Trump, the White House, and their defenders claim that trade is bad and tariffs are good. So how on earth do they defend America's AI policy, which is the opposite in every way?
Wow. Totally missed the rationale (that I assume is driving it). We NEED the AI buildout to happen as rapidly as possible. Whoever gets ASI first will rule the world (at least if China gets it, they will). Thus, anything that inhibits the buildout (such as tariffs on parts needed to build AI infrastructure) is an existential threat to the existence of the US. The same simply isn't true for any other good or service.
I THINK the rationale for selling China some of our 'better but not best' chips is to keep it the case that it makes more sense for them to buy from us and not build their own SOTA chips. If we start allowing them to buy our best chips, that wouldn't make any sense.
The wildest part isn’t just the hypocrisy — it’s the split-brain governance OS.
On paper: protectionism, economic nationalism, anti-globalist rhetoric.
In practice: a globalized AI stack that depends on exactly the trade, capital flows, and corporate power the rhetoric claims to reject.
That divergence between the narrative and the underlying structure is where systemic risk piles up. The AI carve-outs look less like a strategy and more like an adaptive reflex around the one sector propping up growth.
When a government’s stated model and its actual economic design drift this far apart, you get a policy liminal phase: decisions turn reactive, incentives route around the story, and the real governance happens wherever AI infrastructure intersects trade, capital, and security.
If not Trump someone has to know the only thing holding the economy up is AI, but I also think that is just dumb luck and not a strategy. Trump loves that all the tech bros are kissing the ring, but he has to keep them happy if he wants them onside. Plus he is taking a stake in these companies. ask Nvidia and Intel about how liberal this all is.
Wow. Totally missed the rationale (that I assume is driving it). We NEED the AI buildout to happen as rapidly as possible. Whoever gets ASI first will rule the world (at least if China gets it, they will). Thus, anything that inhibits the buildout (such as tariffs on parts needed to build AI infrastructure) is an existential threat to the existence of the US. The same simply isn't true for any other good or service.
I THINK the rationale for selling China some of our 'better but not best' chips is to keep it the case that it makes more sense for them to buy from us and not build their own SOTA chips. If we start allowing them to buy our best chips, that wouldn't make any sense.
The wildest part isn’t just the hypocrisy — it’s the split-brain governance OS.
On paper: protectionism, economic nationalism, anti-globalist rhetoric.
In practice: a globalized AI stack that depends on exactly the trade, capital flows, and corporate power the rhetoric claims to reject.
That divergence between the narrative and the underlying structure is where systemic risk piles up. The AI carve-outs look less like a strategy and more like an adaptive reflex around the one sector propping up growth.
When a government’s stated model and its actual economic design drift this far apart, you get a policy liminal phase: decisions turn reactive, incentives route around the story, and the real governance happens wherever AI infrastructure intersects trade, capital, and security.
If not Trump someone has to know the only thing holding the economy up is AI, but I also think that is just dumb luck and not a strategy. Trump loves that all the tech bros are kissing the ring, but he has to keep them happy if he wants them onside. Plus he is taking a stake in these companies. ask Nvidia and Intel about how liberal this all is.