[lenkite]

> It’s not a “tax” on the rest of us in any sense. There’s just a lot of demand everywhere.

Curious on whether you will still hold your stance if OpenAI gets a taxpayer bailout. Even disregarding a bailout, they are already lobbying hard for tax credit expansion.

[jaredklewis]

A government bailout of OpenAI would be a regressive redistribution of wealth to some of the least needy people in all of society, which is a horrendously poor use of government funds. But that has no bearing on the fact that calling high DRAM prices induced by high demand a “tax” stretches the meaning of the word beyond all recognition.

There are many horrible things in the world and we don’t need to label them all as a “tax.” If we use words in an imprecise way, it obfuscates the truth.

[lenkite]

Please note that OpenAI Partners and suppliers (Oracle, CoreWeave, SoftBank-linked entities) have taken on significant debt to fund infrastructure for OpenAI - around ~$100 billion reported in late 2025 alone.

Projections show $14-20 billion in losses for OpenAI expected just in 2026.

The chances that someone is not going to ask for a debt write-off approaches zero as the years go. OpenAI already began testing the waters since late last year. Senator Warren has already raised alarms about potential indirect taxpayer exposure when the "AI bubble" bursts.

When that happens - and it is all but guaranteed to happen - it will amount to a horrendous tax, rendering everything you’ve said about 'imprecise words obfuscating the truth' complete hogwash.