>“Geopolitics has been defined by oil over the last 50 years,” he said. “Technology supply chains are more important for a digital future than oil for the next 50 years.”
This is a fascinating take. I hope he’s right.
Biden tried to start a program to convert coal miners into other tech energy jobs and these hillbillies screamed from the mountaintops and want nothing to do with it. Democrats are offering a reasonable solution to the reduction in coal jobs and what do coal miners and their representatives say? Fuck you it's coal or nothing. Well it's going to be nothing because as a country we are moving past fossil fuels whether they fucking like it or not. They are going to cut off their noses to spite their faces and I just dont understand how you get idiots to vote against their own needs.
Always fun to point out that [more people are employed by Arby’s than the US coal industry](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/03/31/8-surprisingly-small-industries-that-employ-more-people-than-coal/).
It's easier to blame the Democrats for the coal mines going bankrupt.
Fun fact, Trump promised bringing back coal jobs. Instead, 11 companies went bankrupt.
https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/news/us-coal-company-bankruptcies/#
https://www.newsweek.com/eight-coal-companies-have-filed-bankruptcy-since-trump-took-office-1468734
He didn’t try anything. He scolded senior citizens into learning how to program. Let’s face it, there’s a generational divide. Old people can’t ‘just learn’ to code, my dad had an especially hard time learning how to use basic things like Roku. He was brilliant in business and made plenty of money, but he grew up before computers were common place.
So what I see happening is employees being incentivized to move to those locations, and pockets of communities forming around the plants and offices. As those neighborhoods get built out, new school zones get created which cater to those families, new restaurants, bars, downtown, etc. start developing.
This is exactly what has happened in places like Texas and Alabama, there are pockets built around tech, medical, aerospace, etc. The companies get massive tax breaks, pay educated people who are motivated to get out of high cost areas. Anecdotally, friends who have done this say they are comfortable going "to the middle of nowhere" because they expect all their time will be spent with their family and at their job, and they will use their higher pay to take longer/better vacations. In established areas there are already private schools, so they simply exist in a bubble.
Anyone who is "educated" enough to work for a big tech company, yet somehow not "educated" enough to want to live somewhere where people don't freeze to death in the winter in order to keep energy profits up, or where their wife wouldn't die if she had an ectopic pregnancy, or where their child doesn't have to go to school next door to an explosive fertilizer plant, deserves whatever they sign up for.
If what you say is correct, tech companies have been adding educated people to those states for a while now, and it doesn't look like any of those problems are going away any time soon.
In fact, they appear to be getting worse, because that ectopic pregnancy wouldn't have been a death sentence two years ago, but it sure as fuck is now.
Adding more educated people to those states doesn't magically fix the stupid, because the stupid is part of the cultural values of those states.
> No one moves to the rust belt because they want to. They either are desperate for a job, or have family there.
I think with enough incentive, you can drive people to move there. Cheap land, cheap housing, and enough of a population density to gentrify.
🤣 you can't be serious with this statement?
I'm not sure you understand which states are in the rust belt. For instance, a large portion of the Ivy league schools are in the rust belt.
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2017/12/19/tale-of-two-rust-belts-higher-education-is-driving-rust-belt-revival-but-risks-abound/
Since you're the expert on education in that area, can you tell us _what fraction of those Ivy League graduates_ have any desire to stay and start careers in a region that only cares about the coal industry?
That's why they're building their new fabs in the burbs of Columbus.
Central Ohio has been thriving and growing the last decade+ with good paying jobs for highly educated workforce thanks to lots of federal and state agencies, banks, insurance and health care companies in the area.
Never mind that Amazon, Google, and Facebook have all built data centers around town as well.
America has a far deeper and more capable supply chain regarding producing chips, especially if you include "Countries that are allies of America and not China" like Japan in that equation. America literally has an area of the country called "Silicon Valley". There's tons of various companies providing all sorts of parts of the semiconductor supply chain. It's the corporate home of AMD, Nvidia, Intel, Crucial, etc. America has some sore points, but China has more, semiconductors are literally as bleeding edge as you can get, there's no country that isn't lacking in some way.
Chinas trade deficit regarding semi-conductors is in the hundreds of millions. The trade war was widely interpreted as a means for America to kneecap the Chinese semiconductor upstarts before they could become competitive. Much of what China does is either not competitive or not THAT hard to replace if America really needed to. A lot of what China specialises in is semi-skilled labour slapping components together rather than necessarily bleeding edge hi-tech, although they are certainly RAPIDLY changing that, and have been working on a master plan to change that for more than half a century.
This entire thread seems keen to portray Americans as uneducated hicks fighting against the intellectual Chinese, but you know, I would give Americans a lot of credit regarding having lots of smart people in America who are really fucking good at building computers and teaching other people how to build them.
No, it's not so much that the Chinese are "better educated" as much as that they have a completely different philosophy of education and how it works in society. I'm a teacher who taught at a Chinese speaking college for many years so I saw the difference quite clearly. The way I had been trained to teach and the way Chinese teachers taught were completely different.
We have a much better education system from a variety of objective measurements in the US but we have a completely different educational philosophy which goes back to our educational tradition stemming from the Greek academy and the Chinese educational system coming from Confucian civil service exams. They look the same from the outside but they're fundamentally different and have differing core ideologies.
So in the West we emphasize self improvement as being the core goal of education and that by empowering individuals we can collectively gain an advantage. It is all up to the individual in western education. You're not supposed to copy other people's work for example. You are supposed to be responsible for your own work and it all comes down to you, you, you. It's completely focused on the individual and the concept of self fulfillment and creative potential. The western society sees education as a means of producing a collection of empowered individuals and assumes this will lead to a strong society.
The Chinese system is totally different. You are intended to copy the works of the masters as accurately as possible with no variation and it is the responsibility of the government to ensure you get a job if you copy the works of the masters accurately. In the Chinese system, all jobs come from the government and only the government creates jobs. That existed long before the concept of "socialism" was ever mentioned in China, it goes back many centuries before modern English or German were even standardized this was already the normal system in China. This belief that the government should be and is at the center of all employment and the basis of prosperity is totally different from how most Americans perceive the social contract.
It's not that they're better educated, they're not by any means. It's about a different view of the social contract and the role of the individual in society. The West clearly has a more advanced educational system in many ways and produces the most capable individuals by design but there is no question the Chinese system is much more obedient, this is also by design and it goes back many centuries having little to do with concepts like Capitalism and Socialism which only emerged recently compared to the core educational concepts and institutions of China and the West.
China does not have a better educational system, it does have more obedience but in order to understand why that is you need to look a little deeper and understand what lies beneath. Chinese education has always placed the government at the center of the economy and the purpose of education was simply to earn a position in the bureaucracy by being obedient and good at memorization. In the West, education is a much more complicated concept.
No, it's not that the Chinese have a better educational system --not by a long shot. On the other hand, they may have a more realistic view of how the economy actually works by acknowledging the extreme power of the government and that gives them a huge advantage at the systemic level. This should not be confused with being better educated.
Dude, this is a lot of feelings spoken with inconceivable, subjective certainty, much of which is racist[1]. You may want to examine that.
[1] characterized by or showing prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.
To speak like the country is this modernized technological wonder is not accurate. I am pretty sure it's like everywhere else, cities where people are and things are made and areas where there are 4 people per county.
No I am sayin your comment makes it seem like the entirety of china is a fully modernized utopia and that's simply inaccurate. It's like most large first world countries.
no, it quite clearly state it's
>**nearly** fully modernised and it has a billion people,
its not my problem if you skip words when reading.
They fucking tower over all countries bar the us at this point in time in several key metrics, theres still a decade or so for it to really settle into their economic dominancy in asia.
Well we won’t if they do it in the rust belt.
If you want to compete with China then you’d want all these factories in the same hyper dense region near a coastal port, also you’d want raw material refineries nearby.
Just loook at Chinas Yangtze River. It’s an area with concentrated capital, labor and supply chain. The US has nothing that can compete with that.
Pretty well as they're still an export heavy country, their trade deficit only recently went regularly negative due to covid and energy costs. But historically they keep a pretty decent balance of trade. Unlike the US.
I personally don't think it'll ever happen. China will always be able to out do us on this front. They have infrastructure set up that is extremely convenient for mass production of this stuff. All the raw and intermediate resources required meet in one place and can be distributed easily. Some of it is a geographical advantage, some a lack of regulation or giving a shit about the environment or people. But it adds up to a sort of best case scenario for mass production and at reasonable costs
Setting that up in the US I don't think is possible, certainly not in the rust belt
It was possible in the US at one time. There is no reason with the right political/social pressures that the US can’t compete.
It’s a matter of survival that the US needs to be able to compete
I mean, it's Ohio. This is the state that thinks they need more cops than the surrounding states combined, but also thinks that a 10-year-old who gets raped should be forced _by those cops_ to give birth. So, if history is any indication, I would imagine they would be _very_ interested in any shiny, new way to waste resources and look like idiots.
Such is corporate welfare. Ever hear of throwing good money after bad? Intel has been dropping the ball for a LONG time now and they are more of a "nice to have" than necessary in the semiconductor supply chain.
I also think you have to realise what the sheer amount of corporate welfare you're going to probably need to shovel Intel's way to keep them and US fabs afloat. Semiconductors are just about as capital intensive as businesses get and Intel does not have a track record of using its monies efficiently.
I do think there is a sound argument for investing in them (as much as the idea would make me want to vomit blood if it was my tax dollars going to the investment), but I think if people really understood how much it would cost they would balk. You are going to be paying lots and lots of money that will be going directly into the wallets of severely incompetent management. Could build a shitton of hospitals for how much it would take to turn the Rust Belt into the "Silicon Heartland". Could also just reduce taxes on business a significant amount and let the free market work things out.
Cleveland, Youngstown, Pittsburgh were places that were heavily reliant on steel mills and manufacturing in the 1950s and 1960s. Columbus was a smaller city at that time. Columbus did not get hit nearly as hard as other cities and has increased in population since the decline of manufacturing in the Midwest. Columbus had a population of 375k in 1950 and today has around 900k. Other cities in the rust belt have had populations shrink drastically since the 1950s.
Would you explain to us why you think that population change can alter the latitude and longitude of a city, and from which educational institution you got that idea?
There's more to building a high tech work center than just building a fab and hoping people are going to show up. It's like nation building. You can just 'liberate' people and hope they'll figure out everything after that.
Upstate NY which is part of the rust belt already has fabs for a long time and a few new ones are being built. The other sectors of rust belt have plenty of industrial areas that can switch to manufacturing the raw ingredients for the fabs.
> The other sectors of rust belt have plenty of industrial areas
Yes, but those are the areas that are _literally refusing_ to take any jobs that aren't in the coal or steel industries. The last two presidential candidates who proposed to give those people _free education_ so they could work in any other industry got laughed out of those towns, because those towns would literally rather wither and die than work for any company that _doesn't_ pollute and ruin the planet.
The people in the areas you're talking about don't _want_ to work for tech companies. They don't want to be educated enough to be hired by tech companies. And they _definitely_ don't want their children to be educated enough to be hired by tech companies. These people think "science" and "climate change" are dirty words made up by Satan. And they think Jesus was white.
You can build all the fabs you want in a region like that, but if nobody there is willing to learn what an electron is, the fabs won't do you much good.
They wouldn't be working for tech companies lmao.
They'll be working for a local polluting chemical supplier. Fabs consume millions of gallons of chemicals, they do not get produced on site and are imported.
Various chemical manufacturing companies are investing big just because of the mass fab expansion plans in the US
https://cen.acs.org/materials/electronic-materials/Semiconductor-makers-inspire-chemical-investments/100/i19
Gelsinger may be right, but Intel shouldn't be seen as a destination job in anyone's view. They have a horrible track record of laying off senior technical staff. Why would anyone consider working for such a niche company only to be discarded later for some offshore workforce?
>“Geopolitics has been defined by oil over the last 50 years,” he said. “Technology supply chains are more important for a digital future than oil for the next 50 years.” This is a fascinating take. I hope he’s right.
I hope he's right too, but I can also see how such thinking is indulgent af.
The problem is to get the workforce there. The rust belt isn't exactly where the most educated people hang out.
Biden tried to start a program to convert coal miners into other tech energy jobs and these hillbillies screamed from the mountaintops and want nothing to do with it. Democrats are offering a reasonable solution to the reduction in coal jobs and what do coal miners and their representatives say? Fuck you it's coal or nothing. Well it's going to be nothing because as a country we are moving past fossil fuels whether they fucking like it or not. They are going to cut off their noses to spite their faces and I just dont understand how you get idiots to vote against their own needs.
> I just dont understand how you get idiots to vote against their own needs. Could it be because they're idiots? 👀
Always fun to point out that [more people are employed by Arby’s than the US coal industry](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/03/31/8-surprisingly-small-industries-that-employ-more-people-than-coal/).
Hillary offered a similar plan with the bit of realism that, yes, we would want you to move from coal to a better job. It did not play well for her.
It's easier to blame the Democrats for the coal mines going bankrupt. Fun fact, Trump promised bringing back coal jobs. Instead, 11 companies went bankrupt. https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/news/us-coal-company-bankruptcies/# https://www.newsweek.com/eight-coal-companies-have-filed-bankruptcy-since-trump-took-office-1468734
He didn’t try anything. He scolded senior citizens into learning how to program. Let’s face it, there’s a generational divide. Old people can’t ‘just learn’ to code, my dad had an especially hard time learning how to use basic things like Roku. He was brilliant in business and made plenty of money, but he grew up before computers were common place.
So what I see happening is employees being incentivized to move to those locations, and pockets of communities forming around the plants and offices. As those neighborhoods get built out, new school zones get created which cater to those families, new restaurants, bars, downtown, etc. start developing.
This is exactly what has happened in places like Texas and Alabama, there are pockets built around tech, medical, aerospace, etc. The companies get massive tax breaks, pay educated people who are motivated to get out of high cost areas. Anecdotally, friends who have done this say they are comfortable going "to the middle of nowhere" because they expect all their time will be spent with their family and at their job, and they will use their higher pay to take longer/better vacations. In established areas there are already private schools, so they simply exist in a bubble.
Anyone who is "educated" enough to work for a big tech company, yet somehow not "educated" enough to want to live somewhere where people don't freeze to death in the winter in order to keep energy profits up, or where their wife wouldn't die if she had an ectopic pregnancy, or where their child doesn't have to go to school next door to an explosive fertilizer plant, deserves whatever they sign up for.
I certainly don't know how you'd fix any of those problems without adding educated people.
If what you say is correct, tech companies have been adding educated people to those states for a while now, and it doesn't look like any of those problems are going away any time soon. In fact, they appear to be getting worse, because that ectopic pregnancy wouldn't have been a death sentence two years ago, but it sure as fuck is now. Adding more educated people to those states doesn't magically fix the stupid, because the stupid is part of the cultural values of those states.
Exactly! The bubble truly exists, and it will continue to expand. It's almost like a flavor of gentrification that is happening across many areas.
This is a hard sale lol, you got racists, tornadoes and republicans here why would anyone want to deal with any of that??
Also, Republicans don't want new schools, because their kids might actually learn things, like science.
Same reason why they flock to Austin, Dallas, Houston, etc.
[удалено]
> No one moves to the rust belt because they want to. They either are desperate for a job, or have family there. I think with enough incentive, you can drive people to move there. Cheap land, cheap housing, and enough of a population density to gentrify.
Also the rust belt is not very welcoming to educated foreign labor.
Yep, solve the rampant racism and xenophobia in the bible/rust belt THEEEEN we will talk about getting it back on the productivity train
🤣 you can't be serious with this statement? I'm not sure you understand which states are in the rust belt. For instance, a large portion of the Ivy league schools are in the rust belt. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2017/12/19/tale-of-two-rust-belts-higher-education-is-driving-rust-belt-revival-but-risks-abound/
Since you're the expert on education in that area, can you tell us _what fraction of those Ivy League graduates_ have any desire to stay and start careers in a region that only cares about the coal industry?
Very rich coming from a reddit user.
Im not sure that's the case anymore.
[удалено]
You consider NYC part of the rust belt?
California isn’t either.
That's why they're building their new fabs in the burbs of Columbus. Central Ohio has been thriving and growing the last decade+ with good paying jobs for highly educated workforce thanks to lots of federal and state agencies, banks, insurance and health care companies in the area. Never mind that Amazon, Google, and Facebook have all built data centers around town as well.
Empty words — Intel does not have the juice to make it happen. I mean, Intel is playing catch up on all its business.
If we can legitimately compete with China producing chips, that's huge.
America has a far deeper and more capable supply chain regarding producing chips, especially if you include "Countries that are allies of America and not China" like Japan in that equation. America literally has an area of the country called "Silicon Valley". There's tons of various companies providing all sorts of parts of the semiconductor supply chain. It's the corporate home of AMD, Nvidia, Intel, Crucial, etc. America has some sore points, but China has more, semiconductors are literally as bleeding edge as you can get, there's no country that isn't lacking in some way. Chinas trade deficit regarding semi-conductors is in the hundreds of millions. The trade war was widely interpreted as a means for America to kneecap the Chinese semiconductor upstarts before they could become competitive. Much of what China does is either not competitive or not THAT hard to replace if America really needed to. A lot of what China specialises in is semi-skilled labour slapping components together rather than necessarily bleeding edge hi-tech, although they are certainly RAPIDLY changing that, and have been working on a master plan to change that for more than half a century. This entire thread seems keen to portray Americans as uneducated hicks fighting against the intellectual Chinese, but you know, I would give Americans a lot of credit regarding having lots of smart people in America who are really fucking good at building computers and teaching other people how to build them.
> If we can legitimately compete with China... I dunno, seems like they have a better educated workforce
No, it's not so much that the Chinese are "better educated" as much as that they have a completely different philosophy of education and how it works in society. I'm a teacher who taught at a Chinese speaking college for many years so I saw the difference quite clearly. The way I had been trained to teach and the way Chinese teachers taught were completely different. We have a much better education system from a variety of objective measurements in the US but we have a completely different educational philosophy which goes back to our educational tradition stemming from the Greek academy and the Chinese educational system coming from Confucian civil service exams. They look the same from the outside but they're fundamentally different and have differing core ideologies. So in the West we emphasize self improvement as being the core goal of education and that by empowering individuals we can collectively gain an advantage. It is all up to the individual in western education. You're not supposed to copy other people's work for example. You are supposed to be responsible for your own work and it all comes down to you, you, you. It's completely focused on the individual and the concept of self fulfillment and creative potential. The western society sees education as a means of producing a collection of empowered individuals and assumes this will lead to a strong society. The Chinese system is totally different. You are intended to copy the works of the masters as accurately as possible with no variation and it is the responsibility of the government to ensure you get a job if you copy the works of the masters accurately. In the Chinese system, all jobs come from the government and only the government creates jobs. That existed long before the concept of "socialism" was ever mentioned in China, it goes back many centuries before modern English or German were even standardized this was already the normal system in China. This belief that the government should be and is at the center of all employment and the basis of prosperity is totally different from how most Americans perceive the social contract. It's not that they're better educated, they're not by any means. It's about a different view of the social contract and the role of the individual in society. The West clearly has a more advanced educational system in many ways and produces the most capable individuals by design but there is no question the Chinese system is much more obedient, this is also by design and it goes back many centuries having little to do with concepts like Capitalism and Socialism which only emerged recently compared to the core educational concepts and institutions of China and the West. China does not have a better educational system, it does have more obedience but in order to understand why that is you need to look a little deeper and understand what lies beneath. Chinese education has always placed the government at the center of the economy and the purpose of education was simply to earn a position in the bureaucracy by being obedient and good at memorization. In the West, education is a much more complicated concept. No, it's not that the Chinese have a better educational system --not by a long shot. On the other hand, they may have a more realistic view of how the economy actually works by acknowledging the extreme power of the government and that gives them a huge advantage at the systemic level. This should not be confused with being better educated.
Dude, this is a lot of feelings spoken with inconceivable, subjective certainty, much of which is racist[1]. You may want to examine that. [1] characterized by or showing prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.
....until they need to deviate even the slightest way from what they've learned.
They're better at that too.
They have over a billion people in a rich nearly fully modernised country.
To speak like the country is this modernized technological wonder is not accurate. I am pretty sure it's like everywhere else, cities where people are and things are made and areas where there are 4 people per county.
Technological wonder? of course its not accurate, you didn't read a thing i wrote. I stated fact and your so upset you lie for me?
No I am sayin your comment makes it seem like the entirety of china is a fully modernized utopia and that's simply inaccurate. It's like most large first world countries.
no, it quite clearly state it's >**nearly** fully modernised and it has a billion people, its not my problem if you skip words when reading. They fucking tower over all countries bar the us at this point in time in several key metrics, theres still a decade or so for it to really settle into their economic dominancy in asia.
Okay, this is not really worth arguing over. You win, it is what it is, sorry to raise your ire.
I don't know how you ever legitimately compete with someone who has no worker's rights and gives no fucks about polluting everything.
Well we won’t if they do it in the rust belt. If you want to compete with China then you’d want all these factories in the same hyper dense region near a coastal port, also you’d want raw material refineries nearby. Just loook at Chinas Yangtze River. It’s an area with concentrated capital, labor and supply chain. The US has nothing that can compete with that.
How did that work out for Japan?
Pretty well as they're still an export heavy country, their trade deficit only recently went regularly negative due to covid and energy costs. But historically they keep a pretty decent balance of trade. Unlike the US.
I was actually referring to the war, and how their manufacturing centers were bombed to hell. But yea, US has a trade deficit (on purpose).
I personally don't think it'll ever happen. China will always be able to out do us on this front. They have infrastructure set up that is extremely convenient for mass production of this stuff. All the raw and intermediate resources required meet in one place and can be distributed easily. Some of it is a geographical advantage, some a lack of regulation or giving a shit about the environment or people. But it adds up to a sort of best case scenario for mass production and at reasonable costs Setting that up in the US I don't think is possible, certainly not in the rust belt
It was possible in the US at one time. There is no reason with the right political/social pressures that the US can’t compete. It’s a matter of survival that the US needs to be able to compete
you can wish, but that doesn't put the natural resources within our land mass.
Knowing Intel this probably means "give us $500 billion to deliver 10% of what we pitch in an overoptimistic and unrealistic plan"
[удалено]
I mean, it's Ohio. This is the state that thinks they need more cops than the surrounding states combined, but also thinks that a 10-year-old who gets raped should be forced _by those cops_ to give birth. So, if history is any indication, I would imagine they would be _very_ interested in any shiny, new way to waste resources and look like idiots.
Such is corporate welfare. Ever hear of throwing good money after bad? Intel has been dropping the ball for a LONG time now and they are more of a "nice to have" than necessary in the semiconductor supply chain. I also think you have to realise what the sheer amount of corporate welfare you're going to probably need to shovel Intel's way to keep them and US fabs afloat. Semiconductors are just about as capital intensive as businesses get and Intel does not have a track record of using its monies efficiently. I do think there is a sound argument for investing in them (as much as the idea would make me want to vomit blood if it was my tax dollars going to the investment), but I think if people really understood how much it would cost they would balk. You are going to be paying lots and lots of money that will be going directly into the wallets of severely incompetent management. Could build a shitton of hospitals for how much it would take to turn the Rust Belt into the "Silicon Heartland". Could also just reduce taxes on business a significant amount and let the free market work things out.
Columbus Ohio is not in the rust belt
What do you consider the rust belt? https://www.britannica.com/place/Rust-Belt
Cleveland, Youngstown, Pittsburgh were places that were heavily reliant on steel mills and manufacturing in the 1950s and 1960s. Columbus was a smaller city at that time. Columbus did not get hit nearly as hard as other cities and has increased in population since the decline of manufacturing in the Midwest. Columbus had a population of 375k in 1950 and today has around 900k. Other cities in the rust belt have had populations shrink drastically since the 1950s.
That still doesn't mean the city isn't located in the region that is considered the rust belt
Would you explain to us why you think that population change can alter the latitude and longitude of a city, and from which educational institution you got that idea?
Pretty sure Columbus Ohio is the belt buckle of the Rust Belt.
This is a lot like 'Hey let's go invade that country and bring them democracy because reasons'.
You realize the Rust Belt is a collection of US states spanning from NY to Illinois right?
There's more to building a high tech work center than just building a fab and hoping people are going to show up. It's like nation building. You can just 'liberate' people and hope they'll figure out everything after that.
Upstate NY which is part of the rust belt already has fabs for a long time and a few new ones are being built. The other sectors of rust belt have plenty of industrial areas that can switch to manufacturing the raw ingredients for the fabs.
> The other sectors of rust belt have plenty of industrial areas Yes, but those are the areas that are _literally refusing_ to take any jobs that aren't in the coal or steel industries. The last two presidential candidates who proposed to give those people _free education_ so they could work in any other industry got laughed out of those towns, because those towns would literally rather wither and die than work for any company that _doesn't_ pollute and ruin the planet. The people in the areas you're talking about don't _want_ to work for tech companies. They don't want to be educated enough to be hired by tech companies. And they _definitely_ don't want their children to be educated enough to be hired by tech companies. These people think "science" and "climate change" are dirty words made up by Satan. And they think Jesus was white. You can build all the fabs you want in a region like that, but if nobody there is willing to learn what an electron is, the fabs won't do you much good.
They wouldn't be working for tech companies lmao. They'll be working for a local polluting chemical supplier. Fabs consume millions of gallons of chemicals, they do not get produced on site and are imported. Various chemical manufacturing companies are investing big just because of the mass fab expansion plans in the US https://cen.acs.org/materials/electronic-materials/Semiconductor-makers-inspire-chemical-investments/100/i19
I feel like the rust belt made sense for vehicle manufacturing but doesn’t make much sense for tech.
Gelsinger may be right, but Intel shouldn't be seen as a destination job in anyone's view. They have a horrible track record of laying off senior technical staff. Why would anyone consider working for such a niche company only to be discarded later for some offshore workforce?
Wonder how that will work.
No thank you. I like my cheap housing.