KQED's Forum Should the U.S. Government Own Shares of Private Companies?
Aug 27, 2025
Louise Matsakis from Wired, Tad DeHaven of the Cato Institute, and Nils Gilman from the Berggruen Institute dive into the U.S. government's unprecedented 10% stake in Intel. They discuss the implications of this move likening it to China's economic model, raising concerns about government overreach and market principles. The conversation delves into broader shifts in capitalist ideologies and the potential long-term effects on national security and technological innovation. Listener perspectives highlight fears surrounding the unpredictability of industrial policy.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
CHIPS Act Repurposed Into Equity Demands
- The Trump administration repurposed CHIPS Act funding into equity demands like a 10% Intel stake.
- That shifts a grant-based industrial policy into direct government ownership without clear legal basis.
Different From Past Bailouts
- Historical precedents exist for U.S. government stakes during crises but Intel's case lacks a solvency crisis.
- The administration frames stakes as a step toward a U.S. sovereign-wealth-style portfolio of corporate holdings.
Transactional Power, Not Strategy
- Trump's approach is transactional rather than ideological, opening unpredictable new precedents.
- That unpredictability undermines consistent industrial policy and market planning.