Next scheduled rescrape ... never
Version 1
Last scraped
Scraped on 23/08/2025, 20:07:10 UTC
This is some of the most bonker news I've heard.
The US gov paying billions to get shares in a company, and no board seat in return. Intel hasn't issued any dividends this year, in spite of a long standing tradition to issue quarterly dividends. The company is arguably on a downtrend with dwindling market share and losing the competing battle with AMD in terms of technology.
There is nothing wrong with this, what is bonker about it? Should they continue to give free money handouts and get nothing in return for it whenever some idiots from management fuck up a company? A board seat is not necessary. The US gov paying billions to get shares in a company, and no board seat in return. Intel hasn't issued any dividends this year, in spite of a long standing tradition to issue quarterly dividends. The company is arguably on a downtrend with dwindling market share and losing the competing battle with AMD in terms of technology.
Alright, sure why not even go full blast with it and take control of all corporations? Not just subsidies. Eliminate competition, centralize planning. Why not?
If it works at 10% why not take full advantage of it?
In his first Admin Trump accused China a lot saying they had a strategic advantage due to central planning. So is the US trying to become a socialist economy now also?
Will be funny to witness.
Is Taiwan a socialist economy and TMSC a state run business with centralized planning? If it is, then it is fucking better company than anything you liberal capitalist idiots managed to create in this century.
The US is seeing that capitalism is caving within and is now utilizing very antithetical solutions to save its economy. This is what's bonkers about it. Because the US has historically been a very strong proponent of the so called "free market capitalism".
This has nothing to do with US's economy directly, it is about saving Intel. Mate you are being an idiot. Are free handouts part of free market capitalism or not? How is this different except that they actually get something in return? Usually what happens in a free money handout is that the companies do fuck all or the minimum necessary to satisfy the requirements and steal most of the money. This happens in every country of the world. This way they actually get something in return for the money, strategic stake in a fairly important company. Original archived Re: US State acquired 10% stake in Intel
Scraped on 23/08/2025, 20:02:43 UTC
This is some of the most bonker news I've heard.
The US gov paying billions to get shares in a company, and no board seat in return. Intel hasn't issued any dividends this year, in spite of a long standing tradition to issue quarterly dividends. The company is arguably on a downtrend with dwindling market share and losing the competing battle with AMD in terms of technology.
There is nothing wrong with this, what is bonker about it? Should they continue to give free money handouts and get nothing in return for it whenever some idiots from management fuck up a company? A board seat is not necessary. The US gov paying billions to get shares in a company, and no board seat in return. Intel hasn't issued any dividends this year, in spite of a long standing tradition to issue quarterly dividends. The company is arguably on a downtrend with dwindling market share and losing the competing battle with AMD in terms of technology.
Alright, sure why not even go full blast with it and take control of all corporations? Not just subsidies. Eliminate competition, centralize planning. Why not?
If it works at 10% why not take full advantage of it?
The US is seeing that capitalism is caving within and is now utilizing very antithetical solutions to save its economy. This is what's bonkers about it. Because the US has historically been a very strong proponent of the so called "free market capitalism".
Now what's going to happen if US' partners also start subsidizing the industry? The EU has for forbidden state subsidies to industry and vowed to keep its markets competitive throughout its existence. But if Trump takes the charge at changing this who's to say that other countries that are historical US allies won't follow?
In his first Admin Trump accused China a lot saying they had a strategic advantage due to central planning. So is the US trying to become a socialist economy now also?
Will be funny to witness.
Is Taiwan a socialist economy and TMSC a state run business? If it is, then it is fucking better company than anything you liberal capitalist idiots managed to create in this century.