Skip to main content

Sound Advice: December 15, 2021

The U.S. Is Slipping Behind

In its early years, the semiconductor industry did not have many customers.  Few businesses in the 1950s could make use of the expensive new devices that allowed computers to function.  But one organization could: the federal government.

The first shipment from Fairchild Semiconductor – the company that helped create Silicon Valley – was for the computers inside the Air Force’s B-70 bomber.  The Minuteman missile soon needed semiconductors too, as did other Cold War weapons systems and NASA equipment.

Only the federal government tends to have the huge resources to make these investments.  After it does, private companies then use the fruits of these investments to develop innovative and profitable products, spurring economic growth and tax revenues that comfortably cover the cost of the original research.

The Defense Department built the original internet – and Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and others expanded it.  The National Institutes of Health funded laboratory experiments – and pharmaceutical companies created treatments based on them, including those for Covid-19.  There are similar stories in energy, automobiles, aviation, and other industries.

In recent decades, however, American investment in research and development (R&D) has lagged.  In 1964, U.S. federal spending on R&D reached a peak of 1.8% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).  In the decades since, the rate of those expenditures has been reduced by nearly two-thirds.

The U.S. now spends a smaller share of national output on research and development than many other countries, ranking seventh on this measure. As a percentage of GDP, our R&D outlays are about half of those of China, which is the leader.  China is notably ambitious in this area, essentially copying the American strategy for building a strong economy, even as the U.S. has abandoned this strategy.

In The Wall Street Journal this week, Graham Allison, a Harvard professor, and Eric Schmidt, the former C.E.O. of Google, wrote, “In each of the foundational technologies of the 21st century — artificial intelligence, semiconductors, 5G wireless, quantum information science, biotechnology, and green energy — China could soon be the global leader.”

The semiconductor industry is a particularly good case study.  U.S. companies like Fairchild and Texas Instruments initially dominated, followed in later decades by Intel.  But the U.S. semiconductor industry has fallen behind, now making only about 12% of the world’s semiconductors, down from 37% in 1990.

Right now, U.S. companies make none of the most sophisticated chips.  Taiwan, however, is one of the leaders with those chips, which means that a disruption there – hardly out of the question, given China’s aggressive posture – could disrupt the global economy.

In June, the Senate passed a bill that could substantially increase American R&D efforts.  The bill included outlays of almost $250 billion over five years, including $52 billion for semiconductor makers.  The main purpose of the bill is to keep the U.S. from falling behind China.

The bill has yet to pass the House, though it is long overdue. 

N. Russell Wayne, CFP®

Any questions?  Please contact me at nrwayne@soundasset.com


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sound Advice: January 3, 2025

2025 Market Forecasts: Stupidity Taken To An Extreme   If you know anything about stock market performance, you can only gag at the nonsense “esteemed forecasters” are now putting forth about the prospective path of stocks in the year ahead.   Our cousins in the UK would call this rubbish.   I would not be as kind. Leading the Ship of Fools is the forecast from the Chief Investment Strategist at Oppenheimer who is looking for a year-end 2025 level for the Standard & Poor’s Index of 7,100, a whopping 21% increase from the most recent standing.   Indeed, most of these folks are looking for double-digit gains.   Only two expect stocks to weaken. In the last 30 years, the market has risen by more than 20% only 15 times.   The exceptional span during that time was 1996-1999, which accounted for four of those jumps.   What followed in 2000 through 2002 was the polar opposite: 2000:      -9.1% 2001:     -11.9% ...

Sound Advice: January 15, 2025

Why investors shouldn't pay attention to Wall Street forecasts   Investors shouldn't pay attention to Wall Street forecasts for several compelling reasons: Poor accuracy Wall Street forecasts have a terrible track record of accuracy. Studies show that their predictions are often no better than random chance, with accuracy rates as low as 47%   Some prominent analysts even perform worse, with accuracy ratings as low as 35% Consistent overestimation Analysts consistently overestimate earnings growth, predicting 10-12%                 annual growth when the reality is closer to 6%.   This overoptimism can                 lead investors to make overly aggressive bets in the market. Inability to predict unpredictable events The stock market is influenced by numerous unpredictable factors, including geopolitical events, technological changes, and company-specific news.   Anal...

Sound Advice: October 12, 2022

More Pain Ahead? It’s been a difficult year for the investment markets, but tough times have happened before and they will certainly happen again.   Sometimes recoveries are relatively quick and sometimes a hefty dose of patience is required.   No two downdrafts are alike, but the net result is always a rebound to even higher levels than seen before. One of the most uncomfortable stretches over the last half century took place during the oil embargo days of the early and mid-1970s.   Market valuations fell to the high single digits, a level that was about half the historic average.   For investors, this was one of the great sales of all time.   Those who had the courage to get aboard reaped huge rewards. More recent pullbacks of note took place during the dot.com days of the turn of the millennium and the banking crisis of 2008-9.   The former period was marked by what appeared to be investors’ absolute indifference to longstanding measures of reasona...