3 ms·

Especially for US investors I suspect. That this is legal and seems to be at least partially government led, is absolutely mind boggling to me.

by pard68 3y ago

peterfirefly 3y ago
It isn't quite legal -- it's just customary to pretend it is. The dealership situation in the US is a good comparison -- Tesla refused to comply with the parasites in the American system and set up dealerships. Tesla managed to sell on the internet or in neighbouring states while fighting to get many of the dealership protection laws overturned. They did indeed succeed in getting some of them overturned (deemed illegal), they succeeded in getting others interpreted differently (which means that the customary interpretation was illegal), they succeeded in getting yet others changed to be less extortionary. That fight is not quite over yet. An interesting wrinkle is that it is not actually in Tesla's interest to get rid of all those laws, as long as they are more of a bother to the competition than to Tesla ;) Some of the stuff that is happening in Sweden/Denmark/Norway/Finland is completely legal -- some of it is even fair and reasonable. Some of it isn't and relies on selective enforcement of laws or on customary but incorrect interpretations. Some of it is according to laws that are against constitutions. I think Tesla has a good case here, too. Tesla can fight dirty (but within the law) by making the unions unpopular AND by making it extremely clear to foreign investors that these countries don't have all that much rule of law in certain areas and are therefore risky places to invest. I wonder who happens to own a really, really big platform for spreading that kind of information...
- xorcist 3y ago
  > I think Tesla has a good case here You misunderstand. There is no case. Tesla refuses to negotiate with the labor market, and the labor market refuses to do business with them. They can either get a contract, in which case they are free to do business under contract law, or exit the market. > and are therefore risky places to invest It can certainly be argued that Sweden specifically has lax rule of law around the labor markets, depending on which countries you compare it with. But if you were to argue that the Nordic countries in general are risky places to invest, you'd likely get laughed out of the room. It is perhaps the region in the world with the strongest legal systems and stable societies and has spotless history of adhering to trade agreements and international rule of law.
  - peterfirefly 3y ago
    The people who actually work for Tesla do not refuse to do business with Tesla. It's other people who want to exercise their customary (but not really legal) right to extract private taxes who try to force Tesla to comply by sabotaging their business.
    - xorcist 3y ago
      This is either a misunderstanding or some sort of conspiracy theory I am unaware of. This is not a question of taxation, unless you are alluding to some "lawyer tax" which is the price of doing business. Tesla needs a contract with the labor market. It's that simple. Matters of the workplace is mostly under contract law in Sweden, as opposed to civil law. That's unusual internationally, even if all the Nordic countries have similar systems, but it is what it is. Free actors competing in an open market under contract law should be appealing to anyone with a libertarian bent. The people who actually work for Tesla are car mechanics and it is the union that organizes car mechanics that is the pushing for a contract, so it is certainly people who work there who is behind the strike. They are known by name and give interviews with media, you can fact check everything so there's nothing strange going on. And certainly nobody wants to sabotage anything. That would be counterproductive. Unions in general has every incentive to help create strong companies who can compete internationally and create as many local jobs as possible. This situation is not different, apart from the fact that they have not even started negotiations yet.
- cornholio 3y ago
  Speaking of dirty fights, I'm not quite sure if Sweden can afford to win this. They are a major exporter in the US, Volvo brands control 15% of the truck market. US is one of the three major export destinations for Sweden, and a good chunk of the $18 billion exports are vehicles and related parts and supplies. So if the Swedish state, by its inaction, allows an American car company to be targeted by public employees to the point where it is driven out of the market, the proportional retaliation from the US is not a 10% or 20% import duty; it's the complete blocking of Swedish brands. This would cost Sweden entire percentages of GDP and countless jobs.

Especially for US investors I suspect. That this is legal and seems to be at least partially government led, is absolutely mind boggling to me.

by pard68 3y ago

Especially for US investors I suspect. That this is legal and seems to be at least partially government led, is absolutely mind boggling to me.

peterfirefly 3y ago

It isn't quite legal -- it's just customary to pretend it is. The dealership situation in the US is a good comparison -- Tesla refused to comply with the parasites in the American system and set up dealerships. Tesla managed to sell on the internet or in neighbouring states while fighting to get many of the dealership protection laws overturned. They did indeed succeed in getting some of them overturned (deemed illegal), they succeeded in getting others interpreted differently (which means that the customary interpretation was illegal), they succeeded in getting yet others changed to be less extortionary. That fight is not quite over yet. An interesting wrinkle is that it is not actually in Tesla's interest to get rid of all those laws, as long as they are more of a bother to the competition than to Tesla ;) Some of the stuff that is happening in Sweden/Denmark/Norway/Finland is completely legal -- some of it is even fair and reasonable. Some of it isn't and relies on selective enforcement of laws or on customary but incorrect interpretations. Some of it is according to laws that are against constitutions. I think Tesla has a good case here, too. Tesla can fight dirty (but within the law) by making the unions unpopular AND by making it extremely clear to foreign investors that these countries don't have all that much rule of law in certain areas and are therefore risky places to invest. I wonder who happens to own a really, really big platform for spreading that kind of information...

xorcist 3y ago
> I think Tesla has a good case here You misunderstand. There is no case. Tesla refuses to negotiate with the labor market, and the labor market refuses to do business with them. They can either get a contract, in which case they are free to do business under contract law, or exit the market. > and are therefore risky places to invest It can certainly be argued that Sweden specifically has lax rule of law around the labor markets, depending on which countries you compare it with. But if you were to argue that the Nordic countries in general are risky places to invest, you'd likely get laughed out of the room. It is perhaps the region in the world with the strongest legal systems and stable societies and has spotless history of adhering to trade agreements and international rule of law.
- peterfirefly 3y ago
  The people who actually work for Tesla do not refuse to do business with Tesla. It's other people who want to exercise their customary (but not really legal) right to extract private taxes who try to force Tesla to comply by sabotaging their business.
  - xorcist 3y ago
    This is either a misunderstanding or some sort of conspiracy theory I am unaware of. This is not a question of taxation, unless you are alluding to some "lawyer tax" which is the price of doing business. Tesla needs a contract with the labor market. It's that simple. Matters of the workplace is mostly under contract law in Sweden, as opposed to civil law. That's unusual internationally, even if all the Nordic countries have similar systems, but it is what it is. Free actors competing in an open market under contract law should be appealing to anyone with a libertarian bent. The people who actually work for Tesla are car mechanics and it is the union that organizes car mechanics that is the pushing for a contract, so it is certainly people who work there who is behind the strike. They are known by name and give interviews with media, you can fact check everything so there's nothing strange going on. And certainly nobody wants to sabotage anything. That would be counterproductive. Unions in general has every incentive to help create strong companies who can compete internationally and create as many local jobs as possible. This situation is not different, apart from the fact that they have not even started negotiations yet.
cornholio 3y ago
Speaking of dirty fights, I'm not quite sure if Sweden can afford to win this. They are a major exporter in the US, Volvo brands control 15% of the truck market. US is one of the three major export destinations for Sweden, and a good chunk of the $18 billion exports are vehicles and related parts and supplies. So if the Swedish state, by its inaction, allows an American car company to be targeted by public employees to the point where it is driven out of the market, the proportional retaliation from the US is not a 10% or 20% import duty; it's the complete blocking of Swedish brands. This would cost Sweden entire percentages of GDP and countless jobs.