From the New York Times I'm like about this four Romney. I disclosure, Mr Connell, on Tuesday night, the Aser Sixty eight, the name. thirty two, the sixty votes, so having that achieved, the bill is past. Do you it states Senate, willingly past passed the kind of historic ends keeping spending that typically triggers Peter Partisan Warfare today David, sank, pond wide this bill did not

It's Wednesday, Jus night David describe this legislation that was just adopted by the Eu Asylum or Michael. This is quite simply put the biggest example of industrial policy that the United States has put together. Perhaps in it history, but certainly in many decades in what is industrial policy. Industrial policy Michael means using tax payer dollars to go direct funds to specific industries, research initiatives or actual manufacturing plants to involve the? U S: government, directly in the private sector economy,

by injecting massive amounts of capital that, in the normal american way, would be raised first by venture capitalists and then on the stock market and just how much capital are we talking about we're talking about a quarter of a trillion dollars over five year, so even by Washington standards. That's a lot of money, and you know it's not the first time that the? U S government is invested in these things. We do other investment right, like the defence advanced research projects agency. Part of the Pentagon has been doing this for years, but their budget is three billion dollars a year at what President Biden asked for for this year. So it gives you a sense of just how huge an injection

capital in the high tech part of the economy that the Senate bill would require in which industries exactly will be invested in under this programme, while its everything on the list that you would think of, if you picked up the paper in, you saw what a cutting edge industries that the United States worries about. Semi conductors gets the biggest part of it because the chip said power our computers are zoom calls are automobiles are, bridge raiders and our automated houses Those are the steel industry of the modern age. He autonomous vehicles are a big part of this robotics, artificial intelligence and then, of course, also see

Derek biology, basically, the creation and manipulation of new organisms and understanding how that process works. There are other areas here: Quantum computing, which was an entirely different way of going about designing computers at very high speed, critical for defence purposes, for encryption and perhaps over time for me, factoring in most of these areas, the bills pretty vaguely worded about how exactly the money is going to be spent. So you know gonna be a huge scramble. now to get a part of this pie by redefining projects that are already under way to fit within the categories of Congress is allocated these billions for and so Michael. The big question is: how is it that a? U S Senate, that can agree on

We think that arguing with President Biden over infrastructure projects and the usual easy stuff like bill hi ways and dams right. How is it that they have agreed to and a quarter trillion dollars on this front. Workable array of high tech industry, really the great mystery. That's been surrounding Washington these past couple of days and what is answer, because I very much is the question I have. How is it possible that war and came together for a spending build this vast

There is one reason and one reason only its China, IRAN when he mean by that or China has been spending heavily in this arena. Almost this exact same list of research projects in industries since twenty fifty they ve got a project under way call made in China twenty twenty five and by that deadline they were be self sufficient in all of these territories, from semiconductors, two autonomous vehicles to everything so was on our list. They don't want to after to rely on the United States or the west for any of those technologies, and so what's happened here in Washington. Michael. Is that the they were image of, the chinese fear has been playing out and Capital Hill gradually

where senators are waking up to the thought that the United States is incredibly depended on China. We saw it in the argument over five g networks. Where the? U S have gotten out of the business we ve, seen it in semi conductors where the? U S is a much smaller part of the market than it was an over time. What this is done, is created, a bipartisan consensus no matter what else we agree or disagree on, we can't be in a position in twenty twenty five, where we are dependent on China for the key. technologies that keep our industry going and keep our defence sector going and somehow that has managed to oh seep into the body politic, There was no real debate, especially when people look at the sheer numbers and saw them.

the chinese government spending on research and development is now twice. What the. U S: spending is as a percentage of GDP and Sadly, changed give this bill seems to assume that China's dominance, in these industries is a pretty urgent threat. is that? True, as my sense is that we have relied on China to manufacture? all kinds of goods that get export it back to the? U S for a really long time. We have relied on them, but I think, what's changed in recent times is the recognition that China is not just an economic competitor and not just that it's a potential military adversary. It's that China has brought about a combination of its military prowess and its economic prowess,

and made us overtime increasingly dependent on Beijing for the core technologies one our economy and people started asking the question first can we really rely on China to provide us with five g advanced? So you networks is the net, That will be powering not only our cell phones but our factories and across the Obama administration. The trumpet minutes asian, and now the buying administration people came to the same answer, which is no we really cannot rely on China for the four five g, because they could turn it off. In times of tension and then we began to look at semi conductors and ask the question: how Why do we want to be for the foundational technology of everything we build, and then

began to look at synthetic biology, an area that the United States pioneered and said? How much do we want to be dependent there and what happened over time is that this concept that the two largest economies in the world were inextricably intertwined. Is now changing to a concept that the two largest economy These in the world have to be self sufficient. So the fear is quite simply that one, day? If the United States does not invest properly in these industries and become self sufficient in these areas, that we might wake up and find that China has basically turned off our economy through goods, we ve, purchased from them or turns all those technologies against us. That's right,

and they wouldn't even need to turn them off. All we would need to do is live in the fear that they could turn them off, and you know members of Congress saw in both classified and unclassified session, some pretty remarkable examples. One is that a few years ago the United States was bringing in some very large electric transformers, the kind you used to power the electric grid and when sent them off to one of the national labs for examination. They discovered some hard their inserted in the transformers that was not part of the design speck. That would have essentially enabled somebody in China to flip these. On and off while literally the american night. It is indeed, and then in the telecom you patients area. We saw something similar, we internet traffic that was running through Chinese controlled elements of the now

work inside the United States. That was mysterious. sleeping routed. The Beijing before it came back to the United States and elsewhere in the world, and people started asking the question Why is it that China could from a base in the United States, road traffic at will back the Beijing and then, as the five she argument, revved up and we were urging allies not to buy the chinese networks. We had nothing offer them, because american companies had gone out of business and the accumulation of these examples managed to White bowed Thirty years of ideological division inside the Senate overall The United States should be

spending taxpayers money on specific industries in order to stay competitive? it was a really remarkable thing, because this debate that has gone on for decades just fell silent in the face of chinese competition. order, it back Daily is supported by Tt America trade. Now that commission free choice is the norm, its tend to rethink how we define value values more than a price tag. It's the confidence of knowing you have a tea of traders on stand by to answer any question: its thinkers, swims, powerful, Harding and analysis tools and it's a personalized education to fine tune. Your skills value is becoming smarter. With every commission, free online equity trade, discovered

who value with tedium air trade, where smart investors, get smarter hate We listeners its Jane Christian posted the argument, a podcast from your chance opinion I spent years, is a reporter talking to people from across the political spectrum. I've heard a lot of our that's too in person and online Samar Baseless and mean, but some of made me think differently or helped me under damned other people's points of view. That's what the argument is about. Each week on the share, you'll hear people who disagree with each other risk full civil debate that gets behind the Big news stories and beyond party lives like powder reform, policing in America Weather the council still Dan raise the minimum wage or killed the filibuster. You might not agree with everything you here and that's the point. You might even walk away some Europeans of your out. You can listening The results of the argument every Wednesday, wherever you're listening to this body, Guest David,

scribe this thirty year and divide that you just referred to, over. U S! Government investment in american industry, where does it come from what date back to the nineteen eighties when Japan was the great ascendant economic power. The fear in Washington, was but we would become what Andy Grove the Founder of Intel referred to, HU as a technical colony of Japan that it seems hard to imagine today, but back there japanese cars were not only flooding, we, U S market, but consumers grabbing them. Ten Donovan here taken frustrations out on this toy. You and the way offs in Detroit were huge. But I was raised

park, they used to have carnivals, you take away at a car and it was always the biggest sensation. We thought well. Why not? A japanese car me while of course the japanese market they come over here Well, they're caused a vcr as they knocked the hell out of our companies and was quite close to american goods, but more important, Lee you began to see Japan dominate some of Same industries that were worried about today, starting with semi conductors, and they were producing memory chips, not microprocessors the do the thinking, but just what ho? holds memory inside computers right, as was long before, chips were going into every bit of consumer goods and so What was beginning to happen in Congress was a huge backlash against Japan, I remember it pretty vividly because I was sent by the New York Times for a wonderful six year assignment in Japan.

Starting in nineteen. Eighty eight in the midst of this dispute- and I spent most of my time, Doc panting whether or not the companies were in fact our lunch and what was happening as the Japanese, government and the Ministry of Industry and trade began. Funding big are indeed programmes in Japan for many of these same industries sitting. What does Congress do in response to this perceived threat from Japan, or there are few things vital. First, bailed out automakers like Chrysler, that were on the verge of bankruptcy. That was very controversial, but they went ahead and then to put together a consortium of american semiconductor makers and invested hundred million dollars in government funds in the efforts to revive the entire semiconductor industry? That consortium was called summit,

and this was at the end of the regular administration, was nineteen. Eighty seven, but by the time we we're leaving office. This effort to boost governments spend in these industries began to create a backlash, and it opened up a really deep illogical divide about The role of the american government should be in boosting industries and particularly new high tech ventures, what is the nature of that political divide on the one side of the Republicans who said by and large, this is madness. Government is terrible at picking new technologies. This is where, market works best the creative destruction of inventing something finding funding for it, seeing if it takes off that's what

makes american industry the shining example for the rest of the world and the we think we will do in. Fearing in this is wasteful out of taxpayers, money and get in the way of that process and then on the other side of the Democrats? Who sing are you? we ve been doing this for years in the territory of basic research in the work that created the spaceport. not only landed man on the moon. It created first What Terry and then, a commercial satellite business, the defence, Van Research projects, agency, gay the seed money for the experiments that started the internet, and that if you are going to get people to jump, start key technologies the best way to do it is poor, some government money and do it even If you know that some of its gonna be wasted

you're gonna lose some of it because the overall benefit to american job creation is well. worth whatever you might lose over the short term. So what does this battle? Look like throughout the next few decades, while it got pretty intense during the Clinton image creation when President Clinton wanted to go, make some major investments and many Republicans called this socialism. One president Obama was an office? You may remember that the administration probe I did some loan guarantees just about five two million dollars to a company called Sir Sandra that was working. I do remember yeah an interesting technology for solar power and solar panels, and the thing went bad and went bankrupt as projects like this sometimes do is. A lot of success, but a failure and Mitt Romney results.

the symbol of how the president thinks about free enterprise, among others, whose course running against President Obama during the year, the re election campaign and twenty twelve argued that this was a prime The example of the? U S: government trying to interfere in the capital listing process that made the United States such a powerhouse. He thinks a government decisions like this marriage, America, stronger that Obama had wasted taxpayers money, they make us weaker brain. Romney's argument was this- is classic wasteful government spending, and this is exactly what the private sector designed to do, and even though Roundy lost that election it fell like he had landed a pre significant punch with the example

of cylindered? That no doubt Democrats would have understood as something politically risky that right, especially because the most effective part of the republic and argue was that often times when the United States spends money on research and development. What happens? Is the private sector pulls back Why should we spend our shareholder money on this when the taxpayers are gonna? Go funded research for us for free rightly Republican argument- is that this becomes a perverse sir. And centres in which the government. This places the motivations and the instincts of the private sector that right and that's it exactly what some of the critics of SAM Attack that semiconductor every third President Reagan. began in eighteen, eighty seven and by the Ninety nine, these it hadn't accomplishment.

its goals and sought a withered? And when people look back at that, they discovered that semiconductor companies had in many cases pulled back on private investment, because They thought the government would pay for. It. Should even I guess, I'm still confused about why we are not seeing this same partisan fight play out with this Senate play to spend? So much? U S, government money to counter China, given that you just explained how almost permanent this battle is in the United States com. Why are we seeing much of this accompany this Senate proposal? Here? It's a pretty remarkable change and I think the reason really comes down to the difference between Japan as a competitor and try that has occurred

Yes, Japan was and remains a major economic and the United States, but it's also our closest. ally in the Pacific right, it's the same, piece of the american strategy to contain China's expansion in South Korea straight to Japan, never posed the existential threat to United States that China now does. That's what's happening that right. Japan was a commercial adversary, but not a military adversary, and China is the opposite, but you know Michael something else happened in the course of this. The change that bait and then Donald Trump going. He walked away from all of the usual republic in ideology. this issue and many others, when he made that turn about a year and a half ago, at the beginning of the pandemic,

began describing China not as a potential deal maker with the United States, but as its Mortal enemy was hiding the cause of corrupt. virus and me, maybe had deliberately launched it in his imaginings and that some entered the view in his own party that any bill that was described as a counter try A bill was worth passing. That was why change the debate and one President Biden came in. He actually extended this debate by canting it as the battle between democratic forces and autocracy right. There was a line in president binds speech to both houses of Congress that spoke to this stock May he spoke of the need for tonight?

states to come together to confront China and you dont, Michael their State Union speech, was just the common vision of several moments at which President Biden had raised this concept that it was The challenge for the United States to prove that a disorganized, disorderly democracy could get its act together and actually accomplish big things and that that wasn't simply the pathway that autocracy could take. That has been the closest thing by national security philosophy that we ve heard yet. So perhaps it is worth noting David that, despite the fact that President Roman President Biden I'm really not agree on much of anything. They do both seem to agree on the threat of China. And the need for the United States to invest in such a way that it can counter it. That's actually write. My

and some of these efforts, including more than fifty billion dollars. The semiconductor industry first got past during the Trump administration. Is now being rolled into this bill. There are some caution here, though, you have seen this bill get squeeze down a little bit by people who were afraid were spending too much money, you have seen some objections that the bill, because as one of the few, spending bills will actually pass in Congress, has become a Christmas tree for everybody's favorite project. But Why we ve learned here essentially, is that the competition with China, the fear of China, both a realistic and the exaggerated fears of China. have become the one great you fine element of american politics today, and if that is true, then I guess there is some hope-

but a democracy can plan for long term, and this is not just the terrain of an autocracy. That's right now, even after this bill passes our research and events and spending as a percentage of GDP is still gonna, be well. Of the Chinese and some other countries. It is more of a start. But if there's one key lesson that emerges The debate really the non debate over this bill. It's that America needs again as it always has an adversary to be the organizing fought for things we probably needed to do anyway, first Russia. Now China, Russia and the Cold war China and the new cold war. That's how

Erica get his acting, that's how America has a shot and give him time. David, thank you very much appreciated. Thank you, Michael will be right back This package is supported by GO daddy artist. Anti colleague has never led to others for validation. He built his business by state

True to his vision, the content that I created usually for me. First, it's like my are whether it is misleading and using my voice or me dancing in my living room am popping onto my computer and coming up with a story. Learn how Don T colleague created a digital portfolio. Dispread Julian cannot but others Debbie, Debbie Debbie Dad, and why times that calm, slash, go daddy makers. here's what else you need to today. We are deeply sorry for the impact that this attack had. But we are also heartened by the resilience of our country and of our company during a city. hearing on Tuesday, the chief executive of colonial pipeline apologized, for the consequences of a ransom where attack that cut off energy access to much of the east coast. Last month I made the decision to pay, and I made a decision. Kidney information about payment is confidential possible the executive.

Joseph Blood defended his controversial decision to pay hackers more than four million dollars in ransom to end the attack and bring a major fuel pipeline back online It was the hardest decision I made in my thirty nine years in the energy industry, and I know how Protocol are pipeline is to the country, and I put the interests of the country first data from the Internal Revenue service obtained by them you're organization pro public shoes that between two thousand forty, and two thousand eighty, the twenty five richest Americans, including Jeff Basis, Michael Bloomberg, an Elon musk paid little and in some years, new federal income taxes public found that the billionaires avoided, paying significant income tax by exploiting loopholes and reductions in the tax code by

borrowing large sums of money and because the United, its emphasizes taxing traditional income over accumulated wealth such as stocks and realistic, tidies episode, which produced by asked the charter waiting aircraft, Luke Vanderpool and mean potter. It was edited by these shocks, engineered by Chris Wood and contains original music by Mary Lozano Indian PAL that's for the deal unworkable by seen him on this podcast is supported by comments shop. Thousands

Carmack? Certified quality vehicles at car, max dot com and by a mind from the comfort of home, then take a full month and up to fifteen hundred miles to love it or return? It learn more at car, max dot com.