Reply to post: Re: Subsidies are "necessary" ?

Hey Joe, those US CHIPS funds still coming? We kinda need them, says Micron

Tron Silver badge

Re: Subsidies are "necessary" ?

It's not capitalism. It's nationalism. Nationalism is way more expensive. You have to replicate tonnes of stuff that would never be viable in a free market. Assuming you have the [migrant] labour to build it, staff it, and resource it. The US are trying to replicate the Chinese model of state funding, allowing them to control access to tech at all levels. That costs enormous amounts more than the capitalist system, where everyone grabs a bit of turf according to what they are best at, or what local resources they have to sell. Nationalist economics is almost the opposite of capitalism. It works best for short periods under dictatorships (China and South Korea modernised doing it). It doesn't work well in functioning consumer economies.

Are the Taliban 100% on side with this? Most of them hate the Chinese as much as the Democrats, but will Trump, DeSantis or [Insert random nut] pull the cash and funnel it into stuff they are more chummy with? Maybe the opportunity of pinching tech manufacturing from their EU and Asian competitors, er, allies, will be enough of a bonus to keep writing the cheques.

It's not just SK. Japan may have problems too, unless they can wangle an opt out on the sly. This usually happens, but Washington might not permit it this time. Cutting Japan off from China wouldn't be as bad as Brexit, but it would sting, economically.

Given climate change, none of this may be relevant in 20 years time. We may be better off spending the last of the magic billions building resilient infrastructure. What's the use of 6G if it's 50 degrees outside and the wild fires are getting closer?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon