distributor ignition.
Oh, FFS! How have I not been clear here?!? Do I need to draw it out in crayons?!? 1) People are complaining about semiconductors they just don’t know it. 2) It doesn’t tax ordinary people it taxes corporations and those making over $400k/yr.
There's a reason I named FF Boy Jenee shortly after he got here. There's not a helluva lot of difference between their posting styles.