If Kamala Harris were proposing that the federal government take ownership stakes in private companies, I can hazard a guess that Republicans would loudly oppose it. What’s going on with a party that has traditionally opposed government ownership of the means of production?
The Trump administration is in talks with the likes of Rigetti Computing (RGTI), IonQ (IONQ) and D-Wave Quantum (QBTS) to take equity stakes in them in exchange for federal funding, according to the Wall Street Journal.
Not to worry; Democrats could never conceive of the ridiculous idea of taxpayers receiving any ROI from the billions of dollars they give away annually.
Imagine if tier 2 Canada would have gotten a stake in Stellantis or any entities which had received big gov’t handouts for EV factories? It’s a long list of handouts, all for nothing.
Then, when the company folds, at least they’d have an ownership stake to sell.
In Canada, those funds seem to have been given out with no expectation of anything in return but “promises”
What if… the tier 2 gov’t of Canada had gotten a stake in the buildings where TorStar, Globe and Mail, CTV, are headquartered, and had received all those tax credits, so that when they all run out of money anyways, the gov’t could say, “look we took partial ownership in these capital buildings and toolings, which we’ll sell for something instead of nothing”
Just an example, I’m NOT advocating for gov’t to be investing in these companies within Canada, for all we know these buildings could be on First Nations lands and they’d never be able to action on any of the stakeholders…
Well … I keep hearing Pelosi and her ilk speaking of $T’s in new taxes as … “investments” … in America? I guess it’s time to actually treat them as investments, since we-the-taxpayers are providing the equity … and should receive a share of the profits from all those investments.
Kenji
By now you should have figured out that trillions of American taxpayer dollars, and borrowed funds, are “invested” in American politicians and their cronies.
Nazi Pelosi and Stacey Abrams as two examples.
This is a trojan horse for authoritarian government. Having those motivated by personal politics rather than those motivated by excelling the company is a recipe for disaster. The desire for government to buy stakes in businesses is driven by this and this alone. Governments that want to bolster corporations through investment to meet national goals are more than capable to exact guarantees as the time of issuing the loan(s).
100% no need to have a stake in anything.
Where are all the anti fascists against this?
Governments need to get out of the way and we’ll figure it out
A story that’s critical of the Trump administration on SDA? It’s been a while since I read Revelations, but I think that’s one of the signs of the apocalypse.
Ohhhhhhhhhhh Mommmaaaaaaaaa … Trump’s tariffs are gonna SINK the US and the world’s economy …. Ohhhhhhhhhh mommmaaaaaa …
Overall, 12% of the companies in the S&P 500 have reported actual results for Q3 2025 to date. Of these companies, 86% have reported actual EPS above estimates, which is above the 5-year average of 78% and above the 10-year average of 75%. In aggregate, companies are reporting earnings that are 5.9% above estimates, which is below the 5-year average of 8.4% and below the 10-year average of 7.0%.
Thank you for that hysterical reply.
Trump’s tariffs can be both good and bad for a US company. They can be good because the company has less competition from international trade. The company can boost prices and still boost sales, so long as the price boost is less than the tariff.
But they can be bad because (1) imported raw materials can get more expensive, (2) their customers can get tapped out from higher prices, and (3) other countries might implement retaliatory tariffs or restrictions, which can hurt the company’s exports.
It depends on what industry the company is in. Import-reliant and export-reliant companies tend to suffer. And it takes years to fully play out.
Aye, we’re all such mindless conformists here. Thank God we have Ratnuts to provide fearless independent thinking and unrestrained flatulence.
I agree. Rather than evaluating each Trump policy for its strengths and weakness, SDA tends to support absolutely everything he does, even when it breaks with traditional conservative thinking. Any objection — no matter how well argued — is labelled TDS.
Hopefully, this article is the start of a trend where they critically analyze rather than cheerlead.
Why are you still here? You clearly think you’re far, far superior to the rest of us knuckle-dragging rubes.
“Thinking I’m superior” apparently translates to “doesn’t always take the majority position.”
Somewhere along the way, I got into the habit of not looking at policies through a strictly partisan lens, but rather for what I actually thought of the policies. That this drove others to make lame insults didn’t bother me much.
You should try it. It can be liberating. But you’ll first have to give up blind idolization of Donald Trump or any politician. And you’ll have to develop the courage to disagree with people that you formerly sought approval of.
Allow me to point out, sir, that this did not drive me to lame insults, but to prancing, dancing, wonderfully graceful insults, whose elegance and beauty brightened the world.
Oh all right, I farted a bit, too. Who’ s going to point fingers here? Let him who is without flatulence hold the first nose!
Marmot, you small deadly animal 🙂 Trump, like everyone, does not have my automatic 100% support. Trump is good for Americans, and the world, because he was not an establishment candidate, showing it can be done. He dithers on foreign policy and is boxed in by the Neocons and other warmongers. His use of economics, AKA tariffs, as an imperial political weapon is misguided. On the domestic front, he’s having a lot of success. This policy of government investing in industry is proof he is not an ideologue, and that he doesn’t know history. He is fundamentally an emotional nationalist.
For me, Trump is very much a mixed bag. He stands to do a lot of good by securing the southern border and pressing for peace in the Middle East. But his broad tariffs, his health secretary, and his rather odd approach to the Russia-Ukraine war are all misguided, and could do immense damage.
Killer,
You had me until you mentioned RFK Jr. He is our best hope to dismantle the utterly corrupt U.S. food and health care systems. The FDA needs “experts” to evaluate medications and food safety guidelines, and it hires them from those industries. After rubber stamping whatever the big companies want, the experts go through the revolving door back to those same big companies.
RFK Jr. is prone to falling for fringe ideas. He has difficulty differentiating between solid science and dross. He’s even bought into the hoary old idea that vaccines can cause autism:
https://archive.org/details/deadly-immunity-by-robert-f.-kennedy-jr.
His skepticism towards vaccines — including MMR — might easily lead to significantly lower immunization rates, and that will produce countless deaths.
Killer,
I would just ask you to read this with an open mind:
https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/how-vaccine-brain-injuries-were-rebranded
The medical establishment maintains that all vaccines are “safe and effective.” Really? Go to your local pharmacy and buy an over-the-counter medication. Read the fine print, nothing is 100% safe. Let’s acknowledge that there is a risk to benefit ratio for everything, including vaccines.
I’ve read plenty of Midwestern Doctor already. He is, IMO, a crank. Here’s a recent article on him, and my opinion of it:
https://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2025/10/05/mothers-little-helper-5/
Same too with John Campbell, although he did make sense many years ago.
HE’S a crank? Marmot, have you ever wondered why people who own Model T’s keep grabbing you when they want to start their cars? There are stones that you should not be throwing.
In my previous career in the fashion industry, I used to design quantum shifts. Not sure I like the hang of this one, but that’s just me.
The government has no business being directly involved in business. Making game rules to ensure a level field is fine. Taking ownership is not.
A crown corporation goes from a revenue generator to a means to push policy.
Trump has already established his mercantilist bona fides so the move to merge the state with corporations is consistent with the end stage democracy of bankrupt welfare/warfare states.
Double tick, John.
Ottawa sold it 6% share of Air Canada in 2024 with about a 7% return in 3 years.
Petro Canada. No matter how much I look at this one I can’t tell if we won or lost. Being gov’t, and Maurice Strong, we probably lost.
I’m sure there is more, especially in Quebec, that have similar stories.
After being burned like that, I’m not surprised politicians don’t want actual ownership to come back and bite them.
What is going on? It’s very simple. Congress appropriated money to lend/give these companies. Trump cannot refuse to give it out but he can demand equity in return that’s what’s going on.
Hopefully it’s got something going on than say…
Solyndra
Or any other “green phantasma”.