> It is also not very smart to antagonize a world power that you also need for a lot of critical components, including lots of modern fabs.

That requires the ability to think and plan long term, which many recent US presidencies have lacked.

The electoral cycle has shifted presidential incentives towards the short-termism that quarterly financial reports have for publicly traded companies. It's about looking good in the short term, by any means necessary.

Electoral cycles have existed for millennia. The difference between back then until ~ 1980 (mind ya I wasn't born then, I'm referring to history books here) with the advent of Thatcherism was that politicians and entrepreneurs/companies alike had a sense of honor. Which means that regents, no matter if kingdoms or democratic governments, wanted to create a positive, long lasting image in history and companies actually respected their workers and paid them fair wages (and even if only so that their workers could afford the products). That resulted ultimately in the formation of the European Union and in what we Germans call "Soziale Marktwirtschaft".

Beginning with Thatcher and exploding after the UdSSR fall came neoliberalism: ruthless privatisations everywhere (telcos, railways, postal services to name the most horrid examples which more often than not turned into shitshows), the total gutting of social security networks (anything from unemployment insurance over healthcare to social/affordable housing), and the lowest of the low being pitted against each other to totally implode wages while the top level enjoyed ever more and more payouts. Many a company employed their own cleaning and building maintenance staff - now it's all outsourced to the cheapest bidder.

No wonder this has also reflected back into politics...