Hello There, Guest! Registered users see far less ads! Register today and join our virtual tailgate. (Login — Register)

Post Reply 
tariffs on Chinese chips
Author Message
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 83,637
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 5051
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #1
tariffs on Chinese chips
https://www.realcleardefense.com/article...49378.html

Short sighted American firms have stopped US government acting against Chinese threats from subsidization of industries. They allowed them to virtually destroy our steel industry. Basic chips are their next target. Article suggests tariffs.
08-05-2024 01:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 83,637
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 5051
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #2
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
This is a real double edged sword. If cheap Chinese chips are not available, American manufacturers may not be competitive with countries that do use Chinese chips.
08-05-2024 01:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
miko33 Away
I'm leaving for awhile
*

Posts: 14,850
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 1158
I Root For: Might be back?
Location: IDK
Post: #3
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
It depends on the types of chips we're talking about. Low value chips may not be a big deal. However, if China is trying to break into the market on higher value chips then it's a problem. i don't think the U.S. would ever manufacture low value chips regardless of China. Too many other countries with better labor rates for low value production.
08-05-2024 02:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stinkfist Offline
nuts zongo's in the house
*

Posts: 86,713
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 11976
I Root For: Mustard Buzzards
Location: Hell House
Post: #4
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
well ... at least some of yaz are learning what it's like to walk backwards with a blindfold...

ain' nobody stopping this 'runaway in the fiat'....
08-05-2024 02:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
olliebaba Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,996
Joined: Jul 2007
Reputation: 2958
I Root For: Christ
Location: El Paso
Post: #5
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
(08-05-2024 02:08 PM)miko33 Wrote:  It depends on the types of chips we're talking about. Low value chips may not be a big deal. However, if China is trying to break into the market on higher value chips then it's a problem. i don't think the U.S. would ever manufacture low value chips regardless of China. Too many other countries with better labor rates for low value production.

I get my chips from Sams...the big box.
08-05-2024 02:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stinkfist Offline
nuts zongo's in the house
*

Posts: 86,713
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 11976
I Root For: Mustard Buzzards
Location: Hell House
Post: #6
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
(08-05-2024 02:12 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  
(08-05-2024 02:08 PM)miko33 Wrote:  It depends on the types of chips we're talking about. Low value chips may not be a big deal. However, if China is trying to break into the market on higher value chips then it's a problem. i don't think the U.S. would ever manufacture low value chips regardless of China. Too many other countries with better labor rates for low value production.

I get my chips from Sams...the big box.

03-lmfao03-drunk03-lmfao



08-05-2024 02:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 83,637
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 5051
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #7
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
(08-05-2024 02:08 PM)miko33 Wrote:  It depends on the types of chips we're talking about. Low value chips may not be a big deal. However, if China is trying to break into the market on higher value chips then it's a problem. i don't think the U.S. would ever manufacture low value chips regardless of China. Too many other countries with better labor rates for low value production.

The problem is that the low value chips are in everything, including our weapons.
08-05-2024 02:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Sicatoka Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,030
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation: 569
I Root For: North Dakota
Location: see above
Post: #8
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
There is no truth to the rumor of the Veep asking if these chips come with salsa or if 'tariff' was like avocado.
08-05-2024 02:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Sicatoka Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,030
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation: 569
I Root For: North Dakota
Location: see above
Post: #9
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
(08-05-2024 02:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-05-2024 02:08 PM)miko33 Wrote:  It depends on the types of chips we're talking about. Low value chips may not be a big deal. However, if China is trying to break into the market on higher value chips then it's a problem. i don't think the U.S. would ever manufacture low value chips regardless of China. Too many other countries with better labor rates for low value production.

The problem is that the low value chips are in everything, including our weapons.

And this is why some industries must never be off-shored.
08-05-2024 02:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stinkfist Offline
nuts zongo's in the house
*

Posts: 86,713
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 11976
I Root For: Mustard Buzzards
Location: Hell House
Post: #10
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
(08-05-2024 02:58 PM)The Sicatoka Wrote:  
(08-05-2024 02:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-05-2024 02:08 PM)miko33 Wrote:  It depends on the types of chips we're talking about. Low value chips may not be a big deal. However, if China is trying to break into the market on higher value chips then it's a problem. i don't think the U.S. would ever manufacture low value chips regardless of China. Too many other countries with better labor rates for low value production.

The problem is that the low value chips are in everything, including our weapons.

And this is why some industries must never be off-shored.

but muh capitalism w/o congressional term limits, JA?!?!
08-05-2024 03:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CrimsonPhantom Offline
CUSA Curator
*

Posts: 62,723
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 3188
I Root For: NM State
Location:
Post: #11
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
Quote:Alawsuit to stop Chinese lithium ion battery maker Gotion from building a plant in Manteno, Illinois, awaits a decision next month, as Americans push back against government officials wooing Chinese companies. America’s governors and state governments are playing a reckless game with our tax dollars: competing to host U.S. locations of China-owned companies. In retrospect, allowing China-owned companies to establish operations in the U.S. is only the latest commercial iteration of Making America China.

First, George H.W. Bush laid the diplomatic groundwork for outsourcing to China, letting the lights go out in our Pax Americana-era factories. Then around the 2010s, China started buying our mega brands such as Smithfield Foods and Starwood Hotels. More recently, Chinese companies have graciously offered to dust off our shuttered factories for their own profit, “as our way of cherishing and conserving resources,” said Gotion Chairman Li Zhen in 2023 of its bargain-basement factory acquisition in Manteno.

Rather than being insulted, state and local officials find this offer so appealing that they throw tax-funded incentives at the Chinese companies in competition with each other. Thus completes the generational cycle of American businesses, to no businesses, to Chinese businesses occupying the industrial properties of what has become the Rust Belt.

They Were Warned
The current mood, in which the various states perceive themselves to be in a hot bidding war for each Chinese company that speculates about U.S. expansion, can be traced back to a meeting in May 2019. It was an Exclusive Deal Making Opportunity (the actual meeting name) within the fifth China-U.S. Governors Forum. The forum’s conferences are sponsored by the Chinese People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries (CPAFFC), part of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) United Front Work Department. The 2019 meeting in Kentucky was attended by 400 U.S. and Chinese government leaders and investors.

The China-sponsored deal-making workshop was advertised as a “prestigious and highly curated event where investors from both countries can meet one-on-one and discuss possible investment projects.” An exciting offer, perhaps, for leaders of economically depressed areas who are unaware of or indifferent to the CCP’s record of forced labor, intellectual property theft, and product dumping. Irrefutable signs of a bad business partner.

Little is known about what deals were made or which governors attended besides the host Gov. Matt Bevin, R-Ky., Gov. Bill Lee, R-Tenn., and representatives from Colorado, Michigan, and Washington state. But with a crowd of 400 — much like Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s dinner with the CEOs last November — the imagination fills in the blanks.

If the danger of this environment was not apparent, the federal government promptly made it clear.

The U.S. Department of State withdrew support for the China-U.S. Governors Forum in 2020. In February 2020, then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo delivered a no-minced-words address to the National Governors Association about the “China Competition.” “Know that [the CCP] is working you, know that it’s working the team around you,” he noted. In October 2020, a Department of Homeland Security report noted that that CCP may take advantage of a state or municipality’s economic challenges to create a dependency.

In July 2022, the National Counterintelligence and Security Center issued a communication detailing this progression, and advising state and local leaders to background check new connections, stay vigilant to bribery, and prioritize national security over economic development.

Leaping without Looking
In response, state governments have pursued a China-forward economic agenda, ignoring all warnings and common sense to the contrary.

Before the U.S. Air Force declared Chinese corn processor Fufeng a national security threat in early 2023, Fufeng initially “selected” Grand Forks, North Dakota, from among 25 candidate submissions for its first U.S. location. Consider the stunning statistic that more than two dozen local governments across the U.S. gave their best-and-final offers in search of a foreign bridegroom.

Consider also that Doug Burgum had been North Dakota’s governor the entire time, from the CCP’s deal-making meeting through former Secretary Pompeo’s address, and the numerous other warnings since. Did Burgum help advance this deal behind the scenes? Had he paid attention to the warnings?

Grand Forks had offered a winning incentive package of $91 million for the ill-fated deal, to provide Fufeng-specific infrastructure needed to feed its energy-intensive beast of a factory. The $91 million was to be generated from mostly county and state grants, a portion covered by a pay-back loan to Fufeng, and most notably: $7 million appropriated from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), a federal Covid relief fund for small businesses.

This generous dowry pales in comparison to the incentive packages offered by other states in pursuit of China deals, which are going almost as poorly.

In October 2022, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, D-Mich., conjured up a total of $715 million for the Chinese lithium ion battery maker Gotion. The package included $175 million cash money, plus $540 million in tax abatements through a “Renaissance Zone” designation. Green Charter Township residents recalled their entire township board for approving this plan, and voted in anti-Gotion representatives. Gotion is now suing the township (population 3,218) for breach of contract.

Gotion wanted to develop a second U.S. site concurrently. It found a warm welcome from Gov. J.B. Pritzker, D-Ill., who offered up the small town of Manteno (population 9,210) along with a proverbial briefcase stuffed with $536 million. This deal included $125 million cash and the rest in tax abatements for the privilege of letting Gotion “cherish” Illinois’ resources. Unable to fire their board, the residents of Manteno formed a protest organization and are suing Gotion. “Why would anybody think that’s a good idea to have that in our backyard?” asked Amanda Piker, founder of “No Gotion in Illinois.”

Smaller China deals haven’t fared well either: Gov. Eric Holcomb, R-Ind., arranged an $11 million incentive package for auto parts maker BeijingWest Industries (BWI) to open an $80 million factory in 2019; a deal he had been working on since 2017. The factory was intended to create a modest 195 jobs; but it closed promptly during Covid, and had trouble staying fully operational thereafter due to alleged “workforce” issues. BWI will be closing this year. Holcomb may as well have given $50,000 checks to 195 unemployed Hoosiers.

Americans instinctively don’t want these companies here. What will it take for state and local officials to honor the will of the people?

The Long Arm of the CCP Likes the Long Tail of the US
The CCP pursued relationships with U.S. state governors to get around the Trump administration’s trade posture. Cui Tiankai (former Chinese ambassador to the U.S.) stated outright at the 2019 China-U.S. Governors Forum that “it is more important than ever that sub-national representatives from China and the United States gather to explore how to advance cooperation.” Why struggle with one door that opens and closes, when there are 50 other doors to check out?

The same year, the CCP deployed a brilliant piece of psychological warfare in publishing a rating of the 50 governors’ attitudes toward China. Despite the questionable methods and source of this survey, it surely branded the CCP-friendly collaborators as such; convinced the less-friendly “ambiguous” states to catch up with the “friendly” states; and put the “tough” states on notice.

“All that we see here [in Illinois] are of enormous value to us,” said Gotion Chairman Zhen. Indeed. We have allowed our land to become the desirable empty vessel, and offered it to the highest bidder. While we wait for a future time when governors are told, not just asked, to change course, we can counter the empty vessel economics with internal integrity. Now is the time for Americans to start businesses. Expand businesses. Remove the argument that there’s no one else around who wants to reindustrialize America.

Link
08-05-2024 03:14 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


miko33 Away
I'm leaving for awhile
*

Posts: 14,850
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 1158
I Root For: Might be back?
Location: IDK
Post: #12
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
(08-05-2024 02:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-05-2024 02:08 PM)miko33 Wrote:  It depends on the types of chips we're talking about. Low value chips may not be a big deal. However, if China is trying to break into the market on higher value chips then it's a problem. i don't think the U.S. would ever manufacture low value chips regardless of China. Too many other countries with better labor rates for low value production.

The problem is that the low value chips are in everything, including our weapons.

Do we even make low value chips in the U.S. today? There in lies the issues with unintended consequences with short term thinking that any of us lay people saw coming from 10+ years out with U.S. corps off-shoring so much manufacturing to China. You can't even lay this at the feet of the Cold War strategy of the U.S. building up the 1st and parts of the 3rd world to fight the USSR because the major rise of microchips occurred in the 90s AFTER the fall of the USSR.

This is why with unfettered Capitalism the invisible hand wields the sword of Damocles against the biggest economies. The larger the market grows and the stronger it gets, the more expensive it gets to make goods domestically for the dominant market. Capitalist theory doesn't care if subsidies exist or not - simply can the goods be made more cheaply and are good enough to be used broadly by consumers. We're supposed to accept someone else can do it more inexpensively - not necessarily more efficiently and with better quality - making cost king of all attributes. When you play with the people who want to see you fail and are actively working towards that goal...Capitalism has no answer.
08-05-2024 03:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stinkfist Offline
nuts zongo's in the house
*

Posts: 86,713
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 11976
I Root For: Mustard Buzzards
Location: Hell House
Post: #13
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
hands down, GHWB, Jr, and Cheney sold our souls ... Nixon and Reagan weren't much better (hell, I take Clinton policy over 'em all combined ... he knew they'd overplayed the hand)

regardless, it all started with Wilson --->>> FDR --->>> LBJ's great society (Ike and DJT were nothing but hiccups ... time is their best friend) ....

08-05-2024 03:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stinkfist Offline
nuts zongo's in the house
*

Posts: 86,713
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 11976
I Root For: Mustard Buzzards
Location: Hell House
Post: #14
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
(08-05-2024 03:18 PM)miko33 Wrote:  
(08-05-2024 02:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-05-2024 02:08 PM)miko33 Wrote:  It depends on the types of chips we're talking about. Low value chips may not be a big deal. However, if China is trying to break into the market on higher value chips then it's a problem. i don't think the U.S. would ever manufacture low value chips regardless of China. Too many other countries with better labor rates for low value production.

The problem is that the low value chips are in everything, including our weapons.

Do we even make low value chips in the U.S. today? There in lies the issues with unintended consequences with short term thinking that any of us lay people saw coming from 10+ years out with U.S. corps off-shoring so much manufacturing to China. You can't even lay this at the feet of the Cold War strategy of the U.S. building up the 1st and parts of the 3rd world to fight the USSR because the major rise of microchips occurred in the 90s AFTER the fall of the USSR.

This is why with unfettered Capitalism the invisible hand wields the sword of Damocles against the biggest economies. The larger the market grows and the stronger it gets, the more expensive it gets to make goods domestically for the dominant market. Capitalist theory doesn't care if subsidies exist or not - simply can the goods be made more cheaply and are good enough to be used broadly by consumers. We're supposed to accept someone else can do it more inexpensively - not necessarily more efficiently and with better quality - making cost king of all attributes. When you play with the people who want to see you fail and are actively working towards that goal...Capitalism stupid li'l greedy cucks that allow such have no answer ... #dipshite-landia

EZ fify
08-05-2024 03:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
b0ndsj0ns Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 30,774
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 1636
I Root For: ECU
Location:
Post: #15
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
(08-05-2024 02:58 PM)The Sicatoka Wrote:  
(08-05-2024 02:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-05-2024 02:08 PM)miko33 Wrote:  It depends on the types of chips we're talking about. Low value chips may not be a big deal. However, if China is trying to break into the market on higher value chips then it's a problem. i don't think the U.S. would ever manufacture low value chips regardless of China. Too many other countries with better labor rates for low value production.

The problem is that the low value chips are in everything, including our weapons.

And this is why some industries must never be off-shored.

Too bad we already did that in the pursuit of muh shareholder profits!!!
08-05-2024 03:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 82,008
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3446
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #16
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
(08-05-2024 03:52 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(08-05-2024 02:58 PM)The Sicatoka Wrote:  
(08-05-2024 02:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  [quote='miko33' pid='19683566' dateline='1722884922']
It depends on the types of chips we're talking about. Low value chips may not be a big deal. However, if China is trying to break into the market on higher value chips then it's a problem. i don't think the U.S. would ever manufacture low value chips regardless of China. Too many other countries with better labor rates for low value production.
The problem is that the low value chips are in everything, including our weapons.
And this is why some industries must never be off-shored.

Too bad we had tax and regulatory policies which drove those decisions.
08-06-2024 04:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


stinkfist Offline
nuts zongo's in the house
*

Posts: 86,713
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 11976
I Root For: Mustard Buzzards
Location: Hell House
Post: #17
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
(08-06-2024 04:18 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(08-05-2024 03:52 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(08-05-2024 02:58 PM)The Sicatoka Wrote:  
(08-05-2024 02:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  [quote='miko33' pid='19683566' dateline='1722884922']
It depends on the types of chips we're talking about. Low value chips may not be a big deal. However, if China is trying to break into the market on higher value chips then it's a problem. i don't think the U.S. would ever manufacture low value chips regardless of China. Too many other countries with better labor rates for low value production.
The problem is that the low value chips are in everything, including our weapons.
And this is why some industries must never be off-shored.

Too bad we had tax and regulatory policies which drove those decisions.

you mean globo-homo capitalism, Ja?!

just like the giveaway at the southern border ... yeah buggy, y'all's gen ran this country into the ground...
(This post was last modified: 08-06-2024 05:45 AM by stinkfist.)
08-06-2024 05:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 82,008
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3446
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #18
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
(08-06-2024 05:43 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  you mean globo-homo capitalism, Ja?!

Actually, I mean 1) high tax rates on investors and producers, giving them strong incentives to go overseas, and 2) cumbersome red-tape regulatory processes and procedures, designed more to create jobs for bureaucrats than to ensure clean air, clean water, safe working conditions, and a sound financial system.

Europe tried the rich in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. They got capital flight, so they began to cut tax rates and broaden their tax bases (and implement value-added taxes, which function like tariffs on imports) to generate the same or even more tax revenues. To give an idea how much Europe cut tax rates, when Bill Clinton got through raising tax rates in the 1990s, the USA had among the world's lowest tax rates. When GWB got through cutting tax rates in the 2000s, the USA had among the highest, particularly corporate rates. We need top tax rates that are competitive in the global economy if we expect to attract investment, growth, and middle-class jobs.

As far as regulatory issues, overturning the Chevron doctrine was a big step in the right direction. But over the last century congress has transferred huge amounts of power from the legislative branch to an alphabet soup of executive agencies populated by unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats. The power needs to be given back to the people's elected representatives. I would propose 1) making all rulemaking subject to congressional advice and consent, automatically if the dollar impact exceeds a certain threshold and otherwise upon petition of a certain number of representatives and/or senators, 2) conducting sunset reviews of every agency and all regulations promulgated by that agency every 10 years, and 3) implementing a set of Article III administrative law courts in every federal judicial district to replace captive administrative law judges (ALJs) in adjudicating regulatory disputes.
(This post was last modified: 08-07-2024 12:20 PM by Owl 69/70/75.)
08-07-2024 12:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Eldonabe Offline
No More Wire Hangars!
*

Posts: 14,911
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 2014
I Root For: All but Uconn
Location: Van by the River
Post: #19
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
(08-05-2024 02:08 PM)miko33 Wrote:  It depends on the types of chips we're talking about. Low value chips may not be a big deal. However, if China is trying to break into the market on higher value chips then it's a problem. i don't think the U.S. would ever manufacture low value chips regardless of China. Too many other countries with better labor rates for low value production.

Personally I am a fan of Ruffles Sour Cream and Onion Chips, but I can go with Pringles once in a while or even go off script with Funions... I know those aren't really chips but they are considered in the same family.
08-07-2024 12:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BartlettTigerFan Offline
Have gun Will travel
*

Posts: 47,622
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 6844
I Root For: Freedom
Location: Undetermined
Post: #20
RE: tariffs on Chinese chips
I'll just stick with Lays chips
08-07-2024 12:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread:


Copyright © 2002-2026 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2026 MyBB Group.