• Wolf@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      7 days ago

      Capitalism isn’t about anything other than keeping the ruling class rich and in power. How it chooses to do that has varied throughout time. During the 20th Century the lie was that “American Style” capitalism was fair because the capitalists would promote Laissez-faire style economics (“Free Trade”) out of their mouths, while actually building monopolies.

      With the rise of Trump-style ‘conservatives’ Republicans have adopted a new strategy, Mercantilism. Mercantilism doesn’t even pretend to be fair or free. The word ‘Competition’ doesn’t even appear anywhere in that article because competition is bad for Capitalists and they see no reason to continue to lie about that. They actively oppose free trade.

      Even if ‘Capitalists’ possessed the ability to feel shame for being hypocrites (which they certainly do not), calling them out for not following along with the principles of ‘the free market’ does no good since they have abandoned advocating for that a while ago.

  • network_switch@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    7 days ago

    Tariffs be damned, I will not buy an American brand car. They’ve been mediocre my whole life and it’s always been easier to source parts for Hondas and Toyotas. I’m not sure how repairable any EV is, but I doubt American brands will top the charts of value in repairability in my lifetime

    • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 days ago

      I’m not sure how repairable EVs are either, since my 2013 Leaf never needed repairs in 12 years. Just tires and wiper blades.

      • ThePrivacyPolicy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 days ago

        Yeah that’s a good point in a sense. Mechanically I think they’re a lot less repairable (or at least a lot less at home repairable), but from the angle of needing repairs, they also need less repairs because most of what tends to fail on ICE vehicles is all the mechanical stuff attached to the engine. Even on my hybrid I repair a ton less and my mechanic said that because all the accessories are electronic since they can’t be belt/chain driven because the engine is off half the time that they’re ultimately more reliable in the end - it’s the mechanical aspects of them that fail on ICE vehicles.

    • kfox@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      Got a subaru as my first non-american car. The old CVT torque converter is wearing out after 120k miles, but she survived being lightly t-boned with just a door repair

    • GreenBottles@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      After 25 years of other brands I finally went Honda and I can’t believe how happy I am with it. I never have problems.

      • network_switch@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 days ago

        Over the years I think Honda and Toyota are the two brands I most commonly see an old guy managing to keep running well for 30+ years and hyper focused on wanting to break 500k miles or dreaming of hitting 1 million miles someday

        • sylver_dragon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 days ago

          Overall, love it. We had a hybrid RAV 4 and wanted to move to a larger vehicle. When we discovered that Toyota was releasing a hybrid Sienna for 2021, we jumped at it. We get ~35mpg on average. And we’ve put just a bit over 55k miles on it since we got it. Maintenance has mostly been routine, though we did have an odd issue with one of the sliding doors filling up with water. According to the tech at the service center, there is a drain which was clogged and needed to be cleared. This was likely exacerbated by the fact that it’s parked outside, in a wooded area. So, it sees a lot of leaf litter. And that is one down side, the back hatch can accumulate leaves and crap in the space between the top of the door and the body of the vehicle. Annoying, but you just have to clean it out on the regular. The adjustment rails for the rear seats are also hard to clean, if anything gets in them. So, that can be annoying.

          As for performance, it moves well enough. It’s a mini-van, so you’re not going to beat a small car off the line, but you do get up to speed at a good clip. The turning radius is surprisingly narrow for such a large vehicle. At speed, the vehicle feels stable and handles ok. I’ll also say that the adaptive cruise control is insanely addictive. I’ve been driving in traffic this week and I can go a long time without touching the pedals. I’d also recommend getting to the trim level where you get the backup camera with the false overview of the vehicle, makes parking super simple.

          We mostly use it for routine tasks like getting groceries or taking the kids places. We also go camping regularly and we can pack all our stuff into the back and put the kayaks on top. Its not a vehicle I’d take off road on anything challenging, but it handles unpaved roads ok.

          So ya, we’ve been happy with it and I’d give it a recommendation.

        • violetring@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 days ago

          Sienna’s are great! I’ve owned 4 of them (because I tend to total cars), and been happy with all of them. Gets decent mileage for a van, and they hold value better than just about any other mini van. Never felt safer when ramming into the back of a semi while going 70mph! The van was totaled, but me and the kids were perfectly fine.

            • violetring@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 days ago

              I’m not sure your location, but I highly advise spending the extra money on AWD. If you have hills plus rain or snow, it’s the difference between peeling out from a stop and just going.

              My first Sienna was FWD. We live on the side of a hill - steep enough that a family pass time is watching cars struggle in the winter. Had to park at the bottom several times with the FWD. Never had a problem with the AWDs.

        • ExploitedAmerican@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 days ago

          I have a 20+ year old 2004 rx330 its basically a sienna with a smaller shell (sienna highlander and the v6 camry all share the same subframe and engine/ powertrain components with some exceptions its the same platform) its great, i have 223,000 miles on it and it needs some work but I’m poor so i do it all myself

    • phx@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 days ago

      And no competition. I’m pretty sure that they can shave some of the price off from that massive jump that came with COVID due to [checks list] “supply chain issues” and yet never went back down after…

  • Mrkawfee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    230
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    8 days ago

    So free markets are a terrible idea now and countries practicing import substitution weren’t impoverishing their people.

    US hypocrisy at it’s finest.

    • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      26
      ·
      8 days ago

      „Free market“? Speaking of hypocrisy. Chinese car brands are so heavily subsidized they probably cost the Chinese economy more than they make selling them at the moment. China is clearly trying to drown the global market with cheap cars so they can ramp up prices immensely once they have killed the competition and have become a monopoly. China hasn‘t been the extreme low income country to produce super cheaply for a long time and they couldn‘t produce cars this cheap in a free market situation.

      Many countries and the EU have measures against such practices because state run operations with the sole purpose to destroy an industry (which this is) undermine the very idea of the free market or even trade relationships.

      Alternatively we could start subsiding local car makers and play the same little game China is playing but more cars is honestly the last thing we need right now. Tariffs are a much smoother option to deal with this even when they have a bad rep.

      Ideally we use that generated money from tariffs to subsidize public transport so we don‘t get cheaper cars but cheaper alternatives but that‘s still just a dream I‘m afraid.

      Whatever the case, one should look at super cheap cars and what that means in the long run more critically.

      • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        75
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        Alternatively we could start subsiding local car makers

        We have been. Bailout after bailout. For the longest fucking time, and have had insane trade rules and tarrigs in place for decades and decades. I’d argue this is what it looks like to have another country finally being able to play on a level playing field.

        • Optional@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          43
          ·
          8 days ago

          After the auto industry intentionally killed public transport.

          The fact that one of the most powerful monopolies in the world went bankrupt and was forced to be bailed out by taxpayers more than once should really be a disqualifier for any future endeavors.

          • witchybitchy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            8 days ago

            you accidentally forget to pay ur credit card minimum for one month and you’re docked so many credit score points that you’re ineligible for being given a loan.

            but we bail out these megacorps time and again and just keep letting them operate like nothing’s amiss

            shit’s borked (intentionally, to favor those with means)

        • 418_im_a_teapot@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          8 days ago

          Is it a level playing field? In China workers rights are pretty non-existent and there’s no OSHA equivalent, at least not to the degree we have in the US. Then add in government subsidies, lower worker pay, reduced R&D costs because they pilfered the engineering from a US company, and you end up with a very lopsided market.

          To be clear, I am in no way defending the US auto industry. They have little customer loyalty for a reason – low quality, overpriced, subscription dependent vehicles with terrible warranties, expensive service requirements, and invasive telemetry. They need more competition to force them to make more consumer-friendly decisions, but China is hardly a fair competitor.

          • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            In China workers rights are pretty non-existent and there’s no OSHA equivalent, at least not to the degree we have in the US

            How much maternity leave d’you get in the US? Cause in China it’s a minimum of 90 days up to 180. And an extra 15~30 days of pat leave. Mandatory paid holiday? US: 0 China: 11. Sick leave? US: 0 China: months (at reduced rate). Vacation? US: 0, China: 1 to 3 weeks.

            An employer that fails to allow an employee to take annual leave must pay that employee 300% of the employee’s daily wages for each unused vacation day

            The work sfatey certainly remains an issue, like any developing country, but things are rapidly improving.

            Efforts at work safety shall be oriented around people and reflect the principle of people first and life first, with top priority given to people’s life safety. The philosophy of safe development shall be adhered to and the principles of safety first, prevention as the main target as well as comprehensive administration shall be followed to forestall and resolve major safety risks at the source.

            http://en.npc.gov.cn.cdurl.cn/2021-06/10/c_786248.htm

            Things aren’t all roses in China, but y’all have to get off of your high horse when you know fuck all other than bland ass propaganda.

        • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          You can‘t compare a bailout with an aggressive offensive. Especially since western car makers and many other manufacturers outsourced to China in the process. There are few to no parallels to be drawn here. A more accurate, albeit tasteless comparison would be the China opium wars. Because that‘s essentially what they‘re aiming to do: Making us addicts to their product. They‘re selling us the stuff at a loss because they know we‘ll come back for more and before we know it we‘re completely hooked. It‘s the exact same thing they‘re doing with Temu and TikTok.

      • BB84@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        If something is being so heavily subsidized, the correct market response is to buy as much as possible, and resell once the prices ramp up.

        Setting up tariffs and complaining about subsidies? 100% not the “free market” response. It’s cope.

        • InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          8 days ago

          True, even Milton Friedman (barf) said we should be thankful if someone wants to subsides our lives. Besides these market extremists say all government intervention is bound to fail, so they should have nothing to fear letting the BYDs in. The socialist subsidy of BYD will collapse and we don’t want the government distorting our market either.

          This isn’t really my personal take, but i like using their own logic to reach a conclusion they will hate.

        • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 days ago

          Are you trying to be funny or something? Used electric cars aren‘t exactly going up in price. What a bunch of nonsense. Talking about cope.

      • Tiger666@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        8 days ago

        We have subsidized the big three many times, and they return nothing back. At this point, they should be nationalized.

        You have a very simple way of looking at things and are part of the problem that is going on.

        Your ignorance is showing. Tuck it in.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 days ago

      Free markets were always a terrible idea, the USA economic system was basically founded on principles of regulation of goods like tea, tobacco, and alcohol.

      • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        39
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        Pretty sure big oil and car companies have been bailed out by the US government in the past. Plus america designs most of its cities so that you need to own a car. Seems like both markets are equally “free” at the end of the day.

        • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          8 days ago

          A one time loan which made money is hardly a subsidy by comparison to China right now. That’s an absurd comparison. Apples to oranges. Hell apples to baseballs.

          • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            8 days ago

            There is also CAFE standards that made small, effecient vehicles require extremely high emissions standards while allowing looser standards for larger, less effecient vehicles. Effectively limiting foriegn market influence while increasing both the price and size of the average vehicle on American roads.

            • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 days ago

              That’s not a competitive subsidy though. Anyone can and don take advantage of those emissions. The US does not have access to China subsidized materials or labor to compete in that market.

              BYD could build here and take advantage of that.

              • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                8 days ago

                The US actually heavily tariffs foreign-made vehicles that could skirt the CAFE requirements the way American trucks do. Light trucks suffer the Chicken Tax and can only be made in Canada, US or Mexico to bypass that. Been that way since the UAW boss asked LJB to do something about the German imports growing.

                • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 days ago

                  So build them here, like every other foreign auto maker.

                  They accomplish two completely different effects by two completely different mechanisms. The former being available to every manufacturer.

      • Akasazh@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        American car makers famously unsubsidized and holding up their own pants.

        • ggtdbz@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 days ago

          The oil industry is famously completely independent from government subsidy. Especially when it comes to setting urban development policy and planning transportation systems, these have no bearing at all oil demand and they also cost nothing.

        • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 days ago

          Compared globally? Yeah mostly so.

          What subsides do US cars get that other countries don’t have similar programs?

    • dinckel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      86
      ·
      8 days ago

      They’ve actually done the exact opposite. The lobbying, the import laws, the absence of a foreign export market, and the manufacturing of cars that would never pass safety laws anywhere else, all resulted in the kind of dogshit that Americans have to experience now. Why improve if you’re the only player

      • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        They don’t compete here either.

        They’ve stopped producing passenger cars, and the Chicken Tax means they don’t have to compete on trucks.

    • NotBillMurray@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      Nah man, that’s not the purpose of unrestrained capitalism. The point is to get big enough that you can buy out all the competition, then make your product cheaper and cheaper once there’s no one to compete against. It’s a bit like an economical algae bloom.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      Detroit is easy to hate but there’s more wrong here than how much can-do energy they wake up in the morning with. If they competed on features and quality they could never compete on price. Everything we do to keep the dollar strong makes it impossible to manufacture here.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      Michael Dunne has been competing the entire time, for the Chinese. His statements here aren’t fear, they’re shillery.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    120
    ·
    7 days ago

    Oh no! The type of capitalism where we have to compete!

    Make it go away, Daddy Trump!

    • Lukas Murch@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      7 days ago

      Sadly, I think it was Biden that put a 100% tariff on Chinese EVs. Fuck Trump, but come on, Biden, don’t do this shit for them. I really like that new Xiaomi YU7.

      • III@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        7 days ago

        The issue is not so simple. Blocking BYD has a lot to do with protecting American manufacturing jobs. That’s not to say Biden’s tariff was the right answer. But it is a more complicated problem to solve than it appears from the perspective of a single car buyer.

        • Zetta@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          7 days ago

          Sucks to suck, our car companies suck and they absolutely should loose and be forced to fire people if they can’t compete. Give me my cheap and decent Chinese cars please. I live in a capitalist country so lets act like it instead of being fucking pussys

          • network_switch@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 days ago

            It the country wasn’t so hostile, also pretty racist when talking about Chinese (99% of the time people say Chinese not CCP as an insult to anything about creativity, invention, culture, whatever), to Chinese consumer big ticket goods, I’d imagine BYD and other would build manufacturing plants in the US. If things weren’t so hostile, the Chinese battery companies like CATL may be willing to build batteries in the US without major concern of a hostile nation stealing their battery tech

            It isn’t even a truly political idealism conflict that causes the split. Americans were fine with South Korean and Taiwanese products when those countries were military dictatorships. Vietnam has the company VinFast selling cars in the US and it’s political structure is a lot closer to China than the US. Americans have never shown appetite for reigning in how American companies treat labor in Latin America, Asia, and Africa. Really not even domestically like in makeshift housing that American farmers pack migrant workers into or meatpacking plants. So it’s really just rich/powerful people not liking to see non-European descendants take the leading role in global trade of high margin goods and services that are often cutting edge technology

            If China was still primarily a labor country, damn near no one would care about Chinese domestic issues like famines. In my mind the inevitability will be another wave of xenophobia that will eventually target India and the Indian diaspora as their military and domestic military and technology companies develop

      • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 days ago

        But the Chinese government could be spying on you if you bought a Chinese manufactured car!!

        P.S. for bonus points, does anyone know where most GM automobiles are currently being manufactured?

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      7 days ago

      Tbf notoriously China subsidizes BYD to net loss so its not exactly capitalism.

        • cuteness@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          7 days ago

          Sadly, ever since “too big to fail”, any large corporation is now nearly indistinguishable from the federal government. Just another example of socialism for the rich, capitalism for the rest of us.

        • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          7 days ago

          To clarify, the bailouts of US car companies were Chrysler around 1980 and GM and Chrysler around 2008. To help them avoid bankruptcy and the resulting loss of jobs, they received loan guarantees (like having a cosigner) and direct loans, all of which they paid back. I think the public generally has a misconception that a corporate “bailout” means they just giving them money, but it doesn’t.

          Note - I’m not trying to convince you not to hate corporations, and there’s no need for a lecture on how evil they are, I know they are. Just clarifying that one topic.

          • Burninator05@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 days ago

            The program started under W and ended under Obama and I think at the end the government actually made money off the deal.

            Don’t confuse this with the COVID PPP loans that were given out by Trump, forgiven by Trump, and then had a lot of the records about them destroyed by Trump.

            • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 days ago

              No confusion at all, I was talking about car company bailouts only, since the other person mentioned “all the bailouts US car manufacturers received”. I think the Bush/Obama thing you’re referring to was TARP, which was for financial institutions.

      • BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        7 days ago

        What do you think Walmart does when they enter a new market, the eat losses till the local competition folds and they are the only option left

        • Zink@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          7 days ago

          Well don’t forget that Walmart itself is literally government subsidized when the people employed there still need food stamps or other welfare programs.

        • madcaesar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          Your point is? They are both shit, agreed. The fact that we have asshole corps here, doesn’t mean we need more of them. We need to fight Walmart, not bring in the Walmart of cars.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          A lot of these subsidies (both in the US and China) are implicit. Chinese state rail networks operate at cost, allowing cheap transportation of materials and labor. American borrowing is heavily subsidized through the Fed Credit Window, which keeps rates in the low single digits while corporate bonds and consumer loans can be 2x-30x as high. Both countries cut corners on environmental enforcement and subsidize waste management. Both countries subsidize education and incentive R&D through their university systems.

          The real benefit BYD enjoys - even above its Chinese peers - is vertical integration. They own everything from mining interests to technology patents to dealerships. This is a deliberate consequence of Chinese trade policy, which requires foreign investors to partner with Chinese nationals in order to own and operate capital. Consequently, Berkshire Hathaway - a large early investor in BYD - cannot dictate Chinese vehicle manufacturing policy from a private office in Omaha. Chinese locals benefit from the innovation, the domestic capital, the experienced labor force (which can migrate to local competitors), and the increased economic activity it produces.

          China is insourcing it’s wealth aggregation, which has a cyclical compound benefit over time.

      • theonetruedroid@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        It’s state sponsored capitalism and China has pumped a ton of money into BYD to get them to where they are.

        I can see them giving larger tax breaks to companies in the US, but current administration is all in on tariffs as the way to increase our domestic production. It doesn’t make ours any better or cheaper, just everything else more expensive.

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 days ago

        So do a lot of other governments, to be fair. It’s one of those industries that employs a lot of people, and it’s always bad press to close it when a bit of money could have kept it. Certainly cheaper than putting thousands of people on benefits.

        Plus there’s subsidies for domestic sales as well. The UK at least had a grant for plug in cars that they ended a few years ago, presumably just to get the infrastructure up and running.

        But then the new vehicle price is neither here nor there in the long term, since most people drive used vehicles anyway. What matters is how many vehicles trickle down to the masses, and whether wear on the battery is a concern. Some of the early smaller models didn’t have great batteries to start with, but as a daily driver to the shops and work it’d probably be fine. For some reason the conversation always drifts over to “but what about that one time you drove across the state” or “remember that time you transported a fridge”, as if that’s something people can’t work around for the once a year they do it.

  • BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    92
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 days ago

    Newsflash: American car manufacturer says “Our cars are crap and overpriced”

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      8 days ago

      Michael Dunne is actually someone who worked in Chinese Automotive manufacturing. He’s the Chinese car manufacturer saying “Chinese cars are good and cheap.”

      His word is basically meaningless.

  • jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    ·
    8 days ago

    If you’re one of the largest and oldest car manufacturers in the world and the most “innovative” thing you’ve managed to do in the last 20 years is rebrand Buick into a young family brand, then you probably need some good competition.

  • gizmonicus@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Good. Fuckem. They make shitty, oversized trucks that are a danger to pedestrians and people who drive reasonably sized cars anyway.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      7 days ago

      My boss in the UK got one. In bright red. It looks like he’s driving a fucking fire engine.

      • GingerGoodness@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 days ago

        My old boss was a huge man who went around in a little yellow convertible. We called him Noddy.

        May I suggest calling him Fireman Sam?

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          Yeah, our VP rides around in a 2-door coupe and he’s very tall, while my coworker (who is shorter) drives a big SUV because “he doesn’t fit in smaller cars.” I’m also tall and drive a Toyota Prius, which is small.

          At the end of the day, none of that’s legitimate, it’s just an excuse to buy the car you prefer.

          Larger cars should cost more because they take up more space, wear out the roads faster, and impact the environment more.

          • Oderus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            At the end of the day, none of that’s legitimate, it’s just an excuse to buy the car you prefer.

            Since when is buying what we prefer considered negative? Calling it an excuse seems short-sighted.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 days ago

              Buying what you prefer itself isn’t an issue, but that should be the reason instead of “I need it because X, Y, Z.” Most truck/SUV owners don’t need a truck/SUV, they just want one.

              My issue with trucks and SUVs are that they make the road more dangerous, since there’s only so much a car manufacturer can do to protect against a vehicle more than twice as massive. That, and they’re artificially cheap here in the US because of stupid regulations intended for farmers that got applied to them to reduce emissions standards.

              • Oderus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 days ago

                Some people don’t need a car but will buy one anyway, not sure what point you’re making there. I see no problem in people buying what they want over what they need. Choice is good and if you want to spend more on a vehicle for any reason, that’s OK.

                Buses, dump trucks, ambulances, 18 wheelers, tow trucks etc. are all heavy and dangerous. The focus should be on better designed roads and better driver training, not limiting what people can drive.

                • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  I see no problem in people buying what they want over what they need.

                  Neither do I, I just don’t like it when people excuse their choices by using terms like “need.” People make a lot of silly choices because they claim to “need” something.

                  I just want people to be more honest with themselves and others about needs vs wants. If we classify things properly, I think people will naturally be more efficient with their resources and we’d have less consumer debt and whatnot.

        • Blackmist@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          His old one was very similar, but a darker colour so we called him The Fall Guy.

          Or rather the few of us in the office old enough to remember that show did.

  • SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    Dam maybe some of the American automakers who took billions in subsidies should have built cheaper cars instead of the largest trucks possible to skirt regulations.

    I literally can’t afford an American car, i can afford a BYD tho.

    • lightnegative@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      8 days ago

      I can afford neither, but if I had to save up for one it would be the BYD.

      American cars are just large, stupid and inefficient. Also the parts are very expensive here in New Zealand

    • jaykrown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      I bought a used Chevrolet Bolt '23 which is the closest I could get, they’re still relatively cheap and mine has been working great.

  • markovs_gun@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    8 days ago

    American cars have sucked compared to Asian cars since the 1970s. I don’t understand why people are acting all surprised that this is true in respect to BYD. Sure in the past products designed in China were stereotyped as poor quality knock offs of western designed goods, but in the past decade Chinese engineers have increasingly proven themselves as perfectly capable of making solid, innovative designs that improve upon those of their competitors. I think it’s kind of fucked up that everyone is so suddenly upset about China’s role in the world economy since everyone was completely fine using them for cheap labor over the past several decades and are just mad that Chinese companies are beating them at high skill labor and technology. Chinese companies do have an “unfair advantage” given how much they are backed by the Chinese government but American companies receive all sorts of money from the government for all sorts of things as well.

    • dirthawker0@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      Americans have come to think of Chinese products as bad quality because of the American companies who engage them for cheaper labor. Walmart was known to order products made to a certain spec one year, then the next year demand the company increase production, but for the same amount paid as the previous year. The Chinese company, not wanting to lose the contract, obliges, but corners have to be cut. It should be called Americanesium, not Chineseum.

      Derek Guy (Die, Workwear!) posted a thread a while back (I think about 6 months ago) about how the Chinese can and do make great quality products, pointing out high quality fabrics. Give them money to buy good raw materials, give them a decent wage, and they’ll put out a good product. Honestly, they probably have a more fair work ethic than some American companies that just feed their CEOs massive salaries or are owned by private equity.

      • InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        8 days ago

        Its largely american cope that they are not that good at manufacturing anymore. Chinese factories build things to spec, and the customer asks for cheap, so they get cheap.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 days ago

        Honestly, there’s a wide range of quality of stuff produced in China, but the expensive stuff isn’t getting brought over. The better stuff is either being used domestically or exported to India/SEA. From my limited experience importing stuff, the biggest common factor is the lack of final quality control. I ordered some small diesel engines because no else makes those but Yanmar and Yanmar prices themselves way out of my range. Even Yanmar doesn’t sell a 5hp engine. The 196cc Chinese diesel was well designed, the parts well built, but final assembly lacks consistence on the bolt torque spec and there was metal shaving left in the crank case. The bigger, more expensive diesel made by a different company had much better quality control, although it’s still necessary to flush the crank case. No one over there seems to do that.

    • psycho_driver@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      8 days ago

      They went through a period in the 90s where they had a huge leap in quality and almost matched Japanese imports of the time. I’d say GM is the only one who’s drivetrain quality is still on any comparable level with Asian imports. Ford gets some parts really right but then their beancounters make really dumb cuts to critical components that make many of their vehicles near lemons. I can’t think of a worse car manufacturer in the world right now than Stellantis, and they aren’t an American company anyway.

    • mostlikelyaperson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 days ago

      The “unfair advantage” bit has been incredibly funny to me ever since I sat in a call to prepare a joint research proposal and the representative of a certain large euro automotive supplier told us that their company would only participate in any project if they got at least a certain amount of government funding.

  • CameronDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 days ago

    I am pretty sure there is some financial fuckery going on with BYD. My parents own two, and they are very nice, but way under priced compared to every other EV manufacturer.

    Can’t prove anything of course, but there is something odd going on when everyone else is 20-30k more expensive.

    Hard to feel sorry for GM though, they suckled at our governments (Australia) teet for decades before giving up and leaving entirely. At least if BYD is being propped up we are at least getting good cheap cars from it.

    • Ulrich@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      8 days ago

      The financial fuckery is that they’re very heavily subsidized by the CCP. It’s not sustainable.

      • einkorn@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        36
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        I’d argue it is.

        Just look how Amazon got where it is now: Sell way under market price, till local competition closed shop, then squeeze.

        • CameronDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          I think your muddying sustainable and successful. It definitely can be successful, but its not sustainable.

          Its also high risk, especially if you can’t crank up the prices enough later

            • CameronDev@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              8 days ago

              Sustainable implies that they can keep doing it forever without changing. Switching later means what they are doing is not sustainable. It might be successful, but its not sustainable.

              • Optional@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                8 days ago

                There’s sustainable practices and sustainable businesses. The latter is what others are arguing. Undercutting competition to take over a market is a sustainable practice IF you can hold out long enough. I’d wager the country of China can hold out longer than General Motors.

                • CameronDev@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  8 days ago

                  But the business model has to change in order to survive. The company cannot undercut forever, it actually needs to change in order to survive. The business model of today is not sustainable. They may have a large warchest, they may be able to crush GM, but once they do, or the warchest runs out, the business model must change.

                  If you want to make the argument that their overall plan with the later change is sustainable, thats fine, but this current phase is not sustainable.

        • Gigasser@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          It might just be that, since BYD is serving such a large domestic market/population, that allows them to have cheaper cars? Something something, economies of scale. I’m no expert though.

          • einkorn@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 days ago

            There is a limit to that effect, though. And most observers agree that the state is subsidizing heavily.

        • jaxxed@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 days ago

          BYD is already facing scrutiny for running Evergrande like accounting, and a lot of political pressures from other Chinese manufacturers. The risk is that they collapse like Evergrande, and that they drag public debt into it. The CCP might prop them up, so it light be safe. A car is different from a book, because you need lifetime service for it. If they go under, you might lose access to parts.

      • CameronDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 days ago

        My only point of confusion is that a 20k loss on every car is insane. I’m guessing its a bit of BYD is subsidised somewhat, and everyone else is price gouging somewhat. No idea the ratio.

        Also odd that other Chinese brands (really only tried MG) dont seem to have the same high quality, high pricing that suggests the same level of crazy subsidies.

        Honestly, there is just so much fuckery going I just have no idea what is what.

            • antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              8 days ago

              Rivian’s financial statements provide insight into its per-unit losses, though calculating an exact figure requires analyzing multiple variables. The company’s cost of goods sold (COGS), which includes direct production expenses, regularly exceeds revenue, leading to negative gross margins. According to its latest SEC filings, Rivian reported a gross loss per vehicle of approximately $39,000 in 2023, though this figure fluctuates based on production volume and operational efficiencies.

              Not exactly a number they put in a press release, but as a publicly traded company it is published quarterly.

    • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      China subsidises industries it wants to dominate in, allowing them to sell for less than cost. It’s why the EU also tariffs Chinese cars.

      Also for anything the big 3 make in the US, I believe they use union labor? Not sure if they did for Aussie market cars.

  • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    The same thing happened in the 80s with Japan. The Japanese were no longer making crappy cars but small and very reliable, affordable cars. Detroit was still making rust buckets, obsessing over powerful engines with bodies that rotted out and defects galore. Detroit got beaten up badly (Chrysler had to get a gov bailout) until they cleaned up their act and improved their products. Protecting Detroit from competition would’ve just saddled US consumers with decades more of crappy, overpriced, low quality, cars.

    https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/how-detroits-automakers-went-from-kings-of-the-road-to-roadkill/

    We still don’t let in the small pickups the rest of the world enjoys.

    • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      8 days ago

      defects galore

      A friend of mine from high school attended the GM Institute and became an engineer for them. One of his first projects was on a team that bought a Lexus and an Infiniti when they first came on the market and took them apart to see how many production defects they had. He said a typical American car at the time (and this was in the '90s after quality had rebounded somewhat from its disastrous nadir) had 300-400 defects. The Infiniti they took apart had 2. The Lexus had 0.

    • sobchak@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Did Japan back then pay their assembly line workers the equivalent of $5k USD/year (in today’s dollars) and have nearly no worker protections? Not a rhetorical question; I just don’t know. Seems like Japan had a better standard of living back then compared to Chinese workers now, so I would guess their workers were compensated and treated better.

      Not defending US auto corps (or any corp for that matter). The regulatory capture in the US is insane, and workers aren’t treated as well as most of the rest of the first world.

      • ToadOfHypnosis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 days ago

        Japan used state capitalism to promote it’s auto industry and other key sectors to sustain strong growth. America’s weakened billionaire owned government system is just being strip mined into the ground. We won’t be able to compete in an economy that’s only product is wealth extraction because of our massive corruption.

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          Back then American industries were just complacent due to insufficient competition, and Japan’s industrial development was a bit of a miracle (that “living in year 2000 since 1980s” joke).

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 days ago

        Japan back then had (and still has) an interesting socioeconomic system, a bit similar to samurai clans went cartels, where workers are supposed to work all their life in one place (or close to that), don’t squeal about worker rights and such, but be covered by lots of company-provided social nets and guarantees.

      • Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        5K/year isn’t exactly poverty when rent is <200, phone data is 20, and you can get pic for 1.50 USD. I too would like them to be treated better, but I dont know if their overall situation is worse than the average american worker making 50K, but spending 24K on rent, 12K on car payments, and 16USD if they eat out.

    • Waffle@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      I would kill for a small electric truck… Telo is calling my name, but they don’t have a functioning product yet.

      • Machinist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 days ago

        Right there with you on small trucks, the kid and I have been drooling over the Slate even if it is Bezos. I drive a '98 Ranger, and we’ve been kicking around the idea of a Ranger electric conversion.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      Protecting Detroit from competition would’ve just saddled US consumers with decades more of crappy, overpriced, low quality, cars.

      And it did. Japanese companies maintained a solid portion of the market in the US, a notable lead in quality, and many consumers no longer willing to waste money on crappy overpriced low quality cars from American companies. American cars were forced to get better and they’re better off for it, but they resisted the entire time, just like today.

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      As an European living in Asia and can’t help but cringe at American cars. They’re so far behind. And it’s the car country. Japan has better cars and better rail. Embarassing.

      • fishy@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 days ago

        Agreed. I’m American and think American manufacturers make the ugliest and worst cars. Outside of the Corvette, which remains the best spots car in it’s price range.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      Targeted tariffs and protectionism can help a situation like this, combined with subsidies like the ones Trump cancelled, to give legacy manufacturers a temporary respite to retool and innovate. However backtracking on your transition, reverting to the tried and true short term profits is just hiding your head in the sand. GM will find itself increasingly marginalized and more years behind. You can’t hide behind trumps skirt forever