←back to thread

335 points aspenmayer | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.252s | source
Show context
GeekyBear ◴[] No.45008439[source]
Didn't we already cross this particular Rubicon during the auto bailout a decade ago?

Other examples:

> Since the 1950s, the federal government has stepped in as a backstop for railroads, farm credit, airlines (twice), automotive companies, savings and loan companies, banks, and farmers.

Every situation has its own idiosyncrasies, but in each, the federal government intervened to stabilize a critical industry, avoiding systemic collapse that surely would have left the average taxpayer much worse off. In some instances, the treasury guaranteed loans, meaning that creditors would not suffer if the relevant industry could not generate sufficient revenue to pay back the loans, leading to less onerous interest rates.

A second option was that the government would provide loans at relatively low interest rates to ensure that industries remained solvent.

In a third option, the United States Treasury would take an ownership stake in some of these companies in what amounts to an “at-the-market” offering, in which the companies involved issue more shares at their current market price to the government in exchange for cash to continue business operations.

https://chicagopolicyreview.org/2022/08/23/piece-of-the-acti...

replies(16): >>45008458 #>>45008466 #>>45008546 #>>45008710 #>>45008838 #>>45009730 #>>45009928 #>>45010439 #>>45010649 #>>45011116 #>>45011228 #>>45011332 #>>45012047 #>>45012973 #>>45014055 #>>45018837 #
JKCalhoun ◴[] No.45008710[source]
What happened to Intel? Did they need a bailout?
replies(5): >>45008786 #>>45009769 #>>45009869 #>>45010341 #>>45012781 #
popopo73 ◴[] No.45009769[source]
They got incredibly lucky with IBM choosing the 386 for the PC platform and have been riding that wave ever since.

Itanium was a flop from bad business decisions IIRC. Note too that x86-64 was developed by AMD, and Intel licensed it from them.

replies(2): >>45010344 #>>45010372 #
aidenn0 ◴[] No.45010372[source]
> They got incredibly lucky with IBM choosing the 386 for the PC platform...

1. IBM picked the 8088 for the PC platform. This was part luck, part Motorola being too slow to market with the 68k.

2. The first PC with an 80386 was made by Compaq, not IBM.

3. A big part of what held OS/2 1.x back was IBM insisting on it working with the 80286, which made properly supporting DOS programs challenging. OS/2 2.0 came out 6 years after the first 386 based machine from Compaq.

replies(2): >>45012111 #>>45013112 #
1. rbanffy ◴[] No.45013112[source]
> Motorola being too slow to market with the 68k.

Also Texas didn’t have a second source for the TMS9900.

We definitely live in the worst possible timeline.