Well, a company has to grow. If it doesn't, it'll be devoured by those who do and show pleasing YoY metrics to their shareholders and prospective investors. Simply imagine you are an investor. Which company would you put your money in? And since the world is limited a company cannot afford not growing if it wants to survive. Government regulation is impossible, because there are other governments which happily let their companies to grow and outcompete foreign companies.
We have an authoritarian nation conducting a literal unprovoked invasion of a liberal democratic country, this entire thread is objecting to the United States STOPPING providing materiel to said country . . . and yet people still think defense contractors are the "bad guys."
It's morbidly fascinating, really. If there's anyone who could be accused of profiting from blood money in this instance, it's companies like Sukhoi and Kalashnikov Concern.
The US did not invade Korea. Post WWII, Korea was split into its northern and southern zones which ended up becoming North and South Korea (the intent had been to make it one independent Korea, but put the USSR and USA in a room together and there will be no agreement on how to do that). In 1950, North Korea invaded South Korea. The UN called for a military response, the US supplied most of that response. But the US did not invade Korea.
North Korea invaded South Korea, the US and others fought them back on behalf of, and with, South Korea . China and the USSR supported North Korea, which is ultimately why it ended in a stalemate.
Iraq invaded Kuwait, our “ally.” South Korea, a democracy, was invaded by North Korea, a Soviet proxy state. South Vietnam, a democracy, was invaded by north vietnam, a Soviet proxy state.
You can’t disentangle the two like that. If you posit that the first gulf war was justified, you’re 90% of the way to justifying the second. The intelligence was that Iraq was rearming. If your position is that the U.S. would’ve had to intervene in the event Iraq invaded a neighbor again, then it doesn’t seem unreasonable to invade preemptively to avoid a potentially costlier conflict.
You’re the one who doesn’t know the history of mistaken american wars in the 20th century and I’m the one being disingenuous?
How do you distinguish Korea, Vietnam, and the first Gulf War from Ukraine? And I suppose your only quibble about the Iraq War is that we should’ve waited until Saddam invaded another neighbor, like he did the first time?
The present administration isn't really planning to cut military spending, they just want to redirect it. $4B of military aid was recently approved for another country.
Here's the budgetary outlook: You'll notice that defense spending is projected to have a slight increase in real terms, or a slight (0.1%) decrease in terms of fraction of GDP.
Yep. DOD spending is likely to shift, but not be reduced. The major firms are probably going to see some contracts cut or tougher competition from the likes of Anduril in certain domains.
DOD spending in IT-related efforts may also shift, Palantir will be a major contender here.
That's only an issue if you're treating the book as a primary historical source, but it's a far cry from it being "largely made-up." Dude was transcribing remembered stories from countless conversations with inmates, of course it's not going to be completely accurate.
> Dude was transcribing remembered stories from countless conversations with inmates, of course it's not going to be completely accurate.
... under the careful guidance of the CIA.
It would have been a much better work if he did not exagerate so much. But, "P: [hopping down from his throne] I'll tell you what I want! I want a last supper with one Christ, twelve disciples, no kangaroos, no trampoline acts, by Thursday lunch or you don't get paid!! "
What are you talking about? He wrote the book covertly in the Soviet Union:
> After the KGB had confiscated Solzhenitsyn's materials in Moscow, during 1965–1967, he worked to develop his preparatory drafts of The Gulag Archipelago into finished typescript. He accomplished some of this while in hiding at his friends' homes in the Moscow region and elsewhere. While held at the KGB's Lubyanka Prison in 1945, Solzhenitsyn had befriended Arnold Susi, a lawyer and former Estonian Minister of Education, who had been taken captive after the Soviet Union occupied Estonia in 1944. Solzhenitsyn entrusted Susi with the original typed and proofread manuscript of the finished work, after copies had been made of it both on paper and on microfilm. Susi got the manuscript to his daughter, Heli Susi, who kept the "master copy" hidden from the KGB in Estonia until the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991.
With an engineer on the helm, rehiring big names in the field, opening more fabs, and having access to TSMC's newest node over AMD[1].. it seems unlikely.
Intel has to do next 4 years what it failed to do for the past 8 years and the complexity of execution in the space is getting harder and hander. Also, they are fighting on multiple fronts, upstarts in GPU, write-offs on AI hardware, Losing share of x86 with ARM et al. Losing share in x86 to AMD, having to rely on TSMC for advanced chips. Also, some bright spots where, they are opening up their foundries for design firms etc.
Over all, Intel has to do perfect execution and we did not fully talk about Apple, Amazon, Microsoft designing their own chips and using Intel's competition for fabbing them. They are in a tough spot, but if any company can come out of it winning, its Intel. They have done it before.
Intel has been a crappy company to work for and doing a crappy job for a long time, but I'm willing to bet they still have enough highly-experienced geniuses on hand to pull through
If you know something the market doesn't know, and you're confident that you're right, then put all your eggs in that basket: that's how one beats the market.
(Don't follow this advice, I'm just a dude on the internet, this is not financial advice and my background is biochem + software, not finance)
They’ve got plenty of cash, and they’re still the strong leader in the server space. AMD is eating away at their consumer grade cpus I concede.
I would be shocked if we had an intel “implosion” they have a sustainable and successful business model and there’s no world where we need fewer processors.
"Implosion" is probably an exaggeration, but with AMD strong, and competitive ARM offerings (Apple silicon for end user devices, and Amazon with their own ARM processors on server), most people are speculating that they will eat into Intel's profit. The fact that Intel can't produce a competitive GPU in an environment where the GPU is becoming more and more important (for various reasons) is also something against them.
Intel has most of its (cpu) market right now so not exactly a growth stock. The market doesn’t believe in the new growth potentials (gpu, fabs). Intel also pays 3.3% dividend right now, not exactly a growth strategy. Also, the market may stay irrational for a while. Also, many investments are in the form of funds, etfs etc. so stocks will tend to move together, esp if in the same sector.
This is clearly an idealistic approach. A materialistic view is better explained in Fernand Braudel's "Civilization and Capitalism, 15th–18th Century".
