• Aria@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Letting Intel fail would be extremely stupid. Computers are the USAs strongest advantage. It’s the only place where they’re undisputed world leaders and it’s a huge industry. (They’re also #1 in finance but finance doesn’t produce value). CNBCs negative spin is ridiculous.

    • limer@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      10% will not help Intel that much; it’s more a “get quick rich” scheme

      • Aria@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        The state is getting rich or Intel is getting rich? 10% is better than fewer percents.

        • limer@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          Individuals will be getting very rich, and I think Intel will be gone in 6 years.

          I also have no reasonable background or defense to saying it. I simply feel it in my bones, very strongly.

          • Aria@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            14 hours ago

            So you’re thinking that Intel is asking for a bailout, but not intending to spend the bailout, and that the USA is signalling they’ll be allowed to pocket the bailout money?

            If they intend to spend the money, then the money is well spent going from tax-payers to Intel, because Intel is one of their most valuable assets after the chipmakers that are profitable.

            • limer@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              14 hours ago

              You are responding to my gut feeling which is not backed up with facts.

              I simply decided that much money, in a deal initiated by known thieves, will have fuckery afoot. People will manage, in a way unknown to me, to line their pockets.