• xmunk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      24 days ago

      The bigger issue is the bottom of the barrel prices making domestic competition impossible.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        38
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        24 days ago

        Sounds like a good reason to nationalize the car industry and not worry about making a profit.

        • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          24 days ago

          We Canadians are in a weird place - socialism isn’t a dirty word up here (except as imported from American culture)… but we’re still deep into neoliberalism with both the LPC and CPC being strongly neoliberal parties… the only national party arguably opposed to neoliberalism is the NDP.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        23 days ago

        Domestic competitors aren’t producing affordable vehicles. They are producing oversize, overweight, overcomplicated, overpriced crap.

        They aren’t competitive primarily because they are focused on a low-volume, high-margin luxury market, and avoiding the high-volume, low-margin utilitarian market. It is their abandonment of that market that provided China with the opportunity to corner it.

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        24 days ago

        Lmao no. That is not the bigger issue compared to literally continuing to poison the planet with fossil fuels.

        That’s North American governments’ stated reason for imposing the tariffs, but that could also be addressed by matching industry subsidies. But I think government understands that the North American auto-makers are intentionally sabotaging the EV market and subsidies likely wouldn’t produce a vastly different result.

    • Blackout@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      24 days ago

      I would love it but I don’t think the economy could handle the 100,000s of jobs that would be lost. The big 3 can’t compete and China charges a similar tariff on our vehicle exports. Only theirs isn’t a single fee. They charge a tariff, plus additional taxes and fees, the price can double by purchase depending on the vehicle. China can always start making them here and get around it.

        • Blackout@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          24 days ago

          They don’t nationalize anything. Not healthcare, energy, higher education. Lots of things that would make sense to and would benefit us all. Taking over the auto industry feels impossible. Besides I’d rather the government go all out on rail which has more benefits for a greater number of people.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      24 days ago

      Somehow I doubt the Chinese mining and manufacturing is environmentally friendly.

      • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        36
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        24 days ago

        Transitioning to EV’s is still good for the environment in the long run. It’s not like getting gas and coal is environmentally friendly. China didn’t cause the Enron scandals, BP oil spill, the pipeline shenanigans, etc.

  • kaffiene@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    23 days ago

    I’m always impressed how capitalists love markets until other people get good at it

  • yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    24 days ago

    China wants to subsidize the transition to EVs in N America. N. America would rather tax their own citizens and risk inflation to protect the profits of capitalists.

    And don’t fucking dare tell me this is about jobs. Because if we were on better terms with China, the capitalists would move the factory there.

    • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      23 days ago

      China wants to subsidize the transition to EVs in N America.

      No they don’t, they want to dominate the next generation of the global automotive industry and their plan involves killing all of the competition in both North America and Europe. It is literally impossible for western auto manufacture to compete because of the pay, worker safety, and environmental regulations that they have to comply with.

      If China gets its way every place in North America and Europe that used to have auto manufacturing will look like Detroit.

      And don’t fucking dare tell me this is about jobs. Because if we were on better terms with China, the capitalists would move the factory there.

      You are attempting to use an argument that is objectively incorrect based on empirical evidence. Auto manufacturers could have moved production decades ago when relations were friendly but they mostly didn’t. The vehicles they built in China were for the Chinese market. The vehicles they built in Europe were for the European market, and the vehicles they built in North America were for the North American market.

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

        If China gets its way every place in North America and Europe that used to have auto manufacturing will look like Detroit.

        How did Detroit end up looking like Detroit, was that China too? A big portion of auto manufacturing for American vehicles is already outsourced to places like Mexico anyway.

  • MajorSauce@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    23 days ago

    5$ on the US meddling again with other countries’ policies to protect their capitalist interests…

  • hark@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    23 days ago

    The little dog following in the footsteps of the big dog. How cute.

    • n3m37h@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      22 days ago

      Most likely. A we must have lane assist, spyware, and the ability to lock you out if you don’t pay on time (just wait for it)

  • Stern@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    24 days ago

    moot point iirc, considering the economic strategy in China is that the gov pays the tariffs.

    • moody@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      24 days ago

      Tariffs are paid by the importers, normally. The final cost to the consumer is then raised by an equivalent amount to offset the tariffs and make a profit.

      I’m not sure why anyone else would pay tariffs. Either way, the cost goes up and the government rakes in some money.

    • masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      24 days ago

      How is that moot? For that to work it would mean that for every Chinese auto sale the Chinese government not only subsidizes manufacturing but also has to give another 100% of the sale cost to the Canadian government.