← Back to context

Comment by UltraSane

4 days ago

Why?

Many commenters on HN have this weird idea that if Taiwan is slightly ahead of competition, US would defend Taiwan against a country with nukes. Or that TSMC superiority is Taiwan's national security issue.

  • > Many commenters on HN have this weird idea that if Taiwan is slightly ahead of competition, US would defend Taiwan against a country with nukes. Or that TSMC superiority is Taiwan's national security issue.

    Well... TSMC is definitely a component of Taiwan's national security. It's called the "Silicon Shield" for a reason.

    And the US definitely has more reasons to go to war, and more importantly, threaten war to prevent one breaking out, over Taiwan if it knows there will be a massive economic impact.

    And China definitely knows that if Taiwan is important for the US, it's almost certain the US would defend it.

  • The US would probably defend Taiwan if the CCP invaded it. I don't think we would ever use nukes.

    • Doesn’t TSMC building a plant in US, offset the need for US to invade Taiwan. Perhaps Taiwan expects US support out of goodwill, but I think Taiwan overestimates how much goodwill drives US politics. Taiwan might have had a better chance of getting support, if it maintained a monopoly on circuit production.

    • You think if say US bombs all the CCP's planes, CCP would sit silently and accept defeat? Same thing happened with Ukraine. NATO couldn't escalate the war at any cost, so they can just play safe and only do things that don't risk escalation.

      8 replies →

  • Why do you think it's a weird idea? It's a strategic asset as much as oilfields are.

    • Because Samsung and Intel would probably close the gap by the time the war is done. They are just 2-4 years behind with the gaps already closing in.

Some people are against industrial policy (like the CHIPS Act) because they don't believe that market failure exists.

Some people are against Biden/Dems.

Some people are clueless about the foreign policy and the geopolitical reality in Asia and take the status quo regional power balance as a given.

Not on the I want it to fail side but my main question is why we put this water intensive industry in Arizona instead of further east where water is less stressed as a resource?

Seems like it would be way better off being somewhere in the eastern half of the country or at least not in the Southwest.

  • water is a non-issue. The main issue in deciding where a factory should go is which state will give you the most to do it.