But I cringe when people (the Biden WH and their parrots in the media) tout this as some kind of economic success story.
“We need this expensive thing for national security” = Good honest coverage.
“I worked so hard writing all those zeros on the check but I wrote enough zeros so, the project is a success story. Wow it was hard work and proof of the strong economy.” = Slavish lemming hogwash.
This is no better/worse than saying “I finally wrote a big enough check to Raytheon and Lockheed that they finally built more bombs and planes.”
“I wrote a big check and some company built a big factory”
is the same (whether the factorr is run by Taiwan Semiconductor or by the the defense industry
By this measure Ronald Reagan was the most successful economic president of all time and the secret to a strong economy is to write bigger and bigger checks to the defense industry.
Write a check to Raytheon for material for defense matreial = right a check to Taiwan Semiconductor for defense material. They are no differdnt and you know it.
This is good for national security, but it is not an economic success story.
It is absolutely no different (no better/worse) than saying “I finally wrote enough zeros on enough checks that defense contractors started building more bombs and bullets and planes.”
We already saw what happened to our economy with minor chip shortages in 2020. Money spent on mitigating exposure to future shortages is an economic success.
TSMC is receiving a 6.6 billion dollar grant and plans to invest 65 billion in the next 5 years. That’s almost a 10x return on investment. How is that not a economic success story?
As noted at the top of the thread, it is no more and no less an economic success story than if Raytheon received $6bn to invest $65bn to build a new fighter plant.
Not what I said.
Not what I said.
Not what I said.
Do you think it would be an economic success if the US built more aircraft carriers?
(They are really high-tech ya know. They require a lot of high-paying tech jobs.)
