Comment by thisisit
4 hours ago
It's like you intentionally chose the ignore other government actions and focus on taxes just to fit your narrative. Read it again:
> It should enact preferential policies like grants, tax cuts, subsidies etc. for industries they want to promote.
And read the announcement again. Intel has not been given extra money. CHIPS Act money has been converted to stake. That means Intel wasn't going away, if that is your concern.
Government routinely provides grants or preferential treatments to certain sectors or industries. Like Tesla and the EV grant. That works fine. It doesn't mean government needs to acquire stake in Tesla and put their thumb on the market scale.
In case you miss it, let me repeat - industries needs to be supported. It is called CHIPS Act not Intel Act for a reason. Given the current POTUS propensity to hold aid/grant without a quid pro quo, we can guess what happened here. Intel doesn't gets the grant money unless they kiss the ring and polish POTUS' image.
“Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.”
I’d encourage you to “read again” the HN guidelines.
> Government shouldn't bail out anyone. Period. It should enact preferential policies like grants, tax cuts, subsidies etc. for industries they want to promote.
If Intel is at risk of going under, saving it is what’s understood to be “bailing out.” A grant that’s meant to save a major multi-billion dollar company isn’t quite what most people think of as a grant.