<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>mattalex</author><text>The US could have required stock in Intel instead of taking nothing: Intel gets money, US gets influence over Intel. Just like it works everywhere else.</text><parent_chain><item><author>ChadNauseam</author><text>Are you suggesting the government buy Intel, or that they steal it from its current owners? You might have different opinions than I do about the morality of such a thing, but either way it would be disastrous as it would disincentivize all investment in things the US can steal.</text></item><item><author>op00to</author><text>Perhaps the government should simply nationalize Intel if they continue to do stock buybacks. There’s more knobs to turn than the free money faucet.</text></item><item><author>sudhirj</author><text>Intel didn&amp;#x27;t get a subsidy because they&amp;#x27;re poor, the subsidy exists because the US Government wants the company to do something (setup a fab on US soil) that is not necessarily in the shareholders best interest (cheaper to set up a fab elsewhere). The subsidy is the difference in both parties judge to be the cost of doing the expensive thing (that matches US strategic interests) vs the cheaper thing.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Intel Brags of $152B in Stock Buybacks. Why Does It Need an $8B Subsidy?</title><url>https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/intel-subsidy-chips-act-stock-buyback</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>tasuki</author><text>If they were to buy Intel for a fair price, why should that disincentivize investment?</text><parent_chain><item><author>ChadNauseam</author><text>Are you suggesting the government buy Intel, or that they steal it from its current owners? You might have different opinions than I do about the morality of such a thing, but either way it would be disastrous as it would disincentivize all investment in things the US can steal.</text></item><item><author>op00to</author><text>Perhaps the government should simply nationalize Intel if they continue to do stock buybacks. There’s more knobs to turn than the free money faucet.</text></item><item><author>sudhirj</author><text>Intel didn&amp;#x27;t get a subsidy because they&amp;#x27;re poor, the subsidy exists because the US Government wants the company to do something (setup a fab on US soil) that is not necessarily in the shareholders best interest (cheaper to set up a fab elsewhere). The subsidy is the difference in both parties judge to be the cost of doing the expensive thing (that matches US strategic interests) vs the cheaper thing.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Intel Brags of $152B in Stock Buybacks. Why Does It Need an $8B Subsidy?</title><url>https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/intel-subsidy-chips-act-stock-buyback</url></story>