https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-08-26/lutnick-suggests-us-looking-at-defense-industry-after-intel-deal

    US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick suggested the government is looking at the defense sector and other industries for potential stakes in companies after an unorthodox deal that saw the US obtain a 10% share in chipmaker Intel Corp.

    “Oh, there’s a monstrous discussion about defense,” Lutnick said Tuesday on CNBC when pressed on whether the administration was considering similar arrangements with companies that benefit from government policies, including in defense.

    Lutnick singled out Lockheed Martin Corp., claiming the company makes much of its revenue because of the US government. “They are basically an arm of the US government,” he said.

    “They make exquisite munitions,” Lutnick said, before asking: “what’s the economics of that?”

    “I’m going to leave that to my secretary of Defense and the deputy secretary of Defense. These guys are on it, and they’re thinking about it,” he added. “But I tell you what, there’s a lot of talking that needs to be had about how do we finance our munitions acquisitions?”

    Commerce Secretary Lutnick suggests the US will take equity stakes in defense companies after Intel deal (Lockheed Martin, Boeing, etc.)
    byu/Fidler_2K instocks



    Posted by Fidler_2K

    41 Comments

    1. The next Dem president should announce that since the GOP now agrees that government ownership is good, the US will take 51% stakes in every US bank, oil company, mining company, railroad, airline, car company, and defense contractor. Both publicly traded and private.

      Fuck this shit. Our press and the GOP are the biggest hypocrites in the country.

    2. Can anyone explain to me what the US taking 10% or whatever ownership in these companies does?

      From what I have read, they don’t have voting rights, aren’t on the board (maybe I’m wrong)

      But what is the benefit they are trying to get or what is the play here?

      Thanks in advance!

    3. Toolatethehero3 on

      Even with Trump I didn’t have the mass nationalization of American industry on the Bingo card. I did have rampant corruption so I guess this is an extension of that.

    4. Mountain-Detail-8213 on

      That’s why I decided not to buy my Boeing stock. I was going to buy. Got a feeling there’s going to be a lot of people around the world not willing to invest in America anymore. Banana republic of Trump and Republican Christians.

    5. Can we get off the high horse and just make money? Which defense companies? Ktos BBAI JOBY?

    6. Commerce secretary Lutnick was next door neighbors with Jeffrey Epstein and involved in his activities. Alex Jones even said so

    7. Man the republicans don’t seem to be anything like I remember. When Obama gave special treatment to Solindra it was all they could talk about and this is levels above special treatment

    8. Oh no! Nationalisation! Wait, but isn’t this suppose to be a party about small governments?

    9. Responsible_Ad_7995 on

      658 people were killed at Cantor Fitzgerald on 9/11. Nutlick was late to work and was spared. It’s amazing that with his second chance at life he chose to be a boot licking fascist piece of shit. Fuck him.

    10. thedeadcricket on

      Why are these clowns following China’s state model of government buying up shares of businesses, I thought the guardians of pedophiles were all about free market capitalism not government intervention…

    11. An unorthodox form of fascism that is now pulling in parts of socialism and communism (fascist corporatism)

    12. So everything is government funded now? It’s communism + fascism on steroids LOL the military complex is crazy

    13. BraveDevelopment253 on

      As long as the percentage ownership stays relatively low and the government doesn’t actually get involved in day to day planning operations like any other large shareholder this just seems like a hidden permanent tax on select corporations that will send more of their profits directly to the government at the expense of the existing shareholders and increase government revenue.  This seems like a massive can of worms from a conflict of interest standpoint though as the government will be incentivised to show favoritism to these companies (like giving them free loans and bailing them out which is unfair to their competitors) 

    Leave A Reply
    Share via