Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Conrad Murphy who wrote (1163132)	9/10/2019 2:44:41 AM
From: bruwin	1 Recommendation Recommended By locogringo Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578161

" .... and we all have a brain the size of a walnut" Looks like a typical meeting of those suffering from a SEVERE CASE OF TDS ..... As you probably know, that's TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME

To: Conrad Murphy who wrote (1163132)	9/10/2019 7:30:04 AM
From: FJB	1 Recommendation Recommended By locogringo Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578161

No wonder. Ramesh Ponnuru points to a poll that found 68 percent of Americans opposed to paying even $10 extra in their monthly utility bills to address climate change, even though most Americans believe it’s occurring and that human activity is responsible. Dem contenders rally around a carbon tax, may soon regret it powerlineblog.com PAUL MIRENGOFF I believe that all of the leading Democratic candidates for president have endorsed a carbon tax. Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren did so during CNN’s town hall on climate change last week. Down a tier or two, Kamala Harris and Pete Buttigieg endorsed it, as well. Bernie Sanders has endorsed a carbon tax in the past. The carbon tax was a bridge too far for Hillary Clinton during the 2016 campaign. She did not endorse the idea. Nor did President Obama. Americans for Tax Reform directs our attention to an internal Clinton campaign memo on the subject. The memo sets forth the serious disadvantages of a carbon tax. First, the cost of the carbon tax would be passed on to consumers: While oil, natural gas, and coal companies would be responsible for paying the fee, they would likely pass a significant share of the associated cost on to their customers. Second, a carbon tax would have a disproportionate impact on low-income households: As with the increase in energy costs, the increase in the cost of nonenergy goods and services would disproportionately impact low-income households. The memo quantifies the effect of the tax on gas and electricity prices: In our analysis, for example, a $42/ton GHG fee increases gasoline prices by roughly 40 cents per gallon on average between 2020 and 2030 and residential electricity prices by 2.6 cents per kWh, 12% and 21% above levels projected in the EIA’s 2014 Annual Energy Outlook respectively. It does the same for household energy bills: Average household energy costs would increase by roughly $480 per year, or 10% relative to the levels projected in EIA’s 2014 Outlook. In addition: The Hillary memo states that a carbon tax would increase the cost of household goods and services: “The cost of other household goods and services would increase as well as companies pass forward the higher energy costs paid to produce those goods and services on to consumers. Not surprisingly, the carbon tax is unpopular with voters. Indeed, Americans for Tax Reform notes that carbon tax advocates haven’t been able to get a carbon tax passed in a single blue state. No wonder. Ramesh Ponnuru points to a poll that found 68 percent of Americans opposed to paying even $10 extra in their monthly utility bills to address climate change, even though most Americans believe it’s occurring and that human activity is responsible. Yet, in their quest to satisfy the Democratic left, the leading Dem contenders all seem to favor a carbon tax. Whichever one of these luminaries wins the nomination will be saddled with that position. He or she will have some explaining to do.

To: Conrad Murphy who wrote (1163132)	9/10/2019 8:27:38 AM
From: sylvester80	Respond to of 1578161

OOPS! China will win the trade war and never trust U.S. again; Will wean off ALL American technology within 7 years, strategist says [ed: it will be much faster than 7 years; within 3-4 years IMO] PUBLISHED 5 HOURS AGO Stella Soon @STELLASJY cnbc.com KEY POINTS China will win the Sino-U.S. trade war, said the president of Independent Strategy on Monday. “China will never trust the United States again, and it will achieve its technology independence within seven years,” he told CNBC’s Squawk Box. Chinese tech firms have traditionally been reliant on American suppliers for semiconductors, modems and jet engines. But recent developments in the trade war have called this relationship into question. WATCH NOW VIDEO02:24 China will win its trade war with the US, says strategist China will win the trade war with the U.S., and eventually wean itself off its reliance on American technology, a strategist told CNBC on Monday. “China will never trust the United States again, and it will achieve its technology independence within seven years,” David Roche, Independent Strategy’s president and global strategist, told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” China has traditionally been reliant on U.S. suppliers for key tech components such as chips and software, as well as modems and jet engines, but recent developments in the two countries’ protracted trade war have strained those ties and affected businesses from both sides. In May, Chinese tech giant Huawei was placed on a U.S. blacklist, restricting the firm from purchasing American-made chips and software unless they got permission to do so. Some American mobile networks also use Huawei gear, while other U.S. companies have said their revenue will be affected by the blacklist. Alphabet’s Google also halted all business activity with Huawei, a move that means future Huawei phones will no longer come installed with Google’s Android operating system. It’s not just about trade. It’s about technology, it’s about the free flow of ideas, it is rapidly becoming about the free flow of individuals ... So it’s a really wide conflict, and it’s simply not gonna go away. David Roche GLOBAL STRATEGIST, INDEPENDENT STRATEGY Amid those tensions, China is reportedly surveying its tech companies to gauge their exposure to American suppliers, and also ramping up development in its own tech industry. For instance, it is developing its own chip industry. Under the government-led Made in China 2025 initiative, the country aims to produce 40% of its semiconductors by 2020, and 70% by 2025. Currently, only 16% of the semiconductors used in China are produced domestically, according to a February report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Just half of those are made by Chinese firms. Roche predicted that the end of the trade war is not in sight, though talks are slated to resume in October. That’s because the U.S.-China trade war isn’t about trade alone, he said. “It is a conflict between a rising global power and a declining global power ... It’s not just about trade. It’s about technology, it’s about the free flow of ideas, it is rapidly becoming about the free flow of individuals,” Roche said. “So it’s a really wide conflict, and it’s simply not gonna go away,” he concluded.

To: Conrad Murphy who wrote (1163132)	9/10/2019 9:24:18 AM
From: Wharf Rat	1 Recommendation Recommended By rdkflorida2 Respond to of 1578161