261
So basically American cars are 2x overpriced rn
Yes, and it's poor Americans who need a vehicle to buy groceries and get to work everyday who are getting shafted while the automakers rake in the profits. Not to mention the environmental costs of driving on fossil fuels.
Maybe we should get our politicians to invest in, say, mass transit. Seems pretty obvious
Why would they do that when they get bribes from automakers.
load more comments
(10 replies)
I’m not working in the conditions the Chinese have decided is ok. They can be poor and live in barracks at factories, I like free time and money.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Big 3 copium as usual.
Eventually they'll do what Japense OEMs did and open factories in the USA.
I mean, that's precisely the ideal case and goal of many tariffs.
Only I think they're already opening factories in Mexico. Which again isn't a terrible situation either.
Mexico
How about American companies just learn to compete? The same bullshit is why we can't get a fucking normal sized truck in this country.
How about American workers learn to work for the same wages and working conditions.
If you want companies to pay a living wage with strong unions and safe working conditions, then competition with other places that don't bother with those things becomes near impossible.
See: The factories that iPhone is built in
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
They aren't sweeping Chinese cars under the road here as much as they are sweeping an actually affordable, practical EV option that could easily win the mass market and shift the status quo away from ICE engine vehicles at scale.
Bigger problem is, that while blocking the Chinese options, they won't give us a similar option at that same affordable cost.
Ah, the free* market at work
load more comments
(3 replies)
Read as: The only way they can compete with Chinese vehicles is 100% tariff
Well yeah. The companies are state subsidized and a good bit of the tech is stolen from electric car companies in other countries that actually have to pay for R&D.
So Musk doesn't get any tax incentives and write offs?
load more comments
(2 replies)
that is the same myth that big pharma explains why Americans pay so much more for medicine.
https://newrepublic.com/article/153864/innovation-drug-price-myth
US automakers have expressed that they are fine economically making expensive cars for rich people. of course that is after 80 years of lobbying to under cut public transit and trains.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
i wouldnt hate this so much if america produced quality automobiles. but we dont. so watch people pay double for something that will last twice as long.
even at equal pricing, they just push out better quality than we can seem to muster
Cough Boeing Cough
Considering how many Boeing aircraft are out there operating every day and how very little we hear about issues I am not sure this is an effective example.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Not as if Chinese EV were any good though...
I've been reading reviews from EU and Australia. The initial quality has improved a lot.
Long term/long distance reliability is what will probably be the biggest issue.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(18 replies)
Great news after Tesla cancelled it's plans for an entry model. Green for me not for thee.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Blatantly anti-competitive practices. We don't have a free market in the US. Shit is expensive so the wealthy can continue to profit at record levels while citizens pay the price. Why try to compete when you can protect the wealthy and make your country suffer?
The CCP can artificially depress the value of their currency and subsidize their industries indefinitely. They are doing this on the backs of their workers, who should earn more for their labor. They are doing this because their own workers are too poor to provide sufficient domestic demand for their consumer goods, however, this strategy just makes their workers poorer, exacerbating the problem. Chinese exports should be used to make their economy self-sustaining, but they just perpetuate economic bubbles and malinvestment that cause economic stagnation. Neither domestic nor international commerce has never been free of interference or fair.
That's true and all but this decision is solely about oil barons and their fat fucking profits.
Its no coincidence that they are going after electric cars and solar panels. Chinese workers have had it rough for 30 years but green tech is where we draw the line and not literally everything else, who believes this?
Its not to protect the economy, it's not to protect the Chinese workers.
This is only about oil profits.
load more comments
(1 replies)
and subsidize their industries indefinitely
People keep saying this that are fully aware the US subsidizes its industries too. Yeah? They subsidize their electric vehicles? Fuckin good!
load more comments
(20 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
China doesn't have the worker protections that the US has, the same level of gov't support, nor the environmental rules that the US has. It's only anti-competitive if there is a level playing field.
load more comments
(19 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Free market for thee, but not for mee.
I don't actually mind the US protecting their economy from a predatory one that is more powerful - but I'd like USians to remember this when their politicians argue for war against 3rd world countries that want to protect their economies from the US.
Jesus Christ he's actually trying to lose this election.
load more comments
(7 replies)
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 10 May 2024
261 points (97.1% liked)
News
39346 readers
3389 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS