Honestly why make better cars for less money to be competitive when you can just prevent competition entirely. Smells like a cartel to me.
this post was submitted on 13 May 2024
159 points (97.0% liked)
[Dormant] Electric Vehicles
3207 readers
2 users here now
We have moved to:
A community for the sharing of links, news, and discussion related to Electric Vehicles.
Rules
- No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, casteism, speciesism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
- Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- No self-promotion.
- No irrelevant content. All posts must be relevant and related to plug-in electric vehicles — BEVs or PHEVs.
- No trolling.
- Policy, not politics. Submissions and comments about effective policymaking are allowed and encouraged in the community, however conversations and submissions about parties, politicians, and those devolving into general tribalism will be removed.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I don’t see similar tariffs being announced on South Korean or European auto imports. Maybe because those cars aren’t being sold at a loss?
It's very unlikely that Chinese cars are sold at a loss. There is no reason for that to happen when they can be sold at a profit, and quite easily.
But even if they are, that's not necessarily a bad thing. It means Americans can buy cars at far cheaper prices since the price is subsidised by the Chinese government. As the article states, that's equivalent to a wealth transfer from the Chinese taxpayer to the American taxpayer.
What it does do is change the dynamic of winners and losers. The American car buyer would be a winner while the American car maker would be a loser. Now, there are a lot more car buyers and the total boon to car buyers is higher than the total hurt to car makers, meaning the wealth overall in the American economy has increased; it's just that not everyone comes out ahead.
This essentially means protectionist lobbying is usually nothing more than rent-seeking and will usually reduce the amount of total surplus in the economy. Anyone who's taken an Economics 101 course in university can point to the black triangle and say "deadweight loss!"
Allowing China to sell their cars at a loss in the US is definitely a bad thing. It allows China to take over the US market by undercutting the competition. The reason for the teriffs, as far as I understand it, is that the Chinese government is subsidizing the EV manufacturers in an attempt to kill competition and corner the market. It is an anti competitive practice that, if it paid off, would allow China to artificially push other EV makers out of the market, then raise prices when their competition is gone.
then raise prices when their competition is gone
It didn't occur in industries where China holds a strong presence, such as solar and other renewable energy equipment, or in lower-tech products available on platforms like AliExpress, Amazon, and eBay. So, why would it be different for electric vehicles (EVs)? Currently, the primary foreign competitor for EVs in China is Tesla, and prices for EVs are decreasing rapidly.
BYD electric vehicles are sold at a significantly higher profit margin in Europe compared to China.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/eu-unwinnable-price-war-chinese-104847336.html
What? There's so much electronics products that you just can't find not made in China these days, it 100% happened! Just because the brand isn't Chinese doesn't mean they're not dependent on China!
Thats maybe only true for the US. In Europe, the solar panel industry ist dead, Like the following:
- The Screen/TV industry,
- Heat Pumps,
- consumer electronics,
As is most of the Smartphone production, again, outside Design and probably the Premium/sustainable Brands.
Nearly every industry, where you can undercut competitors costs by leveraging economies of scale through pollution and the abolishment of labour laws and human rights
That's how you end up being fully dependent on China. They're using the same tactic as Amazon used to force bookstores to close down, sell at a loss long enough that the competition can't compete and needs to go out of business.
Have fun dealing with tens of thousands of jobless factory workers! That sure did improve conditions in Detroit when the same thing happened there!
I'm saying that just because there will be "thousands of jobless factory workers" doesn't mean the situation is, overall, bad.
Yes, that particular outcome is bad, but it's not the only thing that will happen. And I argue that the benefits gained by other sectors of the economy outweigh the negative effects suffered by them.
This argument is like saying that transitioning to renewable energy will put thousands of Appalachian coal miners out of work. That's true, it will, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it.
There will be winners and losers in every economic decision. The important thing is to consider whether there are more winners than losers, not whether there are any losers at all. Economics is cold, calculating, and unforgiving. If you want to argue, you'll need to come up with actual arguments and not just snappy two-liners that sound nice when typed into a Lemmy comment.
I provided an argument that wasn't a two liner, dependence on China.
Once local manufacturers start closing their factories and your start losing all the local expertise, what do you do when China is in a position where they can dictate the price because they're now in control of the market?
You've got a very short term view of things if you only think about the benefit for consumers as prices are low due to subsidies, once the subsidies are gone you're left with a market where cars are no cheaper but the money doesn't stay in your country anymore, that's a huge loss compared to the short term benefit.
Anyone who paid attention to the globalization debate back in the 90s knows that it's not beneficial in the long term to depend on other countries. The difference this time is that China is trying to force everyone's hand instead of having rich countries willingly sending manufactures overseas.
It's a completely valid concern that you've brought up regarding dependence on China.
I don't believe there will be a point where that happens. That's pretty much the reasoning behind why I don't agree with the tariffs. Automakers aren't stupid. I truly believe that they can compete, but just don't want to because it's more profitable to get the Government to levy tariffs against electric cars than to make them instead of gasoline cars. Americans can run their own subsidy regime to flip this maths. I'm pretty sure that automakers would rather make electric cars than no cars.
Yes, it might result in layoffs along the way. I regard that as the cost of progress.
People though it wouldn't happen for so many things and then COVID happened and we finally realized that we had shipped our manufacturing capacity for so much stuff to Asia that we're now playing catch-up to reverse the mistakes of the past.
Again, it's not just about layoffs, it's about making sure you can't get fucked by another country if they decide to make a move against you. It just requires one political incident and you're in for a round of inflation because China decides to increase its prices just enough that people still don't have a choice but to buy from them because the alternatives are still too expensive.
And if you think American manufacturers can't go bankrupt then you don't need to look too far to be proven wrong and once that happens then you're at the mercy of the goodwill of foreigners. Considering the political landscape in the USA that's not a position I would want to be in.
It's very unlikely that Chinese cars are sold at a loss.
Even if we ignore for a moment that Chinese cars are produced at such low costs not in the least because of the use of forced labour and thus by ignoring even the most fundamental human rights, China will subsidize its EV industry at all costs, also offering dumping prices. China's 'industrial policy' isn't focused on financial health but on scale to destroy foreign competition to control the market for economic and political gains.
Believe it or not, the Chinese government does not have infinite money, so we'll see if this plan pans out for them.
Errm.. whos gonna tell them about the economics of being the largest coherent market there is and forcing Joint Ventures in every relevant industry..
BYD cars are sold for much more profit in Europe than in China
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/eu-unwinnable-price-war-chinese-104847336.html
Yes, Chinese Imports are. As they are Not only cheaper manufacturer because of (non existent) labour laws, the local chinese goverments heavily subsidize these companies.
As for technology. China does have an edge on battery tech (again, Production seems to be subsidized) and cheaply produced Screens
On classic car qualities, they are behind the Premium brands.
Thats simplifying the problem. You know what helps with getting better with EVs? Subsidies and cheap credits. And China does that. We can now start to race which countries and tax payers give EV manufacturers the most money or we can ban companies who aren't playing fair.
So yes, get better at EVs is a valid damand. But if your competitor gets an unfair advantage, you simply can't reach his level, no matter how hard you are trying.
Or public transport might be nice too?
Yeah the US isn't even close on the race for EVs with China. Heck, going price for LFP batteries is $70/kWh. The United States is still trying to figure out how to not have conflict cobalt in their batteries. China is just skipping all of that and using iron since we've got tons of that lying around. In fact, we're on a giant ball of the stuff.
The United States is so laughably behind China on tons of technologies related to solar, storage, and EV motors. China is producing sodium ion powered cars with 60 mile ranges because of the various efficiencies in motor design. You can get a nice little around town car with that. They're using fucking SALT to power cars. SALT! You know, the shit that's in the ocean that we've got a bit of that also lying around. And the end cost to consumer is around $6,000 USD, that's the fully tricked out model. The US can't even produce a sub $12,000 car using fuel technology from the 1800s. And you can't even use the human slave labor argument, because the US cannot get children into factories fast enough apparently.
There's not a competition with China on EVs. There's not an arms race with China. China won biggly. The tariffs are just trying to prevent US automakers being laughed out of the room. And the thing is, the cars are so damn cheap, even with the stupid tariffs, they're cheaper than any US EV out there. That's what is so stupid about all of this.
The US is trying to prevent those cars coming here and even the best sacking and jacking the price tag upwards they can do, and no US car is still price competitive. Not even close. That is how amazingly bad the US auto industry has gotten. There is no fight, everyone else won, and the US auto makers are just running on fumes like the coal industry, and greasing the wheels in DC to stay relevant.
And the reason it got so bad isn't because pensions, or unions, or whatever they'd have you believe. It's hardheadedness and inertia by car CEOs, oil execs, and policy makers. It's what happens when you have decades of really bad decisions by a variety of people and the people who made those calls don't want to admit it to themselves. They just didn't want to believe that the oil cash was over. They thought all the automation would make them insanely rich and not actually owners of shit that would go out of date before their return on investment. They thought that keeping Congress would always keep them safe from international pressure. They were going to fight tooth and nail to keep that cash flowing in. They are dead set to sink this goddamn ship we are on before the admit they steered right towards the iceberg at full steam. And every second of hesitation, every moment of denial, every dollar to prevent the inevitable has cost the US auto industry massively.
And you can't even use the human slave labor argument, because the US cannot get children into factories fast enough apparently.
A few factories, none of them owned by US manufacturers, non of them unionized.
It's also impossible to sell for the same prices as Chinese manufacturers without the shit load of subsidies they get and underpaid labor from beginning to end.
People want workers to have good conditions and to lower the carbon footprint of the things they buy, but are unwilling to pay the price that comes with it and would rather buy crap made by workers that are basically slaves halfway across the world instead.
There are mid Sodium Ion based EVs that do 150 miles and they are maybe $10k. Sodium Ion wont be able to get to the 300+ mile mark as they are heavier and bulkier and longer ranges will be dominated by li-ion and the upcoming almost solid state li-ion but that 150 miles covers a lot of peoples usual daily scenarios. The extra topping is the batteries last a lot more cycles too (6000) so after your car has long fallen apart you can use it in your home to buy cheaper night power or for solar storage.
Iirc sodium ion is more akin to LiFePO4 in energy density. Sodium ion battery tech is also fairly immature compared to lithium ion batteries, so we have lots of room for improvement
Yeah, but that would cut into short term profits! :'(
America will progress like we usually do -- kicking and screaming, saying how unfair everything is while we are pulled by the short-hairs into the new century. If America wants to stay relevant, we should be leading industries, not trying to stifle innovation so our increasingly stale auto manufacturers can continue to deliver the same bullshit they've been shipping for years. In a "free" market plenty of people would afford to choose Chinese EVs, which are rapidly gaining in quality. Since Detroit can't compete on a level playing field, they bribe our federal government to implement protective measures against competition and our congress critters eat it right up.