Wasn't logistics the US's superpower? I'd expect someone to explain their chief that factories aren't monolitic objects that can be picked up and delivered to a new location and go right into production?
this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2026
228 points (99.6% liked)
News
37121 readers
1657 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
He still can't grasp what a tariff even is, after a decade of repeated explanations. Trying to explain to him global supply chain logistics is not a realistic goal.
The logistics accolade that you mention here is wartime logistics. That is ability to get the bullets and bandages to the places and people that need them all in a timely manner. The US is good at this because we have bases and transport logistics everywhere.
Military supply chain logistics(multiple sources for stuff, supposedly US companies...) is absolutely a consideration as well but this concept has been hallowed out over time. What used to be locally sourced materials and manufacturing by American companies is now much more dependent on overseas labor/materials. These 'American' companies might have corporate offices here and the c-levels, marketing/sales teams live here but all of the actual product is sourced/made in Mexico, Canada, China, India, Vietnam, etc. There are definitely specific industries like aerospace that still make a lot of stuff here but that is a small fraction of the larger whole.
Why does it seem tRump's answer for everything is, "Let's just steal it"?
The US invading Taiwan would be a hell of a reverse uno on the Chinese.
Oh my god.
That really would be the cherry on top of this goddamned clownworld timeline.
How to unite china in 1 step
And potentially also SK, Japan, the Philippines, Singapore, etc.
It really would be like the dumbest possible thing the US could do.
He backed off Greenland. Taiwan would be an order of magnitude worse. The US could occupy any country on earth (maybe not China, without some Roman level war crimes) But it would be the end of us.
The US could occupy any country on earth (maybe not China, without some Roman level war crimes)
Hahaha, no.
The US could invade maybe two countries with a GDP around 1/4 ours, and actually persistently occupy them for maybe a few years.
Our economy is crashing extremely rapidly, we've functionally lost the ability to build new warships or aircraft in anything approaching a timely or affordable manner... and, because we have decided to tariff and threaten or militarily attack basically everyone everyone...
All of our supply chains for a great deal of our fancy schmancy military tech doesn't work any more.
You cant build complex guided missiles and computer chips and sensors that aim them or night vision goggles without access to a wide array or rare earth minerals, most of which China basically has a near total monopoly of.
We don't have the native industrial base to build anywhere near everything we would need to, to actually autarkicly sustain our own war machine.
... we can't even feed or house our population at a reasonable cost anymore, our internal infrastructure is physically falling apart, and our cybersecurity is beyond laughably comprimised.
There is no way this country would 'win' trying to occupy Taiwan.
China + Japan + SK + all of goddamned SEA + potentially even Australia vs US = we fucking lose hard.
We may be able to get away with some neo-Monroe Doctrine bullshit for a while.
And keep funding genocides in the ME, and doing random airstrikes and spec ops shennanigans in poorer countries.
Thats about it.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Xi: (surprised Pikachu face)
To be fair, this all started under the Biden administration with the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022.
The US is increasingly concerned that, if China invades Taiwan, it will completely lock them out from semiconductor manufacturing and crater the US economy. Rather than flex their soft power and exercise a little diplomacy like the US used to do in decades past, they've apparently decided that the invasion of Taiwan is inevitable and the only course of action is to bolster semiconductor manufacturing at home.
Trump, of course, has all the subtlety of a torpedo and his rhetoric here has been needlessly antagonistic... but yeah, this whole thing started under Biden and now Trump is pretending it was always his idea. So really the thing he stole was the policy.
CHIPS was a response to the pandemic supply chain crunch. It was finding for local businesses to get up to speed so we weren't dependent on a single supplier on the other side of the planet. PEDOnald revoke the majority of that finding, and decided threatening taxes on US citizens to force that single supplier to also produce things here was somehow a better solution...
Biden's investments in the groundwork for future semiconductor manufacturing on US soil was intelligent planning for the future with little potential for short-term reward. A rare display of integrity for american politicians.
tRump slashed that funding, and is now demanding another country overseas, a traditional ally of the US, should simply move their manufacturing capabilities to the US because trump said so. It's idiotic.
The two things are absolutely not the same. Don't portray them in the same boat.
I don't call handing tax dollars to the richest companies in the world to set up for profit companies intelligent planning or a smart move. I call it corruption. Robbing the poor and paying the rich, to ensure the rich have enough product to continue to rob the poor as they are accustomed.
Makes perfect sense. He gets to grift, steal a Biden win, and please his big business donors
While the CHIPS act was started under Biden, it was completely different from what is being done now. It was about developing a domestic source of semiconductors as a hedge against Taiwan being invaded and was done cooperatively with the Taiwanese with mutual benefits. The Taiwanese still owned the manufacturing here, so they would still benefit if the Chinese came invaded. Biden was doing what was smart to do and also had benefits for other countries, including EU allies, since everyone knows those plants in Taiwan are rigged to blow at the first hint of invasion..
Trump has removed the benefits and added tariffs and threats. He didn't steal the policy. He inherited it and then changed it to be something evil.
So like in summary:
Biden Strategy: Bring taiwan companies to US as a redundancy and supply chain contingency.
Trump Strategy: Demand shit from Taiwan and threaten them when they fail to meet goals.
Like the trump strategy only incentivizes Taiwan to pursue a diplomatic solution with China.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Rapist mind.
Yeah what really struck me about the whole thing is it's not that he wants more investment in US manufacturing, it's that he seems to want them to literally take their equipment (but presumably not the people because eww immigrants) and transport the whole lot to the US.
If they moved enough to the US we could stop supporting them in case of China taking them. That is the subtext here and it's not lost on Taiwan. No amount of tarriffs would convince them to give up their flagship industry to their biggest customer and lose their importance.
It's also an empty tarriff threat. Taiwan has more semiconductors than there are people to buy them. We need the chips, they don't need to sell them here specificially. I really don't think the US has any leverage beyond supporting them against China, and the supply chain, which the netherlands and other countries have as much leverage as we do with.
With 40% semiconductor capacity loved to the US, the US will have no more reason to defend Taiwan, it would be suicide
Also, when trump gets his grubby hands on ASML systems you can count on it that he'll sell it to the Chinese for a few millions right after
load more comments
(6 replies)
I dont think you can explain to an importing country that tried to start a tariff war
And it would be a tactical blunder to give the US any access to their current generation of chips. Even more so while Trump is in office. Taiwan should look into ending relationships with the US and getting closer to the EU, South/Central America, and Africa.
I just wanna say. The main issue has always been - American capitalists went to China for manufacturing and shipped all the know how and technologies there.
Because they wanted profits over the country.
This is the result.
Blame capitalist owners
The real impossibility is the work force, as far as my knowledge is knowledged from a while back.
Also if they did move 40% of production to the US, I can't personally see that meaning the US would drop taiwan and let china take it. If you think about that for 1 second longer, you think they'd surrender 60% to china? If I had the best chips, I wouldn't let anyone else get anywhere near them, lest they steal the secret recipe. (Just my thoughts on the matter).
(p.s. im not smart so maybe im wrong?)
Why even say 'we cannot move production to the USA'?
Why not just say 'Are you actual crazy? Fuck right off, don't bother me'
Guess we'll just fall behind
Even Tim Cook mentionned it, the US doesn't have the amount of engineers it needs to move production to the US, it's simply impossible.
the US doesn’t have the amount of engineers it needs to move production to the US
Tim Cook can eat a bag of rancid donkey dicks. The reason we 'don't have enough engineers', a point which I would emphatically argue, is because CEOs like Tim and companies like Apple vehemently refused to invest in domestic capabilities as they rushed to save money via Chinese outsourcing.
If we want "Tooling" Engineers, or any other specialty such as "Process Control", the answer is as always to pay them what they are worth and that's the rub; Timmie and his buddies don't want to pay the high salaries for these skills.
...it’s simply impossible.
It's no more impossible than having enough world class software engineers. The United States in general, and Silicon Valley in particular, used to be the world leader in developing and attracting Engineering talent and the only reason we aren't anymore is because companies don't want to pay for it.
Well foreign engineers could come here, I'm sure they would feel very safe and welcome...
Guess that's on them for pricing people out of higher education...
load more comments
(1 replies)
Everyone seems to have thought that is was a great idea to let pretty much every core manufacturing competency die in the US over the last 30 years or so. How's that working out for us now?
The blame is at least as old as Reagan, really accelerated with Clinton (NAFTA, China entering the WTO) and only got worse from there.
As much as I hate to admit it, tariffs are the answer. I also think that it's important to understand that Trump's tariffs exist only for extortion and bribes that benefit him personally. Tariffs can be used to encourage domestic production of goods and services that are clearly not something that we want to depend on other countries for merely for the sake of enriching the same circle of already rich assholes in perpetuity. Rich assholes would just have to keep resorting to pumping up immigration to suppress wages for these domestic goods, like they have always done for hundreds of years at this point.
Tariffs are not the answer, they are part of a reasonable answer. By themselves they're not going to being back the tech manufacturing industry. You also need incentives on multiple levels, government funding into relevant education, etc.
You also need time. All the money in the world won't cause a world-class industry to spring up overnight; you need sustained investment over years, if not decades.
We've already been providing direct subsidies and tax subsidies for all of these companies for decades. Nothing comes from it and as a member of the tax bracket that actually pays taxes I am not willing to keep doing it. If we need to nationalize truly mission critical companies I would rather just do that instead of continuing to privatize profits and socialize costs.
Those investments should definitely come with strings attached. But there's a lot you need to invest into.
- Fabs cost a shitload of money and are slow to build. If you want to be able to be independent from Taiwan in ten years you should invest a couple dozen billion bucks in fabs right now. If you want a company to invest that money for you, you need to guarantee that they'll see a good ROI, which means you probably sign a contract to buy tons of hardware that won't be made for another decade.
- Fabs need a lot of land. If you want to start building ASAP you need to expedite assessments and acquire land quickly (and though eminent domain, if necessary). That ain't cheap.
- If you want a qualified workforce available you need to not only invest in making training available but also in making it appealing enough that they'll start training before the jobs are even there. Advertisement like that costs money, as do stipends.
- In fact, add research grants to the pool because you'll want both basic research to be done in the field and skilled researchers to be available for cross-hiring by your companies.
You'll need to keep (some amount of) the money flowing at least until the industry can be independently competitive on the world stage. Mishandling your burgeoning industry can mean that all that investment money and a large number of jobs suddenly go up in smoke.
Note: All of this assumes that you'll buy your manufacturing equipment from established, potentially foreign companies like ASML and Zeiss. If you want to make that stuff domestically as well you can probably add another hundred billion bucks and a decade or two of very dedicated catch-up to the bill.
Except we can't just insource production of cutting edge computer chips. We literally don't have enough people to build smart phones. Those require a global supply chain to be remotely affordable. Having a global economy gives us access to technology we would simply have to go without if we try to do everything ourselves.
We should have tarriffs on goods to make up for labor and environmental costs that are cheaper in those other countries, to offset the race to the bottom.
That was a union issue, the republican nominee just co-opted it, because the democrats became more conservative than Bush Senior let alone Nixon, while the rest of the republicans are like Henry Ford, veritable nazis.
He was never going to do it well, he's too corrupt and greedy and mean spirited, it was always going to be more of a shake down racket and a cudgel to use against our allies like Canada and Europe that do not undercut us on labor and the environment and therefore should not be tarriffed at all.
We shouldn't be rejecting everything about something because it was co-opted by the president, like rejecting pressuring drug companies to offer us good deals because the president has some half baked website for that purpose. Just as we shouldn't support everything about something they attack unfairly. Ie a government agency, any of them, attacked for not being bad enough, say the fda, then we support everything about them, as if they aren't run by drug companies and failing in their statutory duties.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›