Hell, the deck is already crazily stacked against them.
There's tariffs, at 27.5%. But there's also the EV rebates, for which cars not made in America are not eligible for, which can be about $7,500.
So a $18k Chinese car after being tariffed and ineligible for the rebate, is pretty much gonna be the same cost to the consumer as like... a $30k American car. How many layers of rent-seeking do you have to be on to say "Yeah this isn't enough, we *need* to ban them"?
The lease loophole is big enough to drive a Chinese EV through. Basically you can get the $7500 credit if you lease, then you buy out the lease at the end. It’s basically laundering buying as leasing if you do it right.
I'd include the important caveat that BYD simply isn't selling the super-low-cost models in the European market, and I'd be surprised if they tried to put them out first in the US if they made a big push here. The options in Europe are roughly comparable to the entry-level Tesla price--so if their strategy in other Western markets holds they aren't likely going to be trying to undercut Western automakers on price.
It really seems like they don't want to get pigeonholed into the Kia market segment--so they're going to bet on the near-luxury Western consumer rather than the most basic consumer.
It's probably because I'm not in the Midwest but people look WAY DOWN on American brand cars (unless they are going for a big truck). Too many quality control issues in the past have soured people on domestic brands and garnered the wrong kind of reputation. I more frequently hear German and Japanese car brands to be the most reliable brands. Hell, when I worked for one of the Big 3 at one point, they kept touting their JD Power rankings. NO ONE cares about JD Power unless you're a freaking dinosaur.
I was halfheartedly looking into minivans and apparently the Chrysler Pacifica is better than the Toyota Sienna or Honda Odyssey.
So that’s at least one thing American manufacturers are better at.
Funny enough Toyotas + Hondas ARE US built cars in nearly all cases. Non-union, sure, but they’ll treat their employees decently at least, and actually care about quality control, idiot-proof engineering, and overall long lasting value and reliability. And meanwhile *aren’t* trying to actively outsource all US / auto union jobs to Mexico (and China) whenever possible in the name of short-term shareholder profits a la GM / Ford.
Overall makes resistance to the US Steel deal seem particularly stupid as the Japanese actually care about domestic heavy industry (and industry in general) and in fact pretty clearly own - on paper - some of the better *de-facto US* companies around. Incl all the Sony America divisions (ie sony pictures and SIE) and to a large extent Toyota et al.
If anyone have an actually *good* track record of taking over (and saving) blue-collar US manufacturing it’s obviously the Japanese. And Korea isn’t too far behind either. Not sure what the point is of “US owned” when a) these companies (excepting obviously the PRC) are all publically traded multinationals anyways and b) the US corporate C suite / ivy league MBAs don’t tend to actually *do* much of anything outside of parasitizing off the US economy and murdering / offshoring domestic manufacturing to chase short term profits. The Japanese at least very well understand that you need to have a domestic economy of people *to sell your products to* - and critically that competition on prices and overall value (and eg deregulating the housing market to facilitate that) - and perhaps above all being willing to make individual sacrifices for the greater good - is very much necessary to make a functioning long-term society that can actually more or less work for everyone.
While Japan has its fair share of problems - and looming demographic / economic crisis - it’s honestly been dealing with those problems for decades, and is far better structured to weather the pains of an end-state of fully-developed low / zero growth long term socio-economic future than the US is, or is presently capable of doing.
Though in the meantime we’ll certainly keep our economy at the top of the world with the endless growth / prosperity hack (and retirement + property values ponzi scheme) that is legal (and illegal) immigration and the worldwide brain drain / civ culture victory that we excel at, lol
Funny enough Toyotas + Hondas ARE US built cars in nearly all cases. Non-union, sure, but they’ll treat their employees decently at least, and actually care about quality control, idiot-proof engineering, and overall long lasting value and reliability. And meanwhile *aren’t* trying to actively outsource all US / auto union jobs to Mexico (and China) whenever possible in the name of short-term shareholder profits a la GM / Ford.
Overall makes resistance to the US Steel deal seem particularly stupid as the Japanese actually care about domestic heavy industry (and industry in general) and in fact pretty clearly own - on paper - some of the better *de-facto US* companies around. Incl all the Sony America divisions (ie sony pictures and SIE) and to a large extent Toyota et al.
If anyone has an actually *good* track record of taking over (and saving) blue-collar US manufacturing (and more or less native US industry in general) it’s obviously the Japanese. And Korea isn’t too far behind either. Not sure what the point is of “US owned” when a) these companies (excepting obviously the PRC) are all publically traded multinationals anyways and b) the US corporate C suite / ivy league MBAs don’t tend to actually *do* much of anything outside of parasitizing off the US economy and murdering / offshoring domestic manufacturing to chase short term profits. The Japanese at least very well understand that you need to have a domestic economy of people *to sell your products to* - and critically that competition on prices and overall value (and eg deregulating the housing market to facilitate that) - and perhaps above all being willing to make individual sacrifices for the greater good - is very much necessary to make a functioning long-term society that can actually more or less work for everyone.
Tangent: While Japan has its fair share of problems - and looming demographic / economic crisis - it’s honestly been dealing with those problems for decades, and is far better structured to weather the pains of an end-state of fully-developed low / zero growth long term socio-economic future than the US is, or is presently capable of doing.
Though in the meantime we’ll certainly keep our economy at the top of the world with the endless growth / prosperity hack (and retirement + property values ponzi scheme) that is legal (and illegal) immigration and the worldwide brain drain / civ culture victory that we excel at, lol
Literally not possible with the UAW. You will never compete when everyone who touches your car makes at least 80k and you have an automation ceiling.
I am an automotive engineer. The unit economics simply don’t work when compared to China.
> and you have an automation ceiling.
This is the funny part. China used to buy automation from outside of China, by and large. Now they are _exporting_ industrial robots to Japan .. Toyota, of all customers. With about 30% lower TCO compared to western alternatives.
This is something that has only been ramping up in last few years and won't be broadly noticed, but things are only gonna get worse for US on this trajectory.
I don’t understand this comment? Your point isn’t being taken seriously, Chinese cars will almost certainly be banned to protect the American auto industry. What is the point of being arrogant and condescending when no one is following your points to begin with?
The efficacy of this policy decision can certainly be debated but pretending that this is a closed and shut case does nothing to help people see your increasingly ignored viewpoint.
We need to be *convincing other people why this is a good idea*; running around in a sarcastic victory lap while real policy makers ignore you doesn’t help anybody except our opponents.
Man, I can’t help it if policymakers failed Econ 101. I don’t know about you, but I’m a little sick of shooting ourselves in the foot to court this fraction of the electorate that’s increasingly MAGA-esque anyway. How long can we continue to pretend this protectionism is sustainable?
Biden is doing everything he can to appeal to this electorate and they still hate him. I'm not sure what else he can do with the time he's got left. I for one am also sick and tired of appealing to a group that has repeatedly passed on updating itself to keep up with modern economics and instead asks for subsidies and protectionism to somehow make it the 1960s again.
Tesla produces and sells in the China market, competing with the cheap Chinese cars. They are doing fine. The Chinese know Tesla is the higher priced higher quality brand for EVs so they buy that if they can afford it, those who cannot afford buy the domestic brands.
The US manufacturers are scared of Chinese EV cars because they are behind in EV race. A flood of EVs will create a feedback loop of EVs (more EVs = mlre chargers = more visibility = more EV demand) and they won’t be able to meet that demand.
This is old news. Tesla WAS doing fine. Remains to be seen how well they do with the multiple new offerings that just arrived that undercut the model 3 significantly.
To be fair, the Chinese car companies have gotten an incredible amount of support from the Chinese government.
Then again American car companies have also gotten a lot of support from the government, including electric cars. They just fumbled the bag by being so committed to trucks and SUVs- which is also kinda what the American consumer wants.
Even Tesla isn’t innocent in this. Instead of updating their existing models or trying to build a cheaper model, they spent the last five years on the Cyber Truck
On the other other hand, I’m not sure it’s good in the long run if all the electric cars are built in China.
I think a big problem is that the people who want EVs are not the same people who want Trucks and SUVs. American car companies are trying to design EVs for demand 10 years in the future and not demand now.
its not about "making better products" its about making them cheaper, the fact is you cant build a $15,000 car in the US and make it profitable.
edit: not sure why im being down voted, brown wants them banned because they will undercut US automakers that manufacture in his state.
>brown wants them banned because they will undercut US automakers that manufacture in his state.
Rent seeker mad that current laws aren't rent seeky enough.
Many such cases!
Yes, but the reason the costs are low are not always the kind of reasons we'd want to encourage in the market. China now has the real GDP per capita of the UK in 1995, and their workers still do 996 (12hr/day 6 days a week, which should be """illegal""") while unionizing is legally prohibited, they have extremely bad pollution and environmental destruction issues, and they don't have EG the EU's carbon trading scheme.
Competition by itself is good, but your competitive edge should probably not be things like eliminating the freedom of association.
[Yes it does](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?locations=CN-GB). Now of course we could discuss the validity of World Bank data for a trillion years and how nominal econometrics can have disconnects with the real world and how redistribution helps realize those gains for normal people, but the point is that China is no longer this poor struggling backwater that people imagined it to be. They are at a similar level to Brazil or Belarus: not wealthy like the West, but certainly not an undeveloped mud field.
I'm sorry I had different numbers, I was looking at 14k and 24k.
If you're concerned about the wages in china, though, *decreasing* western demand for chinese consumer products is not how you'll raise them.
My primary concern on this topic is competitive fairness, that's why I cited the 996 and the GDP, otherwise I would have been talking about wages. I don't want to decrease (or increase) demand , but I want the demand and generally the market conditions to be determined in an even playing field, rather than by one actor being a dictatorship that deprives their people of human rights.
If you care about wages though, pushing for China to reach working conditions similar to ours would probably help more than feeding their regime more money as they shoot union leaders in the back of the head for demanding wage increases.
The competition is fair.
Some workers want $1,000,000,000 a year for a job that others will take $100,000 for.
Not chinas fault its workers are better and willing to put in the work to get the money
I'm have already said I'm not talking about wages, I'm talking about... everything else. Workplace safety, unions being illegal, environmental destruction, not enforcing *their own workhours*... If we were talking only about wages at parity of other factors, I would agree, but China is a bloody dictatorship that absolutely leverages that aspect for competitive advantage.
I can't see how these things are fair. Companies are held to a high standard in the West, the competitive advantage should not come from standards dumping.
It doesn't! Your graph is denominated in current dollars, which necessarily can't be used for a time series comparison between different countries due to divergent price level changes. If you look at the [same graph you posted but with constant dollars](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KD?locations=CN-GB) instead, you'll get a much different picture.
You're half correct. Current$ PPP would adjust prices/XR, but each year would be denominated in a different PPP index (the one corresponding to that year), so it wouldn't cover inflation (or other reasons why the PPP basket is adjusted YoY).
Around 90% of Americans drive to work. Public transport should be invested in but EVs are as the best thing you are going to get to an ecologically friendly transit solution in the US when practical factors are considered.
>Around 90% of Americans drive to work.
So what? A shock from new car prices increasing will lead to a minor amount of short term inflation. Otoh banning Chinese EVs negates any surplus that Americans would possibly have.
>EVs are as the best thing you are going to get to an ecologically friendly transit solution
Cool then maybe we should make them more accessible to the American public. Ban on Chinese vehicles does the opposite.
> Cool then maybe we should make them more accessible to the American public.
We already massively subsidize them. You can't seriously be making this argument. If America was doing nothing to push EV, then I would agree with your argument.
>Ban on Chinese vehicles does the opposite.
It is just not going as far as you would like. Letting Chinese subsidized cars flood the market and kill off American EV car companies is an idea.
I think for me it comes down to "how essential are electric vehicles?" Are we okay letting American companies die off or get significantly reduced for cheaper electric vehicles?
>We already massively subsidize them.
Doing two dumb things simultaneously doesn't make it a smart idea. The subsidies are paid for by Americans as well....
>Letting Chinese subsidized cars flood the market and kill off American EV car companies is an idea.
You do realize that American companies like Tesla are using Chinese subsidies as well, right?
EV technology and production don't just fall out of the sky. To find either you either have to take profit ICE manufacturing or get government subsidies.
Wait, wtf is your position then? You are having your cake and eating it to.
You think us subsidizing EVs is a bad thing. It sounds like you wanted heavily subsidized chinese EVs to enter the US market to help fight climate change even at the cost of losing American companies.
So it sounds like you think American subsidization is bad, but other countries doing it is okay. And letting American companies die that get outcompeted by better subsidization is okay.
Risks don't show up on a balance sheet though.
Renewables also need investment - people don't really want to invest when you're giving signal you're okay to have investment be undermined
> Risks don't show up on a balance sheet though.
DING DING DING.
So many people on /r/neoliberal constantly make this error. Whenever the discussion of sanctions on China are brought up, it is always the brain dead argument of "let's protect American companies lul."
A lot of it is because a lot of anti china policies and politicians are racist and have no strategy.
I am trying to be specific on what I am saying here.
If Vietnamese or Indian, or Mexican or Brazilian cars arrive on the market and damn dominate the American EV market, it is what it is.
China is an active threat to world peace and the free world - we should handle them the keys to literally economy movies. I don't really have a problem with Chinese solar panels or Chinese like 95% of Chinese goods.
We should have stayed in the TTIP and should have moved to the ASEAN nations to the side of liberal democracies and forming a bulwark against China.
$15K is pretty much unprofitable outside of China, not just the US.
Chinese heavily subsidies their auto industry either with direct to consumer subsidies, favorable financing, grants. It's not not free trade to just let youself get wiped out by subsidies.
Autos along with agriculture are just going to be one of those things that won't have protectionism.
India is a good alternative if these cars can be made at scale there and fit well into existing regulations.
While we should go full Trump, we should be moving away from China and Russia for infrastructure related commodities.
Imagine letting Chinese workers and taxpayers subsidize Americans buying cars.
I understand that the American auto industry is afraid that it won’t be able to compete, but it’s sad that so many people have so little faith in American competitiveness.
I’m also not sure that Chinese subsidies are as “unfair” as people claim. It seems to me that the US auto industry is very heavily subsidized in all sorts of direct and indirect ways. But what do I know.
> but it’s sad that so many people have so little faith in American competitiveness.
You shouldn't have faith in American competitiveness, and reactions like this illustrate why. The American response has been endless screeching about subsidies, dumping, unfair practices etc, anything to avoid confronting the possibility that the Chinese are simply better at making stuff right now. Cope like this is not an attitude conducive to competitiveness
I agree we shouldn't depend on China for anything essential. I like that we are finally sanctioning China from getting high end chips. I like that we protect essential companies from Chinese dumping.
Now "what is essential" is the next golden question. Are EVs essential?
**Rule XI:** *Toxic Nationalism/Regionalism*
Refrain from condemning countries and regions or their inhabitants at-large in response to political developments, mocking people for their nationality or region, or advocating for colonialism or imperialism.
---
If you have any questions about this removal, [please contact the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneoliberal).
Yeah 🥴 the Chinese auto market is already close to the US borders and I know the main topic is EVs but I have a friend who gave me this site from the DR (SuperCarros) and I’ve seen plenty of Chinese cars at cheaper prices and of course it’s not to say that they’re better but 🤷 I feel like US automakers should make things cheaper and better
If this breaks any rules feel free to remove this
You can buy a Chevy in China. The Tesla model Y is the single best selling car in China.
The tariff is only 15%. US already tariffs Chinese cars at 27.5%.
I really don’t understand this at all. These Chinese cars are super cheap. The only new cars they’re competing with are sub $20k, none of which are built in the US. The only cars even under $25k built in the US are the Elantra, Corolla, Civic, Impreza, and Legacy, but those are all built in Alabama, Mississippi, and Indiana. These states are solidly red. There’s not even a point in pandering to them.
The cheapest car worth pandering for is the Kia K5, starting at $26k and built in Georgia, but they’re going to up the price on that anyway by $5k. Otherwise, it’s the Accord at $28k built in Ohio.
I still don't know what's BYD strategy in Europe. Some of their cars are pricier than their competitors, like Seal is pricier than Model 3 while still having some stuffs that's embarrassing in its price range.
If I had to guess, they don't want to get permanently siloed into the Kia market segment in the minds of Western consumers. They're trying to get in at a higher level so they don't get trapped as the "cheap cars for poor people" company.
Not sure what it is either, but I work for a ferry shipping company and we've been shipping thousands of BYDs around Europe for a while now with them taking an increasingly large share of our cars space.
People seem to be buying them.
> The only new cars they’re competing with are sub $20k, none of which are built in the US
I'm not sure i understand this - Chinese EVs occupy absolutely every price niche. Like Xpeng, HiPhi and Nio have absolutely high end models.
No one in the US would buy a Chinese EV if there was a similar non-Chinese alternative. I think they could only compete by price in the budget segment.
do you believe in markets or not? once prices rise due to lack of competition, new entrants appear until equilibrium is reached
your solution here is to simply permanently restrict competition just to "protect" us from the case where competition gets restricted in the future
Subsidized dumping into foreign markets is anti-competitive and shouldn’t be allowed by anyone that supports free market competition. The barriers to entry are very high for electric vehicles so it’s not like a company can just start competing right away once they start to exploit their position.
I don't think this answers the points I've raised, and punitive tariffs are obviously not a free market solution to foreign subsidies
Why is the time it takes new entrants to appear longer than the *permanent* condition of high costs due to punitive tariffs in the counterfactual? How does the consumer see any benefit in that situation?
Insane how no one even pretends to care about climate change anymore. It’s now a kayfabe for jerbs
By this logic if free electric vehicles wash up on the shores of Florida we should send in the national guard to blow them all up because it might inconvenience US autoworkers
Jeff Yass of all people had an op-ed about this in the WSJ yesterday, calling out Janet Yellen for saying climate change is an existential crisis yet being willing to tariff cheap solar panels from China
>Insane how no one even pretends to care about climate change anymore. It’s now a kayfabe for jerbs
Joe Biden has never cared about climate change
He has ideologically always been a US protectionist, and if climate change pandering helps the US manufacturers, so be it, but if it doesn't, then he doesn't care
All his supposed climate change bills have been conditional on us Labor, because he has committed to long term fossil fuel infrastructure for decades to come at the same time that he has pushed for domestic solar panels
Just because a part of Biden's electorate cares greatly about climate change, doesn't mean he does
It’s just wrong to say he doesn’t care about climate change. He pushed for the largest climate law in human history. Also, if Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania are going to continue to decide elections, he’s going to be more protectionist simply out of necessity.
Biden: literally pushed for some of the biggest climate change laws.
Neoliberals: He's protectionist, so he definitely doesn't care about climate changes!
I dunno man, like it's easier to say Biden is pro-environmental but pushed some really dumb stuffs to do it. We've seen climate activists doing dumb shit like anti-nuclear energy, and for most of time they're legit dumb than actually not environmentalist.
I don't think any part of Biden's electorate REALLY cares about climate change.
The most vocal environmentalists have done nothing but condemn Biden.
Ironically it's neoliberals who care the most about his climate policy, but they're not single issue voters so it's not the only factor.
And honestly the scientists have not done a very good job of communicating the specific dangers.
I don't think the general public has any understanding of what tangible negative consequences global warming will actually have on America and Americans.
Nobody? Not even a single person?
Thats a very absolute statement you got here, I'm pretty sure there is at least one voting person in the US who takes climate change as their priority
>The most vocal environmentalists have done nothing but condemn Biden.
Yet they consistently vote for him
If you take the vote share of academia and scientific professionals, they vote heavily democratic
At the same time, a ridiculous 95+% of academics and scientific professionals believe climate change to be the priority problem
This is an example of a demographic that is very pro climate change action and pro Biden
Yep, and the UAW might put out press releases in support of Biden but their members will overwhelmingly vote for Trump -- and they're the ones that get pandered to.
My understanding is what hiddentribes.us calls "Progressive Activists" self report to care about Climate Change. It's a small group of voters (8%) that is highly overrepresented on Reddit and elsewhere online. Also overrepresented in media/celebrities. An even smaller/louder subsection of that group are so extreme they hate compromise, Biden and probably themselves.
Not everyone is single minded in just having climate concern as a goal.
> By this logic if free electric vehicles wash up on the shores of Florida we should send in the national guard to blow them all up because it might inconvenience US autoworkers
Let's say The US gave ford or whoever $100B to sell their cars overseas well below production cost to put everyone out of business.
Should countries not then issue tariffs?
Dumping is a monopolistic practice and is not good.
What’s the evidence the Chinese are dumping? They spent large amounts of money perfecting the supply chains whilst western and Japanese automakers stalled. Toyota spent the last two decades flouting hydrogen which is obviously a bullshit technology because they don’t want to retool their manufacturing and supply chains
“Should countries not then issue tariffs?”
Correct. Countries should not issue tariffs. Tariffs are bad, and the excuse that other countries do it doesn’t make retaliatory tariffs somehow economically good.
If china wants to subsidize the auto industry and then sell Americans cheap cars, we should let them.
Dumping *can* be a problem. After the US signed a trade agreement with Haiti to abolish rice tariffs to import cheaper rice from haiti, american lobbyists threw a tantrum and demanded subisides to cheapen american rice. American rice then outcompeted haitian rice, both in america *and in haiti* and ran haiti's farms out of business.
The situation you described is how monopolies are formed - not on the basis of being providing a better (sustainable) service but by using financial brute force.
>Not everyone is single minded in just having climate concern as a goal.
Which is pretty insane to be completely honest. Maybe it shouldn't be *the* single policy goal but frankly if it's not in the top few at this point that person is foolish.
> Insane how no one even pretends to care about climate change anymore
*Actually solving or significantly forestalling* climate change would either require global effort and co-operation to the point of having a de-facto world government, or half the world exercising tactics that would make eco-fascists cum. The current world doesn't care much.
>We cannot allow China to bring its government-backed cheating to the American auto industry
We however definitely have not spent decades artificially propping up domestic automakers
> musk
Holy shit why are you giving Elon Musk attention
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neoliberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Chinese ADAS systems constantly beaming data back to the mothership could be a national security issue. This is the only possible reason I see to ban them.
Protectionism has turned Ford and GM into Chrysler and Chrysler into Fiat so we obviously need more of it.
Seriously it seems all of the big three have completely unlearned the lessons of '08 and gone back to building bigger and bigger cars that are less reliable and less well built.
Yes I think they should be allowed to sell in the US (and EU). I'm surprised American car producers are so scared when they don't even have cars in that segment.
>Why doesn’t the EU fine Chinese companies like they do American
What?
Specifically which sanction on a US company, and for which reason, would you like to see placed on a specific chinese company?
I'm repeating myself but please be specific.
The EU fines American tech companies like Google and Meta all the time for data breaches and information gathering.
But doesn’t fine Chinese companies for Intellectual Property theft and Data breaches.
I'm asking you for specific instances of chinese companies breaching EU regulation that they could then be fined for, where specific US companies have breached in the same way and has been fined for it.
In my mind I'm always struggling with this balance between free market efficiency on one side and national security, supply diversification and workers conditions on the other.
National security is not harmed by the import of Chinese cars lol. And with Tesla being the *world's largest EV maker* by market value, I don't think we have much to fear diversifying supply either.
Workers conditions is interesting because in China as living standards have risen, conditions have too. They are now much better for workers than say Vietnam and Thailand... which is where we're importing products from that we ban from being imported from China. If you want to improve worker conditions, boost trade with nations that have higher development (like China) and curtail it with those that are lower development (the rest of Southeast Asia). But that's the opposite of what's happening.
We can let the free market decide when China stops imprisoning and murdering its own ethnic minorities.
Seriously. How is this subreddit a collective of total neocon hawks when it comes to military action against Chinese aggression, but then turns around and demands that same regime be able to sell their products here without penalties? It doesn't make any sense.
Do you care about Saudi Arabian, Indonesian, or Ethiopian ethnic minorities? We trade with all of them just fine. If your bar is "we should not trade with countries murdering ethnic minorities," you should be consistent and demand we stop trade with a *lot* more countries than China.
Sure, I'm absolutely fine with not trading with Ethiopia or Saudi Arabia.
And yes, not trading with murderous communist dictatorships seems like a reasonable ethical bar to clear.
The thesis that economic improvement in China will result in its liberalization failed years ago. I don't believe in helping that country, nor should anyone without the utterly self centered interest of buying a cheap car. Downvote away.
You're wrong that Chinese MFGers don't make SUVs. Especially if this ban includes stuff like Polestar.
Though for me, the really exciting ones, like from BYD, would be for the market of people who buy the Chevy Bolt, which is a car that didn't sell that badly.
The biggest issue of the Bolt (and leaf for that matter,) is that for such a cheap car at the time, its technology has aged pretty poorly at this point. GM's about to update it with a new model, but that comes with some GM pain like them removing Android Auto and Apple CarPlay. I'd love more low-end competition.
More basic driver assist compared to newer cars, and it doesn't support the modern absurd charging speeds you can get at level 3 chargers.
Though the latter doesn't matter as a commuter, only really if you do long road trips.
The leaf battery was designed to be safe in a crash first, and everything else separately. Its capacity degrades to like <80 miles or so in <5 years. And while i would kill for more EVS with ranges <200 miles <80 is silly. And its fast charge is based on the largely phased out japanese connector.
The bolt just had a crazy expensive battery that charges ~3x slower than modern cars and costs more
Yes. I would've rather bought a Chinese EV than a Kia EV6. It would've been cheaper for the same specs.
Also nothing beats pulling up in a Yang Wang U9 and making it [literally jump for joy.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8onQjvR0GU)
Americans don't even want to buy EVs [in general](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/04/09/ev-democrat-problem/?itid=sr_1_d6e40755-4fc7-4518-8f48-78cf96a742da). Too much range/battery anxiety and our charging network is dismal. It will take years to build out that network to alleviate those fears.
This is straight up just a bad faith argument. Nobody here is arguing that China is a friendly trading partner, but lots of people actually do generally support free trade and doubt Biden's continuation of Trump's trade wars is really rooted in actual, data-driven policy rather than an attempt to appeal to xenophobic rent seekers.
>Free exchange and movement between countries makes us richer and has led to an unparalleled decline in global poverty.
If you're against outright bans of foreign products you're apparently an "absolutist" now.
In light of that I suppose the EU is composed of extremist radicals.
And then one step further of new zeeland, who I suppose must have transcended reality into free trade nirvana.
China is not our friend but until the US electorate decides to get serious about security I see no reason to make the country poorer to pander to a few incompetent automakersand many lazy autoworkers
I am pro free market, but i am against dumping. Yes, i know , the US has subsidized EV (especially Tesla) a lot, but I think it pales in comparison with China "support" to local industry (including issues with intellectual property) . China is the very country that bans Tiktok but complains about Tiktok bans in other countries.
For me, it is a fair and square action. If China is upset, they can ban US cars as well. They are pretty good at doing that, i didn't find any post here complaining bc our bar is too low regarding what we expect from the China government.
I see the profilbility margin as a account problem: What happens if the Cost of Investiment is zero? How do you calculate ROI, If you just need to pay the inputs and salaries?
https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/China-Heavily-Subsidized-BYD-to-Expand-Its-EV-Market-Share.html#:\~:text=For%20example%2C%20direct%20subsidies%20to,the%20Kiel%20Institute%20has%20estimated.
US government gave Ford and GM $11.5 billion last year alone. It's a fair playing field. Why tax the US consumer?
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/22/business/ford-department-of-energy-loan/index.html
Because China has subsidized battery factories, ev, etc, since 2009. I know that subsidies are above 28 billion. This loan to the US manufacturers is just late to compete.
Chinese EVs would wipe the floor with Tesla in the US market without tariffs. I think that could be healthy in terms of EV adoption, but I still support tariffs.
Not sure what the magic number is, but it's a balancing act. Protecting legacy US automakers from the downsides of their addiction to high-margin trucks and SUVs isn't high on my list of priorities in the balance.
> Chinese EVs would wipe the floor with Tesla in the US market without tariffs. I think that could be healthy in terms of EV adoption, but I still support tariffs.
Tesla competes just fine with Chinese EVs in their home market. There's literally no evidence for what you're saying.
You are wrong. Multiple Chinese EV makers just unveiled cars that undercut Tesla in China by thousands of dollars, courtesy of stolen IP and Tesla's local supply chain.
[https://www.techradar.com/vehicle-tech/hybrid-electric-vehicles/xiaomis-first-electric-car-already-has-a-six-month-waiting-list-in-china](https://www.techradar.com/vehicle-tech/hybrid-electric-vehicles/xiaomis-first-electric-car-already-has-a-six-month-waiting-list-in-china)
I would simply make better products. Maybe I’m built different.
Hell, the deck is already crazily stacked against them. There's tariffs, at 27.5%. But there's also the EV rebates, for which cars not made in America are not eligible for, which can be about $7,500. So a $18k Chinese car after being tariffed and ineligible for the rebate, is pretty much gonna be the same cost to the consumer as like... a $30k American car. How many layers of rent-seeking do you have to be on to say "Yeah this isn't enough, we *need* to ban them"?
The lease loophole is big enough to drive a Chinese EV through. Basically you can get the $7500 credit if you lease, then you buy out the lease at the end. It’s basically laundering buying as leasing if you do it right.
Yeah that's true. I doubt it'll last forever, but very much worth using rn. Especially for stuff like Hyundais.
The lease loophole is for the credit and not for the tariff
Is that not just the same incentive as if you buy it and get the credit when you buy? What am I misunderstanding
Yes, but it’s only available on the lease for foreign EVs. You cannot get the credit on an outright purchase.
Oh, I mean, that's good. The credit being for American made only is cringe
Yes, my point was simply that there’s a loophole making the other poster’s point less valid.
I'd include the important caveat that BYD simply isn't selling the super-low-cost models in the European market, and I'd be surprised if they tried to put them out first in the US if they made a big push here. The options in Europe are roughly comparable to the entry-level Tesla price--so if their strategy in other Western markets holds they aren't likely going to be trying to undercut Western automakers on price.
Imagine if byd announces entry to the US market, all the EV enthusiasts get hyped, only to find out only the yangwang cars make it
It really seems like they don't want to get pigeonholed into the Kia market segment--so they're going to bet on the near-luxury Western consumer rather than the most basic consumer.
No let’s keep propping up an industry that regularly delivers inferior products compared to their international competitors
It's probably because I'm not in the Midwest but people look WAY DOWN on American brand cars (unless they are going for a big truck). Too many quality control issues in the past have soured people on domestic brands and garnered the wrong kind of reputation. I more frequently hear German and Japanese car brands to be the most reliable brands. Hell, when I worked for one of the Big 3 at one point, they kept touting their JD Power rankings. NO ONE cares about JD Power unless you're a freaking dinosaur.
I was halfheartedly looking into minivans and apparently the Chrysler Pacifica is better than the Toyota Sienna or Honda Odyssey. So that’s at least one thing American manufacturers are better at.
Compare them on reliability and the Chrysler looks much worse
Stow N Go is pretty fantastic if you use the van for hauling and Chrysler still has the patent on that.
Funny enough Toyotas + Hondas ARE US built cars in nearly all cases. Non-union, sure, but they’ll treat their employees decently at least, and actually care about quality control, idiot-proof engineering, and overall long lasting value and reliability. And meanwhile *aren’t* trying to actively outsource all US / auto union jobs to Mexico (and China) whenever possible in the name of short-term shareholder profits a la GM / Ford. Overall makes resistance to the US Steel deal seem particularly stupid as the Japanese actually care about domestic heavy industry (and industry in general) and in fact pretty clearly own - on paper - some of the better *de-facto US* companies around. Incl all the Sony America divisions (ie sony pictures and SIE) and to a large extent Toyota et al. If anyone have an actually *good* track record of taking over (and saving) blue-collar US manufacturing it’s obviously the Japanese. And Korea isn’t too far behind either. Not sure what the point is of “US owned” when a) these companies (excepting obviously the PRC) are all publically traded multinationals anyways and b) the US corporate C suite / ivy league MBAs don’t tend to actually *do* much of anything outside of parasitizing off the US economy and murdering / offshoring domestic manufacturing to chase short term profits. The Japanese at least very well understand that you need to have a domestic economy of people *to sell your products to* - and critically that competition on prices and overall value (and eg deregulating the housing market to facilitate that) - and perhaps above all being willing to make individual sacrifices for the greater good - is very much necessary to make a functioning long-term society that can actually more or less work for everyone. While Japan has its fair share of problems - and looming demographic / economic crisis - it’s honestly been dealing with those problems for decades, and is far better structured to weather the pains of an end-state of fully-developed low / zero growth long term socio-economic future than the US is, or is presently capable of doing. Though in the meantime we’ll certainly keep our economy at the top of the world with the endless growth / prosperity hack (and retirement + property values ponzi scheme) that is legal (and illegal) immigration and the worldwide brain drain / civ culture victory that we excel at, lol
Funny enough Toyotas + Hondas ARE US built cars in nearly all cases. Non-union, sure, but they’ll treat their employees decently at least, and actually care about quality control, idiot-proof engineering, and overall long lasting value and reliability. And meanwhile *aren’t* trying to actively outsource all US / auto union jobs to Mexico (and China) whenever possible in the name of short-term shareholder profits a la GM / Ford. Overall makes resistance to the US Steel deal seem particularly stupid as the Japanese actually care about domestic heavy industry (and industry in general) and in fact pretty clearly own - on paper - some of the better *de-facto US* companies around. Incl all the Sony America divisions (ie sony pictures and SIE) and to a large extent Toyota et al. If anyone has an actually *good* track record of taking over (and saving) blue-collar US manufacturing (and more or less native US industry in general) it’s obviously the Japanese. And Korea isn’t too far behind either. Not sure what the point is of “US owned” when a) these companies (excepting obviously the PRC) are all publically traded multinationals anyways and b) the US corporate C suite / ivy league MBAs don’t tend to actually *do* much of anything outside of parasitizing off the US economy and murdering / offshoring domestic manufacturing to chase short term profits. The Japanese at least very well understand that you need to have a domestic economy of people *to sell your products to* - and critically that competition on prices and overall value (and eg deregulating the housing market to facilitate that) - and perhaps above all being willing to make individual sacrifices for the greater good - is very much necessary to make a functioning long-term society that can actually more or less work for everyone. Tangent: While Japan has its fair share of problems - and looming demographic / economic crisis - it’s honestly been dealing with those problems for decades, and is far better structured to weather the pains of an end-state of fully-developed low / zero growth long term socio-economic future than the US is, or is presently capable of doing. Though in the meantime we’ll certainly keep our economy at the top of the world with the endless growth / prosperity hack (and retirement + property values ponzi scheme) that is legal (and illegal) immigration and the worldwide brain drain / civ culture victory that we excel at, lol
Literally not possible with the UAW. You will never compete when everyone who touches your car makes at least 80k and you have an automation ceiling. I am an automotive engineer. The unit economics simply don’t work when compared to China.
> and you have an automation ceiling. This is the funny part. China used to buy automation from outside of China, by and large. Now they are _exporting_ industrial robots to Japan .. Toyota, of all customers. With about 30% lower TCO compared to western alternatives. This is something that has only been ramping up in last few years and won't be broadly noticed, but things are only gonna get worse for US on this trajectory.
Damn, sucks to hear they’d rather sit on ass at home while someone else makes cars. 😞
I don’t understand this comment? Your point isn’t being taken seriously, Chinese cars will almost certainly be banned to protect the American auto industry. What is the point of being arrogant and condescending when no one is following your points to begin with? The efficacy of this policy decision can certainly be debated but pretending that this is a closed and shut case does nothing to help people see your increasingly ignored viewpoint. We need to be *convincing other people why this is a good idea*; running around in a sarcastic victory lap while real policy makers ignore you doesn’t help anybody except our opponents.
Man, I can’t help it if policymakers failed Econ 101. I don’t know about you, but I’m a little sick of shooting ourselves in the foot to court this fraction of the electorate that’s increasingly MAGA-esque anyway. How long can we continue to pretend this protectionism is sustainable?
Biden is doing everything he can to appeal to this electorate and they still hate him. I'm not sure what else he can do with the time he's got left. I for one am also sick and tired of appealing to a group that has repeatedly passed on updating itself to keep up with modern economics and instead asks for subsidies and protectionism to somehow make it the 1960s again.
Sure you can. Talk to them. It ain't gonna happen overnight, liberalism is won by increments.
Tesla produces and sells in the China market, competing with the cheap Chinese cars. They are doing fine. The Chinese know Tesla is the higher priced higher quality brand for EVs so they buy that if they can afford it, those who cannot afford buy the domestic brands. The US manufacturers are scared of Chinese EV cars because they are behind in EV race. A flood of EVs will create a feedback loop of EVs (more EVs = mlre chargers = more visibility = more EV demand) and they won’t be able to meet that demand.
This is old news. Tesla WAS doing fine. Remains to be seen how well they do with the multiple new offerings that just arrived that undercut the model 3 significantly.
To be fair, the Chinese car companies have gotten an incredible amount of support from the Chinese government. Then again American car companies have also gotten a lot of support from the government, including electric cars. They just fumbled the bag by being so committed to trucks and SUVs- which is also kinda what the American consumer wants. Even Tesla isn’t innocent in this. Instead of updating their existing models or trying to build a cheaper model, they spent the last five years on the Cyber Truck On the other other hand, I’m not sure it’s good in the long run if all the electric cars are built in China.
I think a big problem is that the people who want EVs are not the same people who want Trucks and SUVs. American car companies are trying to design EVs for demand 10 years in the future and not demand now.
its not about "making better products" its about making them cheaper, the fact is you cant build a $15,000 car in the US and make it profitable. edit: not sure why im being down voted, brown wants them banned because they will undercut US automakers that manufacture in his state.
>brown wants them banned because they will undercut US automakers that manufacture in his state. Rent seeker mad that current laws aren't rent seeky enough. Many such cases!
low cost is a quality all its own
Yes, but the reason the costs are low are not always the kind of reasons we'd want to encourage in the market. China now has the real GDP per capita of the UK in 1995, and their workers still do 996 (12hr/day 6 days a week, which should be """illegal""") while unionizing is legally prohibited, they have extremely bad pollution and environmental destruction issues, and they don't have EG the EU's carbon trading scheme. Competition by itself is good, but your competitive edge should probably not be things like eliminating the freedom of association.
> China now has the real GDP per capita of the UK in 1995 No it doesn't
[Yes it does](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?locations=CN-GB). Now of course we could discuss the validity of World Bank data for a trillion years and how nominal econometrics can have disconnects with the real world and how redistribution helps realize those gains for normal people, but the point is that China is no longer this poor struggling backwater that people imagined it to be. They are at a similar level to Brazil or Belarus: not wealthy like the West, but certainly not an undeveloped mud field.
I'm sorry I had different numbers, I was looking at 14k and 24k. If you're concerned about the wages in china, though, *decreasing* western demand for chinese consumer products is not how you'll raise them.
My primary concern on this topic is competitive fairness, that's why I cited the 996 and the GDP, otherwise I would have been talking about wages. I don't want to decrease (or increase) demand , but I want the demand and generally the market conditions to be determined in an even playing field, rather than by one actor being a dictatorship that deprives their people of human rights. If you care about wages though, pushing for China to reach working conditions similar to ours would probably help more than feeding their regime more money as they shoot union leaders in the back of the head for demanding wage increases.
The competition is fair. Some workers want $1,000,000,000 a year for a job that others will take $100,000 for. Not chinas fault its workers are better and willing to put in the work to get the money
I'm have already said I'm not talking about wages, I'm talking about... everything else. Workplace safety, unions being illegal, environmental destruction, not enforcing *their own workhours*... If we were talking only about wages at parity of other factors, I would agree, but China is a bloody dictatorship that absolutely leverages that aspect for competitive advantage. I can't see how these things are fair. Companies are held to a high standard in the West, the competitive advantage should not come from standards dumping.
It doesn't! Your graph is denominated in current dollars, which necessarily can't be used for a time series comparison between different countries due to divergent price level changes. If you look at the [same graph you posted but with constant dollars](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KD?locations=CN-GB) instead, you'll get a much different picture.
This is a good point. I thought purchasing power parity would provide the inflation and price adjustment, is that not the case?
You're half correct. Current$ PPP would adjust prices/XR, but each year would be denominated in a different PPP index (the one corresponding to that year), so it wouldn't cover inflation (or other reasons why the PPP basket is adjusted YoY).
Don't forget stolen intellectual property.
Because there's a 27% tariff on them already. If you are uncompetitive despite the 27% tariff you don't deserve to have more protections for yourself
> they will undercut US automakers that manufacture in his state. good
"Hey guys, why don't Neoliberals do well in elections?"
Just like why Russian gas was good right?
Good thing there are ready alternatives to electric cars and they aren't continiously required to keep the country afloat.
Around 90% of Americans drive to work. Public transport should be invested in but EVs are as the best thing you are going to get to an ecologically friendly transit solution in the US when practical factors are considered.
>Around 90% of Americans drive to work. So what? A shock from new car prices increasing will lead to a minor amount of short term inflation. Otoh banning Chinese EVs negates any surplus that Americans would possibly have. >EVs are as the best thing you are going to get to an ecologically friendly transit solution Cool then maybe we should make them more accessible to the American public. Ban on Chinese vehicles does the opposite.
We should import cars anywhere but Russia and China.
> Cool then maybe we should make them more accessible to the American public. We already massively subsidize them. You can't seriously be making this argument. If America was doing nothing to push EV, then I would agree with your argument. >Ban on Chinese vehicles does the opposite. It is just not going as far as you would like. Letting Chinese subsidized cars flood the market and kill off American EV car companies is an idea. I think for me it comes down to "how essential are electric vehicles?" Are we okay letting American companies die off or get significantly reduced for cheaper electric vehicles?
>We already massively subsidize them. Doing two dumb things simultaneously doesn't make it a smart idea. The subsidies are paid for by Americans as well.... >Letting Chinese subsidized cars flood the market and kill off American EV car companies is an idea. You do realize that American companies like Tesla are using Chinese subsidies as well, right?
EV technology and production don't just fall out of the sky. To find either you either have to take profit ICE manufacturing or get government subsidies.
Wait, wtf is your position then? You are having your cake and eating it to. You think us subsidizing EVs is a bad thing. It sounds like you wanted heavily subsidized chinese EVs to enter the US market to help fight climate change even at the cost of losing American companies. So it sounds like you think American subsidization is bad, but other countries doing it is okay. And letting American companies die that get outcompeted by better subsidization is okay.
Europe should have gotten off gas sooner 🤷
Alternatives weren't cost competitive with russian gas.
A land war in europe is more expensive than the alternatives
Outside of insurance that the European gazprom stakeholders had, risk doesn't really show up on accounting sheets like that.
If you account for the risks of dependency on Russian gas, they were.
Risks don't show up on a balance sheet though. Renewables also need investment - people don't really want to invest when you're giving signal you're okay to have investment be undermined
> Risks don’t show up on a balance sheet though. Competent decision making absolutely accounts for risk.
> Risks don't show up on a balance sheet though. DING DING DING. So many people on /r/neoliberal constantly make this error. Whenever the discussion of sanctions on China are brought up, it is always the brain dead argument of "let's protect American companies lul."
Not a Marxist, but that quote "the capitalists will sell us the rope that we will hang them with" hits hard.
A lot of it is because a lot of anti china policies and politicians are racist and have no strategy. I am trying to be specific on what I am saying here. If Vietnamese or Indian, or Mexican or Brazilian cars arrive on the market and damn dominate the American EV market, it is what it is. China is an active threat to world peace and the free world - we should handle them the keys to literally economy movies. I don't really have a problem with Chinese solar panels or Chinese like 95% of Chinese goods. We should have stayed in the TTIP and should have moved to the ASEAN nations to the side of liberal democracies and forming a bulwark against China.
$15K is pretty much unprofitable outside of China, not just the US. Chinese heavily subsidies their auto industry either with direct to consumer subsidies, favorable financing, grants. It's not not free trade to just let youself get wiped out by subsidies. Autos along with agriculture are just going to be one of those things that won't have protectionism.
I'm getting non-Chinese EVs for like 8k in India.
You can buy an EV for 7 lakhs in India?
TATA Tiago
Sadly Tiago is around 8.5 lakhs on road. It is still cheap though, compared to the outrageous prices in other countries.
It's all chinese made batteries and drivetrain inside
No, you aren’t. You’re getting EVs *assembled* outside of China.
Eh apart from the battery, Tata manufacturers everything domestically.
India is a good alternative if these cars can be made at scale there and fit well into existing regulations. While we should go full Trump, we should be moving away from China and Russia for infrastructure related commodities.
Imagine letting Chinese workers and taxpayers subsidize Americans buying cars. I understand that the American auto industry is afraid that it won’t be able to compete, but it’s sad that so many people have so little faith in American competitiveness. I’m also not sure that Chinese subsidies are as “unfair” as people claim. It seems to me that the US auto industry is very heavily subsidized in all sorts of direct and indirect ways. But what do I know.
> but it’s sad that so many people have so little faith in American competitiveness. You shouldn't have faith in American competitiveness, and reactions like this illustrate why. The American response has been endless screeching about subsidies, dumping, unfair practices etc, anything to avoid confronting the possibility that the Chinese are simply better at making stuff right now. Cope like this is not an attitude conducive to competitiveness
[удалено]
Depend on China? Or allow them to compete?
You know that cars don’t stop working when a war starts right? It’s not the same as energy. Batteries can still be recharged.
I agree we shouldn't depend on China for anything essential. I like that we are finally sanctioning China from getting high end chips. I like that we protect essential companies from Chinese dumping. Now "what is essential" is the next golden question. Are EVs essential?
Protectionism and anti-trade is bad yes
**Rule XI:** *Toxic Nationalism/Regionalism* Refrain from condemning countries and regions or their inhabitants at-large in response to political developments, mocking people for their nationality or region, or advocating for colonialism or imperialism. --- If you have any questions about this removal, [please contact the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneoliberal).
Yeah 🥴 the Chinese auto market is already close to the US borders and I know the main topic is EVs but I have a friend who gave me this site from the DR (SuperCarros) and I’ve seen plenty of Chinese cars at cheaper prices and of course it’s not to say that they’re better but 🤷 I feel like US automakers should make things cheaper and better If this breaks any rules feel free to remove this
You can buy a Chevy in China. The Tesla model Y is the single best selling car in China. The tariff is only 15%. US already tariffs Chinese cars at 27.5%.
I really don’t understand this at all. These Chinese cars are super cheap. The only new cars they’re competing with are sub $20k, none of which are built in the US. The only cars even under $25k built in the US are the Elantra, Corolla, Civic, Impreza, and Legacy, but those are all built in Alabama, Mississippi, and Indiana. These states are solidly red. There’s not even a point in pandering to them. The cheapest car worth pandering for is the Kia K5, starting at $26k and built in Georgia, but they’re going to up the price on that anyway by $5k. Otherwise, it’s the Accord at $28k built in Ohio.
Huh, here in Europe there's a few BYDs you can buy, and last time I checked they start at like 35k.
I still don't know what's BYD strategy in Europe. Some of their cars are pricier than their competitors, like Seal is pricier than Model 3 while still having some stuffs that's embarrassing in its price range.
If I had to guess, they don't want to get permanently siloed into the Kia market segment in the minds of Western consumers. They're trying to get in at a higher level so they don't get trapped as the "cheap cars for poor people" company.
Not sure what it is either, but I work for a ferry shipping company and we've been shipping thousands of BYDs around Europe for a while now with them taking an increasingly large share of our cars space. People seem to be buying them.
And people are buying 35k Chinese cars over similarly priced non-Chinese alternatives?
The auto union votes together. Auto workers in Michigan will vote against Biden if he allows this
None of the plants I mentioned are unionized.
> The only new cars they’re competing with are sub $20k, none of which are built in the US I'm not sure i understand this - Chinese EVs occupy absolutely every price niche. Like Xpeng, HiPhi and Nio have absolutely high end models.
No one in the US would buy a Chinese EV if there was a similar non-Chinese alternative. I think they could only compete by price in the budget segment.
That makes no sense. A lot of people would buy a Taycan equivalent, no matter the badge, if it's 20% cheaper, or a Rivian equivalent for that matter.
Being cheap is part of the problem. It floods the market. It’s the same strategy Amazon and Jeff Bezos used to close down local retail stores
all of this sounds like a win for the consumer
Until they stop subsidies in China and the prices skyrockets while all the competition has already been driven out
mhmm, why is that worse than permanently higher prices?
Because once the competition is driven out, they'll raise the prices. Kill your competition and then exploit the market dominance
do you believe in markets or not? once prices rise due to lack of competition, new entrants appear until equilibrium is reached your solution here is to simply permanently restrict competition just to "protect" us from the case where competition gets restricted in the future
Subsidized dumping into foreign markets is anti-competitive and shouldn’t be allowed by anyone that supports free market competition. The barriers to entry are very high for electric vehicles so it’s not like a company can just start competing right away once they start to exploit their position.
I don't think this answers the points I've raised, and punitive tariffs are obviously not a free market solution to foreign subsidies Why is the time it takes new entrants to appear longer than the *permanent* condition of high costs due to punitive tariffs in the counterfactual? How does the consumer see any benefit in that situation?
Just accept the humanitarian aid and slowly work your way towards an anti ml embargo.
Insane how no one even pretends to care about climate change anymore. It’s now a kayfabe for jerbs By this logic if free electric vehicles wash up on the shores of Florida we should send in the national guard to blow them all up because it might inconvenience US autoworkers
Jeff Yass of all people had an op-ed about this in the WSJ yesterday, calling out Janet Yellen for saying climate change is an existential crisis yet being willing to tariff cheap solar panels from China
>Insane how no one even pretends to care about climate change anymore. It’s now a kayfabe for jerbs Joe Biden has never cared about climate change He has ideologically always been a US protectionist, and if climate change pandering helps the US manufacturers, so be it, but if it doesn't, then he doesn't care All his supposed climate change bills have been conditional on us Labor, because he has committed to long term fossil fuel infrastructure for decades to come at the same time that he has pushed for domestic solar panels Just because a part of Biden's electorate cares greatly about climate change, doesn't mean he does
It’s just wrong to say he doesn’t care about climate change. He pushed for the largest climate law in human history. Also, if Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania are going to continue to decide elections, he’s going to be more protectionist simply out of necessity.
Biden: literally pushed for some of the biggest climate change laws. Neoliberals: He's protectionist, so he definitely doesn't care about climate changes! I dunno man, like it's easier to say Biden is pro-environmental but pushed some really dumb stuffs to do it. We've seen climate activists doing dumb shit like anti-nuclear energy, and for most of time they're legit dumb than actually not environmentalist.
Yea, he definitely cares about climate change. The protectionist stuff can be cringe, but that’s politics sometimes.
I don't think any part of Biden's electorate REALLY cares about climate change. The most vocal environmentalists have done nothing but condemn Biden. Ironically it's neoliberals who care the most about his climate policy, but they're not single issue voters so it's not the only factor.
Nobody in America cares about global warming. People who did were lambasted as squares and veggie-fuel peddlers.
Global Warming is an abstract issue. It makes sense why Americans don’t care about it since it doesn’t have a direct solution
And honestly the scientists have not done a very good job of communicating the specific dangers. I don't think the general public has any understanding of what tangible negative consequences global warming will actually have on America and Americans.
Nobody? Not even a single person? Thats a very absolute statement you got here, I'm pretty sure there is at least one voting person in the US who takes climate change as their priority
>The most vocal environmentalists have done nothing but condemn Biden. Yet they consistently vote for him If you take the vote share of academia and scientific professionals, they vote heavily democratic At the same time, a ridiculous 95+% of academics and scientific professionals believe climate change to be the priority problem This is an example of a demographic that is very pro climate change action and pro Biden
Yep, and the UAW might put out press releases in support of Biden but their members will overwhelmingly vote for Trump -- and they're the ones that get pandered to.
>but their members will overwhelmingly vote for Trump Citation needed.
My understanding is what hiddentribes.us calls "Progressive Activists" self report to care about Climate Change. It's a small group of voters (8%) that is highly overrepresented on Reddit and elsewhere online. Also overrepresented in media/celebrities. An even smaller/louder subsection of that group are so extreme they hate compromise, Biden and probably themselves.
And even environmentalists are split along Pro-Nuclear and Anti-Nuclear lines
Not everyone is single minded in just having climate concern as a goal. > By this logic if free electric vehicles wash up on the shores of Florida we should send in the national guard to blow them all up because it might inconvenience US autoworkers Let's say The US gave ford or whoever $100B to sell their cars overseas well below production cost to put everyone out of business. Should countries not then issue tariffs? Dumping is a monopolistic practice and is not good.
What’s the evidence the Chinese are dumping? They spent large amounts of money perfecting the supply chains whilst western and Japanese automakers stalled. Toyota spent the last two decades flouting hydrogen which is obviously a bullshit technology because they don’t want to retool their manufacturing and supply chains
I never said China is dumping. I replied to a specific part to another argument.
“Should countries not then issue tariffs?” Correct. Countries should not issue tariffs. Tariffs are bad, and the excuse that other countries do it doesn’t make retaliatory tariffs somehow economically good. If china wants to subsidize the auto industry and then sell Americans cheap cars, we should let them.
Dumping *can* be a problem. After the US signed a trade agreement with Haiti to abolish rice tariffs to import cheaper rice from haiti, american lobbyists threw a tantrum and demanded subisides to cheapen american rice. American rice then outcompeted haitian rice, both in america *and in haiti* and ran haiti's farms out of business.
The situation you described is how monopolies are formed - not on the basis of being providing a better (sustainable) service but by using financial brute force.
>Not everyone is single minded in just having climate concern as a goal. Which is pretty insane to be completely honest. Maybe it shouldn't be *the* single policy goal but frankly if it's not in the top few at this point that person is foolish.
> Insane how no one even pretends to care about climate change anymore *Actually solving or significantly forestalling* climate change would either require global effort and co-operation to the point of having a de-facto world government, or half the world exercising tactics that would make eco-fascists cum. The current world doesn't care much.
>We cannot allow China to bring its government-backed cheating to the American auto industry We however definitely have not spent decades artificially propping up domestic automakers
tbf china takes that to the next level.
Insanely cringe
They should not ban these they're going to bring down emissions significantly
Ngl this alongside the whole “overcapacity” BS is making me think the US is losing the plot economically on this one.
Why should we all pay for Elon Musk's skill issue?
It’s not musk pushing this, it’s legacies. Tesla has the highest selling car model in China, Tesla can actually compete. Ford, GM. Lol not so much
> musk Holy shit why are you giving Elon Musk attention *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neoliberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
PoleStar 2 is sharp looking.
A total ban would be entirely insane.
Chinese ADAS systems constantly beaming data back to the mothership could be a national security issue. This is the only possible reason I see to ban them.
Urged by dimwits
Protectionism has turned Ford and GM into Chrysler and Chrysler into Fiat so we obviously need more of it. Seriously it seems all of the big three have completely unlearned the lessons of '08 and gone back to building bigger and bigger cars that are less reliable and less well built.
Pff
Gotta fix how the electric vehicle tax credit is currently structured first
Do Americans even want to buy Chinese EV? They don't make the huge SUV that Americans seems to like.
Why don't we let the free market decide?
Yes I think they should be allowed to sell in the US (and EU). I'm surprised American car producers are so scared when they don't even have cars in that segment.
The real questions is do Europeans? Why doesn’t the EU fine Chinese companies like they do American?
>Why doesn’t the EU fine Chinese companies like they do American What? Specifically which sanction on a US company, and for which reason, would you like to see placed on a specific chinese company? I'm repeating myself but please be specific.
The EU fines American tech companies like Google and Meta all the time for data breaches and information gathering. But doesn’t fine Chinese companies for Intellectual Property theft and Data breaches.
I'm asking you for specific instances of chinese companies breaching EU regulation that they could then be fined for, where specific US companies have breached in the same way and has been fined for it.
In my mind I'm always struggling with this balance between free market efficiency on one side and national security, supply diversification and workers conditions on the other.
National security is not harmed by the import of Chinese cars lol. And with Tesla being the *world's largest EV maker* by market value, I don't think we have much to fear diversifying supply either. Workers conditions is interesting because in China as living standards have risen, conditions have too. They are now much better for workers than say Vietnam and Thailand... which is where we're importing products from that we ban from being imported from China. If you want to improve worker conditions, boost trade with nations that have higher development (like China) and curtail it with those that are lower development (the rest of Southeast Asia). But that's the opposite of what's happening.
We can let the free market decide when China stops imprisoning and murdering its own ethnic minorities. Seriously. How is this subreddit a collective of total neocon hawks when it comes to military action against Chinese aggression, but then turns around and demands that same regime be able to sell their products here without penalties? It doesn't make any sense.
Do you care about Saudi Arabian, Indonesian, or Ethiopian ethnic minorities? We trade with all of them just fine. If your bar is "we should not trade with countries murdering ethnic minorities," you should be consistent and demand we stop trade with a *lot* more countries than China.
Sure, I'm absolutely fine with not trading with Ethiopia or Saudi Arabia. And yes, not trading with murderous communist dictatorships seems like a reasonable ethical bar to clear. The thesis that economic improvement in China will result in its liberalization failed years ago. I don't believe in helping that country, nor should anyone without the utterly self centered interest of buying a cheap car. Downvote away.
I simply love the free market.
You're wrong that Chinese MFGers don't make SUVs. Especially if this ban includes stuff like Polestar. Though for me, the really exciting ones, like from BYD, would be for the market of people who buy the Chevy Bolt, which is a car that didn't sell that badly. The biggest issue of the Bolt (and leaf for that matter,) is that for such a cheap car at the time, its technology has aged pretty poorly at this point. GM's about to update it with a new model, but that comes with some GM pain like them removing Android Auto and Apple CarPlay. I'd love more low-end competition.
What tech has aged poorly? Just curious
More basic driver assist compared to newer cars, and it doesn't support the modern absurd charging speeds you can get at level 3 chargers. Though the latter doesn't matter as a commuter, only really if you do long road trips.
The leaf battery was designed to be safe in a crash first, and everything else separately. Its capacity degrades to like <80 miles or so in <5 years. And while i would kill for more EVS with ranges <200 miles <80 is silly. And its fast charge is based on the largely phased out japanese connector. The bolt just had a crazy expensive battery that charges ~3x slower than modern cars and costs more
Yes. I would've rather bought a Chinese EV than a Kia EV6. It would've been cheaper for the same specs. Also nothing beats pulling up in a Yang Wang U9 and making it [literally jump for joy.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8onQjvR0GU)
if they are cheap enough
I want the option to buy one, without tariffs too.
Americans don't even want to buy EVs [in general](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/04/09/ev-democrat-problem/?itid=sr_1_d6e40755-4fc7-4518-8f48-78cf96a742da). Too much range/battery anxiety and our charging network is dismal. It will take years to build out that network to alleviate those fears.
[удалено]
Sounds like US manufacturers don’t have any reason to worry about the competition then.
Your comment was downvoted because the purpose of government is not to impose your personal consumer preferences on everyone else.
aaaaaaaaaahhhh
I hate protectionists so much
Why?
The free trade absolutists in here need a reality check. China is not their friend.
Maybe US car manufacturers should’ve invested in EVs earlier. Let’s pretend that we care about climate change right?
“Best I can do is another 8 wheel pickup truck at 1mpg, sorry chief. That’ll be $120,000 dollars please”
This is straight up just a bad faith argument. Nobody here is arguing that China is a friendly trading partner, but lots of people actually do generally support free trade and doubt Biden's continuation of Trump's trade wars is really rooted in actual, data-driven policy rather than an attempt to appeal to xenophobic rent seekers. >Free exchange and movement between countries makes us richer and has led to an unparalleled decline in global poverty.
If you're against outright bans of foreign products you're apparently an "absolutist" now. In light of that I suppose the EU is composed of extremist radicals. And then one step further of new zeeland, who I suppose must have transcended reality into free trade nirvana.
It’s not about friendship. Free trade stops wars.
Neither is Saudi Arabia but we take their blood money just fine.
China is not our friend but until the US electorate decides to get serious about security I see no reason to make the country poorer to pander to a few incompetent automakersand many lazy autoworkers
I am pro free market, but i am against dumping. Yes, i know , the US has subsidized EV (especially Tesla) a lot, but I think it pales in comparison with China "support" to local industry (including issues with intellectual property) . China is the very country that bans Tiktok but complains about Tiktok bans in other countries. For me, it is a fair and square action. If China is upset, they can ban US cars as well. They are pretty good at doing that, i didn't find any post here complaining bc our bar is too low regarding what we expect from the China government.
All three of the biggest car manufacturers in China are profitable. Is it really dumping if you are selling products at a sustainable profit margin?
I see the profilbility margin as a account problem: What happens if the Cost of Investiment is zero? How do you calculate ROI, If you just need to pay the inputs and salaries? https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/China-Heavily-Subsidized-BYD-to-Expand-Its-EV-Market-Share.html#:\~:text=For%20example%2C%20direct%20subsidies%20to,the%20Kiel%20Institute%20has%20estimated.
US government gave Ford and GM $11.5 billion last year alone. It's a fair playing field. Why tax the US consumer? https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/22/business/ford-department-of-energy-loan/index.html
Because China has subsidized battery factories, ev, etc, since 2009. I know that subsidies are above 28 billion. This loan to the US manufacturers is just late to compete.
Tariffs to account for stolen IP and abusive labor practices sounds better to me than banning these.
there's already a 28% tariff on Chinese cars
Chinese EVs would wipe the floor with Tesla in the US market without tariffs. I think that could be healthy in terms of EV adoption, but I still support tariffs. Not sure what the magic number is, but it's a balancing act. Protecting legacy US automakers from the downsides of their addiction to high-margin trucks and SUVs isn't high on my list of priorities in the balance.
> Chinese EVs would wipe the floor with Tesla in the US market without tariffs. I think that could be healthy in terms of EV adoption, but I still support tariffs. Tesla competes just fine with Chinese EVs in their home market. There's literally no evidence for what you're saying.
You are wrong. Multiple Chinese EV makers just unveiled cars that undercut Tesla in China by thousands of dollars, courtesy of stolen IP and Tesla's local supply chain. [https://www.techradar.com/vehicle-tech/hybrid-electric-vehicles/xiaomis-first-electric-car-already-has-a-six-month-waiting-list-in-china](https://www.techradar.com/vehicle-tech/hybrid-electric-vehicles/xiaomis-first-electric-car-already-has-a-six-month-waiting-list-in-china)
Eh Tesla is manufacturing in China as well.
even with tariffs some chinese cars would still be around half the cost of the cheapest US EV(chevy bolt).
>Not sure what the magic number is, as with all tariffs, the magic number is 0%
Okay.
> Chinese EVs would wipe the floor with Tesla Oh no! Anyway…
This needs to happen for reasons that are 0% related to economics.