You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
46 points

Sounds like US automaker higher prices are the actual threat.

permalink
report
reply
19 points

For what it’s worth, a government can absolutely subsidized an industry in an attempt to capture a foreign market.

There’s a reason Japan and Korea have their own auto industries despite being next door to the largest manufacturing nation on earth, and it isn’t because they’re somehow making and distributing them for even less than China.

That being said, several automakers have blindfolded themselves about the type of cars people want. I do hope this threat is significant enough that automakers actually shift to mini-electric transportation options.

If not, I’d be happy enough buying a small Chinese electric even if the taxes made it equivalent to a larger “western” vehicle. Because it’s what I want to have available to me and it’s nice to fuck capitalists with capitalism.

permalink
report
parent
reply

It’d be nice if instead of putting massive tariffs, we would just subsidise production of comparable, small cars.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

its less about the subsidies and more that budget buyers in the U.S in particular are very picky buyers.

while the federal/state EV tax credits, you can get vehicles like the Chevy Bolt for 20-22k. regardless the car still isnt that popular (meaning theres something specific about the car that buyers dont want).

for those buying used cars, theres not mamy reasons why someone would buy a say new 18k-20k EV that had many cuts in design vs an older premium EV. Used 2016 Model S for example can be found near 16k. its a new cheap car vs used premium car debate

this places a burden any any auto maker trying to make a budget car, because in order for it to sell well, they need to have razor thin margins, and sell a lot. failure to do so would spell the end of your compamy due to how many you produced.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

June 11th 2024 GM announced that the board approved a 6 Billion dollar stock buyback plan.

That is a direct wealth transfer from the company to the owners.

We have met the enemy, and they are us.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

The next quarter is the only thing that matters.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

And this is why we will bail them out again.

That 9 billion could have been spent on making a low cost EV to compete. It could have been spent as retention bonuses for their best workers. It could have been spent so many things that would secure their future in a changing world.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

God forbid these parasites have to compete.

Z HORROR, HORROR, I TELL U

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Are you arguing there’s no competition in the US or are you arguing that China should have to compete without the subsisides?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

My thesis is that China’s biz took state aid and made into something…

We provide state aid to our industry and they just sole that money, now that China is caught up, they are crying for more state aid.

Another example Intel, blows 50 billion on stoke buybacks, tax payer gives them 35 billion for fabs in US, Germany gives them 10 for one in Germany.

Clown capitalism right there.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 16K

    Monthly active users

  • 15K

    Posts

  • 408K

    Comments