Intel is part of a small number of companies that are strategically important for the US to keep posturing in front of China and the EU, like Boeing or SpaceX.

Those companies know the US government will never let them fail: even if they're driven to bankruptcy by the most stupid management, they'll get taxpayer's money - i.e. OUR money - in the form of subsidies to bail them out.

Therefore, to answer your question, they need $8bn in subsidy because they deliberatively placed themselves in a position to request money from us that they know will be granted.

Hell, if I knew however much money I spent, someone would always foot the bill if I ran out, I too would spend like no tomorrow in order to get more money for free. It's plain logic.

Because lobbyism (a.k.a. corruption).

Every two years the US votes for capitalists, then capitalist things happen, and people clutch their pearls as if this isn't precisely what they voted for.

One of the biggest pitfalls of buybacks is the piss-poor timing of them. You're doing good, flush with cash, and share prices are probably at a peak as a result. Shareholders would probably want to rake you over coals if you sat on cash and did nothing in order to weather a storm and perhaps do a buyback when the share prices are relatively undervalued, but you have fiduciary responsibility, so what do you do? Buy at the top and then get caught with your pants down when the shit hits the fan. Doing dumb shit to make shortsighted shareholders happy basically

They've been burning through multiple billions quarter over quarter during all those buybacks too. Sounds like poor leadership to me.

Half for buybacks and half for executives, lobbyist, and other corrupt programs.

Parasites got it good. We pay them on both ends and they still price gouge us

Because otherwise, all this money would be wasted on the dissolute like homeless people or children.

That is 4.34 billion for each year

Because MMMONEYYY!