3 ms·
Simple: Toyota would stop being a motor company. It would instead start 10 new motor companies, and a parts manufacturing supplier system for those motor compan
by eesmith 4y ago
Simple: Toyota would stop being a motor company. It would instead start 10 new motor companies, and a parts manufacturing supplier system for those motor companies, and keep controlling interest in those new companies.
More deeply, I don't understand how it's analogous. Why are companies prohibited from selling more than 300K cars? Is it because of too-high pollution (CO2 emissions, tire micro particles, etc.)? Is it because of a mass desire to switch to public transit systems? To stop having so many traffic deaths?
If so, then the laws will likely result in a ban on the total number of new cars, or at least higher import fees and higher tax rate. And these all shift the economics of what Toyota would produce.
As an unlikely case, if the laws were passed due to a mass movement against displays of wealth, such that private car ownership is frowned upon and luxury cars frequently get vandalized, then Toyota isn't going to make many Lexus sales at all.
- tpoacher 4y agoYou're choosing to interpret the analogy outside of the bounds implied by the argument it is supposed to relate to. In which case the rebuttal to your argument is as simple as adding another arbitrary layer of assumptions that do not generalise, in order to restrict your use of arbitrary assumptions that do not generalise, e.g "the government will not allow that split, back to discussing the original scenario."