OK. But there would need to be ironclad assurances that the manufacturers would actually do any and all cleanup required. A liability fund, at least. Too many companies just leave town when something bad happens and the people and government are left to pick up the pieces. Palestine, OH is a good example.
I'll take the testimony of multi-trillion dollar tech company's confidence in Intel 18A over yours.
Forcing or persuading megacorps to give up some 20% to 50% of their profit for the greater good of the next generations would be a good start. Basically, hammer their greed.
Let’s do it one step at a time. Besides we merely bring back what we sold out to overseas countries that is semiconductor manufacturing.
Nah. Terrible idea. Environmental regulation exists for a reason, and many will go against it if rolling back means their life is threatened. Instead, we should introduce both incentives and heavy punishment so companies at least can slowly start to experiment with producing those materials and whatnot here while still giving citizens clean water and fresh air.
Yeah instead of flocking to the easiest course that can earn the most money, kids should probably study more diverse subjects like engineering and science, and contribute to that field. And with that, migrants with similar backgrounds can be slowed down too because domestic demands are met.
Cite your sources, I know many people that want to increase manufacturing in the US. Rolling back regulations does not automatically mean the environment would be destroyed. There are ways to ensure environmental protections without effectively banning working with certain materials. We used to manufacture lead-based items in this country but we cannot now because of regulations, there are many other examples of manufacturing items that are similar to this. If we follow your example we will eventually get to the point where we do not make anything here and that will be an economic disaster.
By that logic we should reintroduce asbestos as home building material also. Good performance but with deadly health risks. Maybe use mercury more widely too. And many other more harmful chemicals that we abandoned in the past.
Now you’re just being silly, I’ve no need to debate this topic because I have manufacturing data that proves my point. All you have is conjecture.
As long as the manufacturers clean up their messes as soon as they are made, I can agree somewhat. But history shows that, given the opportunity, they will simply leave town. So it's cheaper to pollute a 3rd world country and import the finished product.
Sure, just go look at the manufacturing data for the United States today and compare it to what it was in the past. The data is publicly available to everyone.
Only until there aren’t enough jobs here to earn the money to do this. Once that threshold is met there likely wont be enough capital to bring those jobs back. Then what do we do?
A lot of our regulations are poorly implemented or have roots in special interest. Rolling back regulations doesn’t always mean rolling back safety.
But it typically does. The community typically carries the cost of pollution rather than the polluter.
Does not mean it cannot be done properly. Doing nothing leads to only one outcome, and that is going to be a disaster beyond description.
Doing it properly is the outcome of good regulation. The last part of your comment is catastrophizing which does not help rational debate.
Using adequately descriptive words does not deter rational debate. Meaningful and well-rationed regulations are not necessarily a deterrent to manufacturing, however, there are many regulations currently on the books that are no well-rationed and have caused companies to more manufacturing to other countries, which does nothing for the eco-minded people in the world except let them live in bliss as they think they have stopped the problem whereas they have only transplanted it elsewhere.
Because TSMC has proven that they can deliver better products.
Numerous examples of this. Regulation exists for a reason.
