So you think that we should ban 15k EVs b/c the price does not rep the cost? correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you just arg on another threat for a living wage?
No, not ban them. Just put a 100% tariff on them. You think 15k per car is the true cost of allowing China to dominate the EV industry in the US? Let's get all our chips and AI from China too. I'm sure they'd be willing to sell that stuff to us cheap too.
You seem to have a very schizophrenic view of these things IMO. back & forth on these things is prob not going anywhere.
&, you fancy yourself as someone who cares about the poor....wow. There are those that need to eat & don’t have your privilege.
Using tariffs to protect key industries isn't necessarily bad, the issue is that it needs to be combined with other sensible action. For example, placing high tariffs on imported Chinese EVs, but encouraging them to manufacture in the US, bringing with them their capital, technology, supply chains, perhaps even forcing them to profit share like they did with American manufacturers with their 50/50 JV requirement from a few years back. I think that would've been a solid strategy. What we're doing instead is placing high tariffs on imported EVs, and then also discourage them from setting up in the US, putting up barriers for Chinese investment so we can't access their capital, pressuring the likes of Ford from accessing their tech, and then placing high tariffs on the rest of their supply chain. The steel tariffs alone increased our cost by ~$700 per car, then you add things like tariffs (or other barriers like exemption from subsidies) on batteries, battery components, etc. and finally the 100% tariff that protects the finished product from competition, and you'll only end up with expensive, uncompetitive products. Now rinse and repeat with other products China excels at making, like solar panels and now drones, and we'll be creating product after product that's uncompetitive and companies that suck up more and more subsidy dollars to stay alive. We need to find our competitive advantage. It's impossible for them to subsidize every industry and sell everything at a loss, they have to make money somewhere. We should take advantage of some cheap inputs from China, and use the resources saved to develop our competitive advantage.
Before anyone gets too spun up, I would like to see if the Chinese cars can even meet US safety standards. Geely (now owns Volvo cars), Cherry, Nio and BYD have been building low cost cars for over a decade that are not allowed into the US because of horrific road safety scores. That IS protectionism of a sort, but it is proper regulatory protection. Tata Motors of India has been running into the same problem 3 times trying to qualify a sub-$10k for the US market that has never happened. While I agree with some appropriate tariffs on Chinese EVs (I believe the E.U. just implemented a 100% tariff) due to the HUGE government subsidies that they receive, especially as it pertains to hiring armies of people who largely due nothing, and get virtually "at cost" China sourced materials. Yet, even with all of that, if the vehicles can pass the stringent US standards, I would think you would want the competition in your market??
thread insanity recap because we (wrongly) think that a trade deficit means that wealth is transferred from the US to China we arg for Tariffs China is trying to actually transfer wealth to us & we arg for Tariffs to stop it If a country isn't abiding by free trade, we arg that we should not abide by free trade. that's like China shooting us in the leg & to get them back, we shoot ourselves in the other leg. those who usually arg against corp welfare arguing for corp welfare....nutty as a lemur. Those who usually arg for the poor, arguing against the poor. insanist of all, I agree with nearly everything @wgbgator has posted.
But you are ok with the US government doing this, western corporations and their partners? Just not China because China = bad??
Do you think we should become dependent on China to supply us with important products (computer chips, for example) just because they're cheaper?
Who's 'we?' Just curious in what context this choice should be made for everyone? If the government doesnt want to buy Chinese-made for its systems, cool. But I dont know why someone shouldnt be able to buy a $200 smart phone made in China. Should we let Apple be dependent on making all new smart phones in the market an $800-1500 proposition? Who are "we" helping here? And who is dependent on what?
You are whistling past the graveyard wrt China. They are at war with the US in every way possible: economic, military, social, etc. Any foothold they get anywhere no matter how benign or innocent it appears is an opportunity they could exploit to further the interests of the CCP or PLA. They arrogantly flew an espionage balloon over our country FWIW. China was found guilty of turning restaurants in other countries outside of China into spy depots with spy tech all over the restaurant to collect any information that could be valuable to them in a stray conversation. You can whistle past the graveyard, and play dumb. However, there is no pretext that is off limits that China wouldn't use to advance the interests of the CCP or the PLA. In other instances China has exploited business relationships with companies in foreign countries to silence the criticism of an employee of that company. Once you understand the modus operandi of the CCP, you know they can't be trusted with anything. No Chinese business can be trusted as anything other than a CCP or PLA front group. Cars could easily be turned into spy depots and data collection mines for the CCP and the PLA. People who are OK with this and know China operates this way simply choose to live in their willfully ignorant bubble. You can be that way, but I'm not going play dumb when we are dealing with an adversary that looks to exploit any situation under any pretext they can possibly think of. You might think that is outlandish, but a BYD version of Siri is a real possibility that could serve as a pretext for 24/7 voice collection in BYD cars that could further China's infrastructure on US soil to conduct similar operations but on a much larger scale. BYD dominating the auto market opens up a pandora's box of possibilities that China would love to exploit on US soil, and yet you want to sit there and pretend it is no big deal? OK. You can live in ignorance if you want. I will not be joining you in that.
'We' is our country. Are there any products you think we should make ourselves and not depend on other countries to supply for us? Do you think allowing a country like China to have monopoly power over us for important products is ok?
Why would they have monopoly power over anything? Letting them enter the market creates competition. If they sell cheap EVs they wont control the EV market, unless other manufacturers cant present a case as to why to pay more for superior quality and dont try to compete on a low-end model of their own.
They would have monopoly power because they subsidize industries to sell products much cheaper than US companies can sell them for. That ultimately drives out the competition and we are left with one supplier that we are dependent on. Large corporations do this too, using mergers, market power, economies of scale, and unfair business practices to create monopoly power. We see it over and over. You're cool with all that?
I'm not in favor of monopolies, but if we allow Uber, Amazon, or whoever to burn money and reject profitability to obtain market share, I don't know what the case is against Chinese corporations. I hate Uber and Amazon, they are basically their own totalitarian organizations antithetical to my values, why should I care that they started in the USA?
