The Tontine Coffee-House blog post details the history and inspiration behind its name, referencing the original Tontine Coffee-House established in 1792 as a hub for merchants, politicians, and underwriters in early New York City. It highlights the coffee-house's role as a center for news dissemination, business dealings, and social connection, emphasizing its vibrant atmosphere fostered by lively debate and information exchange. The blog's founders aimed to recapture this spirit of open discourse and intellectual engagement in the online realm, creating a platform for diverse perspectives on financial markets and economics. They specifically mention the goal of providing a space where professional investors and armchair enthusiasts alike could engage in constructive discussions without the restrictions often found in more formal settings.
Reshoring manufacturing to the US faces significant hurdles beyond just labor costs. Decades of offshoring have eroded the US industrial base, resulting in a shortage of skilled workers, weakened supply chains, and a lack of crucial infrastructure. While automation can address some labor challenges, it requires significant upfront investment and exacerbates the skills gap. Furthermore, complex products like electronics depend on intricate global supply networks that are difficult and costly to replicate domestically. Simply offering incentives or imposing tariffs won't solve these deeply entrenched structural issues, making a rapid and widespread resurgence of US manufacturing unlikely.
Hacker News commenters generally agreed with the article's premise that reshoring manufacturing is complex. Several pointed out that the US lacks the skilled labor pool necessary for large-scale manufacturing, emphasizing the need for vocational training and apprenticeship programs. Some argued that automation isn't a panacea, as it requires specialized skills to implement and maintain. Others highlighted the regulatory burden and permitting processes as significant obstacles. A compelling argument was made that the US focus should be on high-value, specialized manufacturing rather than trying to compete with low-cost labor countries on commodity goods. Finally, some commenters questioned whether bringing back all manufacturing is even desirable, citing potential negative environmental impacts and the benefits of global specialization.
ASML CEO Peter Wennink warns that Europe risks falling behind in the global semiconductor race due to slow and complex regulations. While supportive of the EU Chips Act's aims to boost domestic chip production, Wennink argues that excessive bureaucracy and delayed funding disbursement hinder the rapid expansion needed to compete with heavily subsidized American and Asian chipmakers. He emphasizes the urgency for Europe to streamline its processes and accelerate investment to avoid losing out on crucial semiconductor manufacturing capacity and future innovation.
Hacker News users discuss the potential negative consequences of export controls on ASML's chipmaking equipment, echoing the CEO's warning in the linked Economist article. Some argue that such restrictions, while intended to hinder China's technological advancement, might incentivize them to develop their own indigenous technology, ultimately hurting ASML's long-term market share. Others express skepticism that China could replicate ASML's highly complex technology easily, emphasizing the company's significant lead and the difficulty of acquiring the necessary expertise and supply chains. Several commenters point out the delicate balance Europe must strike between national security concerns and economic interests, suggesting that overly aggressive restrictions could backfire. The geopolitical implications of these export controls are also debated, with some highlighting the potential for escalating tensions and a technological "cold war."
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC), the world's largest contract chip maker, is expected to announce a massive $100 billion investment in advanced semiconductor manufacturing facilities in the United States over the next three years. This substantial commitment aims to boost domestic chip production and reduce U.S. reliance on foreign suppliers, particularly in light of escalating tensions with China and growing concerns about semiconductor supply chain security. The investment includes plans for multiple new factories, potentially creating thousands of jobs.
HN commenters are skeptical of TSMC's purported $100B investment, questioning whether it will fully materialize and expressing concern over the high cost of US chip fabrication. Several point out that TSMC's Arizona fabs are smaller and less advanced than their Taiwanese counterparts, suggesting the investment figure may include long-term operational costs rather than solely construction. Others discuss the geopolitical motivations behind the move, viewing it as a US strategy to secure its chip supply chain amidst rising tensions with China. Some highlight the challenges TSMC faces in the US, including higher labor and operating expenses, and potential difficulties attracting and retaining skilled talent. Finally, a few commenters raise concerns about the environmental impact of these large-scale fabs and the potential strain on local resources.
Shein and Temu exploit a US customs rule called the "de minimis" threshold, which exempts packages valued under $800 from import duties and taxes. This allows them to ship massive quantities of low-priced goods directly to consumers without the added costs normally associated with international trade. This practice, combined with potentially undervalued shipments, is under increasing scrutiny from US lawmakers who argue it gives Chinese retailers an unfair advantage, hurts American businesses, and facilitates the import of counterfeit or unsafe products. Proposed legislation seeks to close this loophole and level the playing field for domestic retailers.
HN commenters discuss the potential abuse of the de minimis threshold by Shein and Temu, allowing them to avoid import duties and taxes. Some argue that this gives these companies an unfair advantage over US businesses and hurts American jobs. Others point out that this "loophole" is not new, has existed for decades, and is used by many international retailers. Some also suggest the focus should be on simplifying the US tax code and reducing tariffs rather than targeting specific companies. The impact on consumer prices and potential benefits of lower prices are also debated, with some commenters suggesting that addressing the loophole could raise prices. There is skepticism about whether Congress will effectively close the loophole due to lobbying from various interests. Some also highlight the complexity of international trade and customs procedures.
Summary of Comments ( 0 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43752206
Hacker News users discussed the history of the Tontine Coffee House and its role as an early "stock exchange." Some highlighted the building's later use as a customs house, emphasizing the changing nature of New York's financial center. Commenters debated the practicality and fairness of tontine schemes, with some drawing parallels to modern investment practices. Several comments pointed out the importance of social connections and physical spaces in early financial markets, contrasting the face-to-face interactions of the Tontine with today's electronic exchanges. The building's architecture and location were also topics of discussion, with some users lamenting its demolition. Finally, the etymology of "tontine" and its usage in different contexts were briefly explored.
The Hacker News post titled "The Tontine Coffee-House (2018)" has a moderate number of comments, discussing various aspects related to the history of the Tontine Coffee House and its role in early American finance.
Several commenters delve into the mechanics and implications of tontines as an investment vehicle. One commenter highlights the inherent gambling aspect of tontines, where the last surviving members receive the accumulated benefits, leading to speculation about potential incentives for foul play. This comment sparks further discussion about the historical context and the likelihood of such occurrences. Another commenter points out the mathematical complexity of calculating the expected value of a tontine share, especially in the 18th century before sophisticated actuarial science.
Some comments focus on the historical significance of the Tontine Coffee House as a hub for merchants, underwriters, and brokers, foreshadowing the development of the New York Stock Exchange. One commenter draws parallels between the informal gatherings at the Tontine Coffee House and the later establishment of formalized exchanges, emphasizing the role of social networks and trust in early financial markets.
A few commenters express fascination with the historical details presented in the linked article, such as the architecture of the building and the social customs of the time. They discuss the role of coffee houses as centers of information exchange and social interaction in the 18th century.
There's also a thread discussing the etymology of the word "tontine" and its origins in 17th-century Italy. This leads to a brief discussion about similar financial instruments in other cultures and historical periods.
Finally, some comments offer further reading suggestions related to the history of finance, New York City, and the development of stock markets. These suggestions point to books and articles that explore the topics raised in the original article in greater depth.
While not a highly active discussion, the comments on the Hacker News post offer interesting insights and perspectives on the historical context and significance of the Tontine Coffee House. They expand on the article's content by exploring related themes, providing additional historical details, and suggesting further avenues for research.