9 ms·
Repealing the CHIPS Act risks US national security
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y agoRepealing it requires congress.
- almostgotcaught 2y agopepperidge farm remembers when the same thing could be said of closing departments like Department of Education and USAID lol.
- sanderjd 2y agoIt still can, at least so far. But courts are slow.
- almostgotcaught 2y ago> But courts are slow. You ever heard the thing about how if you throw a frog into a pot of boiling water it'll jump out but if you put it in cold water and slowly turn up the heat it'll cook? That's us. We are cooked.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y agoThe boiling frog meme is about social normalization. The courts are not treating this as normal, they just have procedure to follow.
- almostgotcaught 2y ago> they just have procedure to follow. you are dramatically oversimplifying and/or misrepresenting glaring omissions/errors/accomodations of jurisprudence over the last several years. i'm not going to debate you on it - you can read any number of opinions/analyses/exposes on it from educated/scholarly/authoritative people.
- sanderjd 2y agoI honestly don't feel like anyone feels like the water is heating up slowly. Just sitting here in a coffee shop for an hour, I've overheard about five different conversations about everything the current administration is screwing up, and I had another one at the bus stop this morning. People aren't unaware and they aren't happy.
- nirav72 2y agoYet his approval rating is higher than its ever. There is a segment of the population that seems love the bull in the china shop approach to governance.
- sanderjd 2y agoIt isn't higher than ever, because it's been dropping for a few weeks, as the initial benefit of the doubt honeymoon period has already begun to fade.
- ribadeo 1y agoWhat is anyone going to do about it? MAGA house reps have already fulminated impeachment proceedings for a judge who tried to rein in a lawless Trump admin. The US Marshalls are part of the DOJ that Trump has already pwned, so forget about any consequences for the executive branch completely ignoring the judicial branch selectively. With MAGA congressional majorities, we have literally no possibility of checking an overreaching Trump administration. All mechanisms have been subverted already. There will doubtless not be any midterms, and meanwhile HN doesn't want to be political, yet standing up for our republic is now a partisan effort, and it's being cast as disloyalty to a supreme leader, who apparently now embodies the law and government. Research scientists are denied US entry for having Trump-critical conversations on their phone. The frog is boiling. Dang will say to pipe down and stop screaming, while the frog cries out for its life, because some foolish boss types still persist in the delusion our house speaker persists in: thst they can ride this bucking bronco to work. They cannot. The bronco owns them. Lights out and noting this is considered partisan. What is more radical than harassing our friends and allies and uniting the world against us? But if you let out a peep, it's political. We are supposed to enjoy bowing and scraping to obey our overlords, and insufficient display of joy at being suffocated is now partisan. It didn't need to be this way. TRUMP has already dismantled much of our republic and yet the articles posted here do not reflect this. What part of "we are becoming the new nazi state entity" does ycombinator not understand?
- BiteCode_dev 2y agoPaywalled, so how did it go to the frontpage if most people can't read it?
- re-thc 2y ago> if most people can't read it? By reading the headline
- lapcat 2y agoThis. Many HN users don't read the articles. Some are even unapologetic about it, explicitly admitting that they're here only for the comments.
- AnimalMuppet 2y agoSome of us rarely read the articles. They're often, frankly, a waste of time. And it's hard to tell just by the headline whether it's worth reading or not. The comments often tell me whether the article is worth reading faster than the article would. (And some of the time the article is paywalled, and some of the time it's a video, which makes it harder to skim.) And often I learn more from the comments than I would from the article.
- WithinReason 2y agoClicking the link hits a paywall, but copy-pasting it gets me the article.
- quesera 2y agoMost paywalls are easy to bypass. Most HN readers know this. Some of us also have FT subscriptions though. That'd be an interesting poll. What % of HN readers (poll participants) subscribe to the big paywalled story sources? NYT, FT, The Economist, ...
- 1over137 2y agoSee the archive.is link that someone also provides.
- roter 2y agohttps://archive.is/m3TcW/share https://archive.is/m3TcW/share
- jcfrei 2y agoJust cancel it, make a new Act with a different name and equal purpose, claim victory. Seems to be the most likely procedure with the current administration.
- quesera 2y agoEasier: Make some trivial amendment to it (does not need to be ratified), and then just start calling it something else. "It was a disaster, but We Fixed It because I'm your favorite."
- malfist 2y agoIsn't that how they "fixed ACA" last time around? Failed to have the votes to repeal it, so they "saved" it
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y agoHero John McCain saved it
- blitzar 2y agoThey got rid of the much hated, terrible, corrupt, illegal Obamacare and replaced it with the much loved and wonderful Affordable Care Act.
- giancarlostoro 2y agoCan't tell if trolling
- actionfromafar 2y agoThis is where we are at. So many people are unaware that ACA is Obamacare. Obamacare evil.
- giancarlostoro 2y ago
- jaza 2y agoMuch of the money has already been spent, the new fabs are already operational slash well into construction, so repealing it now shouldn't do that much damage. But it'll still do some damage, and it's still a stupid move, but hey, them's the times we live in.
- Trasmatta 2y agoThe US President is motivated entirely by spite and personal benefits vendettas. The only reason to repair the CHIPS act is because it was one of Biden's bigger accomplishments, and Trump can't stand that. That's literally all it is.
- actionfromafar 2y agoNot only spite. Also what his handlers tell him.
- zoobab 2y agoPublic money, public factories? There is nothing public, just free money for the private sector.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y agoIt's strategically important
- preisschild 2y agoYou could also help defend Taiwan against illegal annexation and then you wouldn't need to have those facilities on-shore.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y agoBad things happen in war- why risk it? We can both defend Taiwan and build fabs in the US.
- rayiner 2y agoWas national security impaired four years ago before the CHIPS Act? That said I like the CHIPS Act in principle. We should have real industrial policy.
- sanderjd 2y agoI mean, that was the theory of passing the bill, yes. You can question that theory, but it's not like some new explanation for the purpose of the law.
- CharlieDigital 2y agoYes? Because during COVID, the supply of microchips became a really big issue. I bought a 2024 Prius last year in Feb and didn't get my second key fob until this year, Feb, because of supply chain issues with microchips. Now imagine an actual war where China takes Taiwan.
- blitzar 2y agoYes. Not been able to build the things required for national security within your own boarders represents a risk to national security. Having them all manufactured at the same place, a risk to national security. Having a single supplier, a risk to national security. Day of the week ending in y, a risk to national security.
- 9283409232 2y agoTrump supporters tell me Trump isn't aiding China but then everything Trump does has a weird way of aiding China. Why would we repeal the CHIPS act and remove our ability to secure a domestic supply of chips?
- _t9ow 2y ago> everything Trump does has a weird way of aiding China This is also why Chinese netizens commonly refer to Trump as 川建國同志 (literally "Nation-Building Comrade Trump").
- curtisszmania 2y ago[dead]
- esbranson 2y agoTrump's SOTU for reference: > Your CHIPS Act is a horrible, horrible thing. We give hundreds of billions of dollars and it doesn’t mean a thing. They take our money and they don’t spend it. All that meant to them. We’re giving them no money. All that was important to them was they didn’t want to pay the tariffs. So they came and they’re building. And many other companies are coming. We don’t have to give them money, we just want to protect our businesses and our people, and they will come because they won’t have to pay tariffs if they build in America. So it’s very amazing. You should get rid of the CHIPS Act and whatever’s left over, Mr. Speaker, you should use it to reduce debt or any other reason you want to.