• credo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      33
      ·
      7 months ago

      To that end, this means we would need to lower standards, use some forced labor, and increase taxes to increase subsidies in order to compete.

      Republicans would shoot down the subsidies.

      • Eldritch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        44
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        No it literally wouldn’t. It’s absolutely possible to produce smaller lightweight vehicles with the exact same standards. But unfortunately we’ve all been pushed towards larger vehicles. Simply because they make more money on them.

        • ozymandias117@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          35
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          The push towards large vehicles was due to the fact that they used a truck chassis, and were exempt from safety and emissions requirements of a “car”

        • andrewth09@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Unfortunately producing a smaller affordable car for the average person would fall under “lower standards” 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        We already use slave labor in the guise of prisoners. How low do we need to go?

  • credo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    7 months ago

    Then China shouldn’t subsidize its manufacturers’ exports while increasing the burden for foreign companies to compete internally. If anyone thinks China cornering the global EV market is a good long term plan, they are naive.

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      I don’t see how they’re going to pass the safety regulations here and in the EU. A ton of their ICE vehicles never made it here because they’re dangerously designed and built.

      • kalleboo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        The Volvo EX30 is based on a Geely platform, made in China, and does well in the EU (won several Car of the Year awards).

        MG (SAIC/Roewe) also has no trouble selling in the EU.

        Chinese manufacturers can make regulatory-conforming cars when the market demands it of them. If the market wants cheap and doesn’t demand safety, they can do that too.

        • themurphy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Then the cheap EV’s doesn’t matter if they are not legal.

          And the Volvo was not based on Geely. It was the other way around. They bought Volvo for this purpose exactly.

          But I hope they will make better EV’s for the world. EV’s are generally just better cars, and it’s a clear road to less noise and toxic pollution.

        • SupraMario@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          That’s not %100, the EX30 is still engineered and developed in Switzerland and pretty much everything MG wise, was and still, is developed in the UK…yes both are owned by Chinese companies, but it doesn’t mean the products are solely Chinese. You are correct they can build cars that are designed to conform to western markets with much stricter regulations, but I don’t think they’re going to do so without significant input from branches in these countries.

    • Bartsbigbugbag@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      China charges nearly double for its EVs outside of the Chinese market. They tend to do what most companies do, charge the highest price that people will still pay. China domestically is the most competitive market in the world, so they have $10,000 high quality EVs, but they don’t have to do that elsewhere and so they don’t.

  • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    China is becoming an increasingly unreliable trade partner. Preventing them from completely taking over a segment is prudent.

    • potatopotato@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yes, but there’s already a steep tariff, it would be nice to let them light a small fire under the us automakers so they make better products for us, instead were kinda just letting them be evil and lazy.

  • MrPloppy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    7 months ago

    “We want expensive American EVs that most people can’t afford, not cheap Chinese ones…”

    • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      7 months ago

      China is subsidizing EV production and selling cars below cost. Allowing them to be sold in the US would kill the domestic EV market. How is that better for Americans?

      • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        7 months ago

        Americans get cheaper EVs and the legacy auto industry gets taught a valuable lesson as companies who refused to modernize go bankrupt.

        • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          7 months ago

          Americans get cheaper EVs…

          For a few years, until the American automakers go bankrupt, as you said, then the Chinese automakers increase prices 10x.

          …and the legacy auto industry gets taught a valuable lesson as companies who refused to modernize go bankrupt.

          What a valuable lesson, get subsidized by an authoritarian government so that you can offer vehicles below cost. Also be sure to add spyware for the aforementioned authoritarian government.

          Do you even understand what below cost means? No amount of modernization will counteract it.

          • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            until the American automakers go bankrupt, as you said, then the Chinese automakers increase prices 10x.

            Americans can also buy EVs from countries other than China. America can also subsidise internal EV production.

            My point is that we shouldn’t give a fuck about petrol loving manufacturers.

            What a valuable lesson.

            Respond to user demand and environmental pressure.

            Don’t arrogantly assume your polluting product will remain market leader.

            Don’t build ever bigger vehicles just to avoid particular regulations.

            Do you even understand what below cost means?

            Yes. Would you like some oil industry case studies?

            No amount of modernization will counteract it.

            Have you heard of R&D investment, continual process improvement and economies of scale?

            • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              9
              ·
              7 months ago

              You’re literally just talking to yourself, ignoring any mention of selling below cost, which is the biggest issue, with spyware being a close 2nd.

              • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                7 months ago

                You’re literally just talking to yourself,

                They responded

                ignoring any mention of selling below cost, which is the biggest issue,

                Adressed twice.

                • Suggesting subsidies should be given to American EV manufacturers

                • Investing to lower costs.

                with spyware being a close 2nd.

                You think US products won’t have spyware?

                • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  They responded

                  You’re saying “they”, but it’s you. And no you didn’t, repeating what you said before isn’t addressing the issues.

                  Adressed twice.

                  Never addressed at all, you pivoted to the oil industry. You didn’t address the subsidies from China or the unfair trade practices.

                  America will not subsidize to that level, if they could, and no amount of innovation is going to combat subsidization or the unfair trade practices.

                  According to a Bloomberg article, China will sell EVs at under $10,000, undercutting the price of the average American EV by $50,000. Are you seriously arguing that “investment to lower cost” will reduce the cost by 85-90%? That’s simply a ludicrous assertion.

                  You think US products won’t have spyware?

                  I don’t think that collecting anonymized usage data, is the same as unlimited spying going back to an authoritarian government. So no, absolutely nothing comparable.

              • Bartsbigbugbag@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                7 months ago

                Tell me you know nothing about Chinese EVs without saying you know nothing about Chinese EVs.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            Did we lose our industry when the Japanese auto manufacturers entered our market? When the Koreans did?

            What’s different this time?

          • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            For a few years

            Yeah cause car dependency is a completely unsustainable scam that’s literally destroying the planet.

            get subsidized by an authoritarian government

            Is it really so much better to by subsidized by an colonial/imperial government (that’s also authoritarian)?

            Do you even understand what below cost means?

            Yes. It’s an ideological term that promotes imaginary numbers over social reality.

      • yogurt@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        They aren’t exporting them below cost, that’s why they want to export. Inside China every company tried to start an EV division because they heard Apple was doing it and assumed it must be a good idea. Now the market is topped out and the biggest companies are trying to price the smaller ones out of business (which still isn’t below manufacturing cost because China regulates that and is nervous about having tons of cars from bankrupt companies on the road). They export with a huge profit margin to make up for the domestic price war.

      • letsgo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Also by claiming “developing nation”, which is up to the nation to decide for themselves instead of having someone else decide for them, the planet’s second largest economy gets to claim WTO rules that the recipient (country) pays delivery. That’s why you can buy something from China for $1.50 and yet it costs $150 to send it back if it doesn’t work.

  • ZetaLightning94@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    7 months ago

    With how china keeps implanting everything with spyware, I agree to keep them away from the heavy tech incorporated cars. Really wish we could transition away from using chinese shit

    • Hildegarde@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      All auto manufacturers put spyware in their cars now. This isn’t a china problem, this is an everyone problem. We need anti-spyware laws that apply to everyone.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      Oh? More spyware than GM selling your data to your insurance company? More spyware than all of the stuff your smartphone collects?

      It’s absolutely a bad faith argument to say we can’t have Chinese cars because they conduct industry standard data scraping.

      • CriticalMiss@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        7 months ago

        The whataboutism doesn’t help. It’s a wrong practice regardless of nationality. But since the house and senate is bought by the corporations, at the very least ban those who you can.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          It’s not a whataboutism when that’s the other choice. This isn’t out of left field. I can buy Chinese data scraping, Japanese data scraping, Korean data scraping, German data scraping, or American data scraping.

          Right now Germany actually wins that contest because GDPR just might have an impact.

          A whataboutism would be me talking about American labor practices in farming. Not great, but also not relevant.

    • assassinatedbyCIA@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      They’re trying to block mexican made Chinese vehicles as well. They don’t want Americans buying cheap evs.

      • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 months ago

        This makes the most sense. Sell them here. Built elsewhere? Tax the shit out of them. You can avoid the tax by creating American jobs and having them manufactured here.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          That’s what the chicken tax is/was. This is just a tax on EVs made by Chinese companies. It’s pretty ridiculous.

          • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Yes, why not? They aren’t prohibited, they’re just being given a disadvantage compared to American made vehicles being sold in America. A tax for notoriously poor labor standards, we can call it. If they want to use a union shop somewhere in middle America they can avoid that tax altogether.

            If I misunderstood you please correct me.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              That’s literally in the textbooks as the kind of thing you’re not supposed to do. If you keep protecting US companies they will never get better. Prices will never come down.

      • Grimy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        They don’t want them to, they want you to keep using gas.

  • BigMacHole@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Anti China Republicans are going to HATE this! They would MUCH rather Elect the man whose Daughter got over 70 patents FASTTRACKED in China once he was elected!

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      7 months ago

      They would just put their hands on their ears and repeat “Hunter Biden laptop” until a scary fact like that one goes away.

    • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Then he should solve the issue by requiring the code to be hosted on American servers with source code inspection.

      Not by making EVs unaffordable.

      • woelkchen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        7 months ago

        Novel idea: make a car, not a cloud service. My phone is better at navigation etc anyways.

        • cyd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          My phone is better at navigation etc anyways.

          You could similarly argue that phone makers should concentrate on making and taking calls. Turns out, that’s not what consumers care about once a certain bar is cleared (a pretty low bar; call quality is notably bad on many modern cellphones). They care more about other stuff like… being good at navigation.

          This has been put to the market test in China. For EV purchases, most consumers turn out not to care about the “car” aspects beyond a certain point. If the car drives okay and has acceptable safety, what matters is the Internet-based bells and whistles.

      • Atomic@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        “source code inspection.”

        Great idea. That way it can be put on pause indefinatly because that shit takes years.

        On top of it. You can NEVER be certain anyway because there’s code burnt into the chips that you cannot read.

        • yamanii@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Why are you making stuff up? Cassinos have code audits and don’t stop working.

          • Atomic@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            7 months ago

            It’s just not the same to review code that runs a slot machine.

            And code that runs a whole car.

            One of the two is a whole lot more complex and probably had millions of lines more than the other.

            I’ll let you guys which is which

        • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Then make it so the manufacturer cannot just push cloud updates without permission from an oversight committee.

          Raising the price does nothing at all to fix the security issues.

    • Pretzilla@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Yes a big risk. Both natsec and IP theft are major concerns and cars are fully mic’d, compromisable, and to top it off, plug directly into your phone.

    • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Then he should solve the issue by requiring the code to be hosted on American servers with source code inspection.

      Not by making them unaffordable.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Do you have a phone in your pocket?

      If you do then congratulations. All of the data your car would collect is already out there for sale to the CCP.

      If you’re talking about people who have high level sensitive conversations in cars, then yes. But that’s an incredibly small group and they have those conversations in government vehicles that are all made in the US.

      • Jamyang@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        Just because I already was backdoored without a lube by person A, doesn’t mean I’d love to be backdoored again by person B.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          It doesn’t make sense to bar an entire sector of EVs over it either though. Caring about it only when that country does it is the peak of bigotry and simping for the executives who would happily grind you down for profit.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              And how is the CCP going to put you in a camp in the US? You sound like conservatives who are afraid the UN will declare a peace keeping mission here.

                • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Europe isn’t banning Chinese cars. They stopped following our lead after the UK joined us in Iraq. Our paths go together many times but they come to that conclusion on their own.

                  Obviously I don’t know what country you’re in but the US has 10 trillion dollars more than the Chinese to throw at the problem and we’ve long held the position that China doesn’t get to invade anyone.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          The data they can just scrape from Google maps? Hell they can see where soldiers are deployed because of their fitness apps sharing running routes on social media.

          This is black helicopter level conspiracy shit.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              They aren’t banned for the surrounding areas. They don’t want them on military bases or used by government/military officials.

              That’s kind of funny though, we have satellites. We know what their bases look like. Unless they drive their cars into the facilities we can’t get anything extra from their car.

  • arc@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    7 months ago

    Protectionism only works in the VERY short term. If the USA doesn’t pull its finger out of its ass and make affordable good EVs, then its automotive industry will crash and burn. Because the rest of the world unaffected by tariffs will be buying Chinese (or Korean / European) EVs and not American ones because they’ll be expensive and suck.

  • umbrella@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    they really willing to throw the planet under the bus so they can protect their own oligarchs. so much for the free market.

  • Hawanja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    Chinese EVs are piece of shit death-traps anyway that tend to explode for no reason.

  • Gennadios@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    7 months ago

    Translation: Biden doesn’t want fire hazards that take hours and hundreds of gallons to extinguish imported from china.

  • ghostblackout@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    27
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I do t want the Chinese EVs because there falling apart exploding crushing more exploding and.there just not safe

    Edit:Sorry about this I get political when I don’t sleep sorry about this