Senate Passes $280 Billion Industrial Policy Bill To Counter China (nytimes.com) 62
The Senate on Wednesday passed an expansive $280 billion bill aimed at building up America's manufacturing and technological edge to counter China, embracing in an overwhelming bipartisan vote the most significant government intervention in industrial policy in decades. From a report: The legislation reflected a remarkable and rare consensus in an otherwise polarized Congress in favor of forging a long-term strategy to address the nation's intensifying geopolitical rivalry with Beijing, centered around investing federal money into cutting-edge technologies and innovations to bolster the nation's industrial, technological and military strength.
It passed on a lopsided bipartisan vote of 64 to 33, with 17 Republicans voting in support. The margin illustrated how commercial and military competition with Beijing -- as well as the promise of thousands of new American jobs -- has dramatically shifted longstanding party orthodoxies, generating agreement among Republicans who once had eschewed government intervention in the markets and Democrats who had resisted showering big companies with federal largess. "No country's government -- even a strong country like ours -- can afford to sit on the sidelines," Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader who helped to spearhead the measure, said in an interview. "I think it's a sea change that will stay."
It passed on a lopsided bipartisan vote of 64 to 33, with 17 Republicans voting in support. The margin illustrated how commercial and military competition with Beijing -- as well as the promise of thousands of new American jobs -- has dramatically shifted longstanding party orthodoxies, generating agreement among Republicans who once had eschewed government intervention in the markets and Democrats who had resisted showering big companies with federal largess. "No country's government -- even a strong country like ours -- can afford to sit on the sidelines," Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader who helped to spearhead the measure, said in an interview. "I think it's a sea change that will stay."
Pork Pork Pork (Score:5, Insightful)
As usual with the US Congress - good intentions wrapped in thin paper that will fall apart in the first rain.
The political payoffs disgused as "plans" are nothing but PORK.
This bacon is not good for you, your children, your grandchildren, or for any future generations that will be saddled with this immense debt.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Pork Pork Pork (Score:5, Insightful)
When have they ever stayed true to their party platform, even when they had one? They shout as loud as they can when not in power about fiscal responsibility, right up until they are to vote on corporate welfare bills and tax cuts for rich assholes that don't need tax cuts, then it's time to put even more on the federal credit card. Then bitch and moan about raising the debt ceiling to pay for spending they already approved.
Today's verse is about inflation and how making sure half the country didn't fall into depression-era poverty due to the covid relief packages was a bad thing, and it's all Joe Biden's fault. And then they go and vote for $230,000,000,000.00 more spending probably in the same breath. Then the familiar refrain of "fiscal responsibility" comes back.
This has been the same song and dance since 1994. I really don't know why anyone still falls for it.
Re: (Score:2)
This has been the same song and dance since 1994. I really don't know why anyone still falls for it.
I am pretty sure its the marketing behind the "your vote matters" people.
I can say that my vote amounts next to nothing. Hell, if I could sell it for $20, I would.
Re: (Score:2)
It explains exactly how much difference your vote makes.
TL:DR: None
Your whole system of government was set up in the 18th century to ensure that wealthy landowners controlled the levers of power, and as you have never reformed your electoral system they still do.
This link has a little video which helps explain it. [represent.us]
Re: Pork Pork Pork (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
I really don't know why anyone still falls for it.
Because "Look over there, gays / brown people / China!" still works.
Re: (Score:2)
Republicans have favored pork ever since the Bush 2 era. That's why Ron Paul ran for president. He didn't get much support. It's not a very popular platform in America. We like "free" gifts.
Re: (Score:1)
Democrat pork tends to be for social programs and Republican pork tends to be military and corporate favoritism. But these are just tendencies as there are plenty of exceptions and flip flops.
Re: (Score:2)
Social programs usually aren't referred to as pork.
Both parties try to get funding for donors in their districts. It's how they reward the donors. It's not a partisan thing, it's a practical thing.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, "pork" is relative.
Re: (Score:2)
Republican spending policy:
https://www.milwaukeeindepende... [milwaukeeindependent.com]
At least the Democrats are trying to help, the Republicans are openly ripping you off.
Re: (Score:2)
Most Americans have benefited from tax cuts. Don't try to pretend that they haven't.
Re: (Score:2)
If taxes are spent well then almost no one benefits from a tax cut, at least with the tax level in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
If taxes are spent well
They aren't.
Re: (Score:2)
Most Americans have benefited from tax cuts. Don't try to pretend that they haven't.
How much did the deficit increase because of it? When do the effects of that show up?
(Clue: A couple of years after they leave office - that's the point of the Two Santas Strategy and you've obviously fallen for it hook, line, and sinker)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I don't have anything wrong with pork (Score:3)
I do have an objection to what we did during covid where we handed about 1.2 trillion dollars to the top 1%. We should just take that money back. By force if necessary. They didn't e
Re: (Score:1)
I've said it before and I will say it again stop voting for the politician who has the best advertisements and the most fun rallies.
I tried to watch a recording of a Trump rally once. "Know your enemy" and all that jazz. I couldn't get through it. It was nothing but incessant whining, complaining and insulting people who are part of the out group. People who find that sort of thing fun or entertaining clearly just have brains that are wired differently.
By contrast, the Hillary rally I went to was largely positive. Almost no time was spent disparaging Republicans, the messages were primarily about addressing issues facing the count
I think the difference between the Democrats (Score:3)
Also it's kind of telling that when I said people shouldn't vote for pro corporate candidates you immediately picked up but I was disparaging the Republican Party. I knew of course if I said the r word I'd get modded down in the pulp because people have been conditioned by our media to think that partisan politics is bad. Nobody ever asks why we have partisa
Re: (Score:2)
Inflation isn't always bad, if it is tied to the general population getting more money then inflation is generally a good thing. Right now it is mostly tied to product and service scarcity.
Wrong, inflation is at root monetary (Score:1, Insightful)
Inflation isn't always bad, if it is tied to the general population getting more money then inflation is generally a good thing.M
Inflation is always bad, because while people get more money pretty much always everything else also goes up faster in price than the rate at which you are getting more money.
The lack of inflation is what allows products to become cheaper and cheaper over time, benefitting everyone.
Right now it is mostly tied to product and service scarcity.
Absolutely false, inflation is ALWAYS a
Re: (Score:2)
There is no product scarcity at this point, in case you had not heard Walmart and Target had massive earnings misses because they have a glut of products and people have slowed down buying.
Sure, they have a glut of cheap clothing, cooking utensils, and fidget spinners.
Too bad Walmart and Target don't sell cars. Or networking equipment, because our lead times for ordering Cisco stuff is now between 6 months and a year.
Re: Wrong, inflation is at root monetary (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Now, explain how rising interest rates affect our carrying costs for all our debt...
Our national debt is (effectively) at an adjustable rate that resets after a number of years, and all we do is make interest payments, never paying down the principle.
Re: (Score:1)
Inflation is always bad
If you have a lot of fixed interest debt, inflation is a good thing, since it means you'll be paying back that loan with dollars which have less buying power than they did when you originally agreed to the loan.
For most average people though, the increased costs of literally everything else negates any benefit of say, your home mortgage/student loans/etc. being slightly "easier" to pay off (that's assuming you get some sort of raise or change jobs to keep up with inflation). Inflation really just helps out
Re: (Score:2)
National debt isn't fixed rate, so, not good when rates go up...
Re: (Score:2)
The lack of inflation is what allows products to become cheaper and cheaper over time, benefitting everyone.
The lack of inflation makes it so it's more profitable to keep your money in your pocket as the deflation (which is caused by a growing economy) increases the value of your money.
It is a mega incentive to stop investing and sit on your money.
In a capitalists (capital, hint hint) society that is bad news.
Watch The Hidden Secrets of Money [youtube.com], and gain wisdom.
Anyone with more than two brain cells understands that media labeled 'The Hidden Secret of X' are just bullshit that tries to capitalize on your lack of intellect.
Re: (Score:2)
If you thought inflation was something wait until this wad of money gets injected into the system.
I think they expect us to be relieved that it isn't another trillion dollar bill. These morons are pretty damn irresponsible.
Re: (Score:1)
Don't worry, the administration has already tackled the recession: they've redefined the word. Now it's not a recession unless they say it's a recession based on whatever metrics they decide it is.
Just wait until you see what happens to inflation when they decide to cancel a whole lot of student debt.
Re: (Score:2)
Inflation is just a rise in prices, you can measure it many many ways.
CPI-U All items, includes food and energy, it is 9.1% June2021-June2022
https://www.bls.gov/news.relea... [bls.gov]
https://www.bls.gov/news.relea... [bls.gov]
All Items Less Food and Energy is 5.6%
Now you can measure the rates yourself, inflation after all is nothing more than a rise in prices. Let say if I take the rate, multiply it by 4 just to be a silly goose and call it the real rate like the shadowstats guy apparently i can charge people money to make t
Oh fun, pork chops! (Score:5, Insightful)
Q: How many companies will get millions of these dollars to produce marvelous new tech, then use that money to pay executive bonuses or do stock buy-backs, then continue to outsource any actual tech development to other countries?
A: All of them.
So vote against pro corporate candidates (Score:3)
I mean how many people bitching about pork on this thread showed up to vote for Bernie Sanders in the last two primary elections? And he's just the most obvious example. I'm not saying you throw your vote away in the general we are a two-party system thanks to winner take all vo
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah Bernie and his multiple houses sure is looking out for you!
Yeah. The house he bought. The house he inherited and the cottage he inherited. Sure was pocketing tax payer money for 50 years as a career politician. Unlike his opponents who became multimillionaires within 5 years of being elected. Remember he is the poorest Senator. Why is that?
Re: (Score:2)
I vote in primaries. The candidates I vote for are typically either last, or second to last in the final standing of the primary. As you said, we're in a two party system. I tend to vote for the lesser of two evils on the national level, because what real choice to we have at that point? The primary process gives us the illusion that our voice matters, then goes to the most corporate sponsored candidates. By the time we reach the actual vote? Corporate corporate, corporate, corporate or corporate? Which way
Re: (Score:2)
In my state at least the primary voter turnout, in a presidential year, was 30%. The presidential election got 77%. Most states I look up are under 50% for primary votes.
If only the people who support pro corporate people vote thats who we get. I don't like it either but turnout is important and could make a difference, upsets and underdogs can and do happen so I wouldn't say primaries are an illusion when 6 or 7 out of 10 people don't bother to participate.
Money in politics is a problem for sure and wit
Re: (Score:2)
The primary process is exactly (Score:3)
This is why I remind people to stop voting for pro corporate candidates and to try and spot them
I for one agree (Score:4, Insightful)
This benefits consumers and us nerds as our steady stream of shiny new toys will continue to flow.
Ignore the naysayers, they are likely paid to fill social media platforms with anti-US propagands.
Re: (Score:2)
Anybody disagreeing is a paid shill? Holy fuck, I love the level of discourse around here these days.
This is the United States of America. If I had faith that our government could craft a bill like this that isn't just a straight, "Here, take this money and pocket it," hand out to the corporate class, sure, this would be a great concept. But, as I said, this is the United States of America. It'll be sunk into companies that will use it to pump their executive bonus pool, then continue to not build manufactu
Re: (Score:3)
public funds are the only way profit driven corporations will do so.
Were tariffs outlawed while I wasn't looking?
Re: (Score:1)
I agree with this bill as well.
Sure there are messy details, and yes people will profit from this.
But the reason humans make most chips in Taiwan and Korea is because those governments spent similar dollars to help get fabs built in their countries.
It will take years after a bill like this passes before for the balance to tip back towards the west.
The years start now.
https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infogr... [statcdn.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Where do you think we'll get the $230BN to fund this spending? China, yay!
Re: (Score:2)
Nope.
"Some are critical of the bill due to it doing little to hold China accountable. “The answer to the Chinese Communist Party’s malevolent ambitions is not spending billions of dollars to help Fortune 500 companies, with no guarantee those dollars won’t end up supporting these companies’ business operations in China," said Heritage President Kevin Roberts"
"The legislation had faced criticism from some Senate Republicans, such as Florida’s Marco Rubio, who said it lacked
Ok, they don't even try to hide it anymore (Score:2)
On every issue, no matter how trivial or unimportant, you can see politicians bicker and shout at each other without end.
But as soon as it comes to throwing your money at their owners, they're partners in crime.
Corporate welfare. (Score:2)
More company handouts.
Yeah. (Score:2)
as well as the promise of thousands of new American jobs
Really?!! Wowwwww!
Dubious (Score:2)
Whilst it's a noble plan, I can't help thinking US companies are being rewarded for ripping out local manufacturing capability in the US [the Semiconductor business is a prime example of this] and sending it overseas. Now the US Government wants it back so it paying through the nose.
Some of this could have been achieved by telling the companies "you want those nice juicy contracts? Local manufacture - all of it. And we mean ALL of it"
Identify key current and future technologies and give the companies 3 year
Re: (Score:2)
I should have added whilst they cost the Govt a few million quid, the Govt is putting in 400 million quid over 10 years [that's $5000 million] to increase capacity and capability.
How much you want to bet (Score:2)
That most of that money just gets funneled to China?
Good luck with that (Score:2)
regardless of whether they use the $$$ in the USA (Score:2)
Next time you file your taxes remember the Senate just voted to give $75 billion to huge chip manufacturers—regardless of whether they use that money in the USA.
@SenMikeLee