4 ms·

Did EU not learn from funding Russia. It is not a good idea to empower dictatorships.

by cscurmudgeon 3y ago

jorvi 3y ago
I sure hope you didn’t type this on a mobile device, or any PC made after the 2000s.
- dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
  You're making his point.
  - jorvi 3y ago
    His point is overly dogmatic. With the Russian gas dependence, shutting down supply meant industries would shut down and (with a freak winter) people might be unable to heat their homes. If Chinese EVs become common in the EU market, it diminishes EU car manufacturing and then China does a rug pull and stops exporting to the EU.. American, Korean and Japanese EV manufacturers will fill the gap in marketshare, perhaps at a slight premium but still well below current EV prices. What horror. And it isn’t like Volkswagen will roll over and die. They’ll just face market pressure to innovate and become more efficient.
    - cscurmudgeon 3y ago
      Meanwhile, you completely ignore China using EU money to build its offensive capabilities against Taiwan.
      - jorvi 3y ago
        China must have some magical coffers that they are simultaneously losing $50 billion+ a year on subsidizing Chinese EV makers.. but somehow also earning money on it and spending it on national defense? I don’t like the direction China is headed either, but anyone with even an ounce of pragmaticness realizes that we still live in a world of global trade. Also, the US is trading with China to the tune of $750 000+ billion a year. So, I guess they should cut off all that trade to stop funding their future adversary.. or perhaps it is not so simple?
        dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
        Huh? China has something like $4 trillion in reserves plug ongoing taxation, it can and has subsidised EVs and other industries more than that. The point is that we've made a mistake and we're in a pickle. We're dependent on our adversary and we should be looking to get out of that situation in a way that doesn't disadvantage ourselves further. Are you just saying there's nothing that can be done? Just looking to change direction is a useful step.
        jorvi 3y ago
        > Huh? China has something like $4 trillion in reserves plug ongoing taxation, it can and has subsidised EVs and other industries more than that. That is not the thing I was giving a counterpoint to though. That was "EU trade is funding aggression against Taiwan" (with the implication that importing cheap EVs would increase the net inflow of capital). > The point is that we've made a mistake and we're in a pickle. We're dependent on our adversary and we should be looking to get out of that situation in a way that doesn't disadvantage ourselves further. > Are you just saying there's nothing that can be done? Just looking to change direction is a useful step. But at least here, we aren't in a pickle. China has little leverage here, and they can't easily increase that leverage either. Let me simplify my point: if China wants to massively subsidize the electrification of the EU's car population, why not let them? They won't reach global market dominance, and it both speeds up our electrification and saves our citizens' money. The only one's getting pinched are the shareholders of EU car companies. I feel similarly about solar panels, even though China has achieved market dominance there. They cannot leverage their position there, because solar panels are not a prohibitively difficult product to set up a supply chain for, and the demand for them is somewhat elastic. It would slow down the closure of fossil power plants and maybe force a few old one's to reopen, but that's it. With EVs, buyers would just switch over to other brands and part of the global supply would get redirected as EU prices go up. I worry much more about China's grip on rare metal processing and mid tier chip production. The rare metals go into "everything" hot right now, and everyone is so focused on high-end chip production that they're forgetting how many everyday products run on "low" density chips.
        3y ago
- Epa095 3y ago
  How is it at all relevant that most of OPs phone is (presumably) made in China? https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:750/format:webp/0*R013OVA6f61IqN10 https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:750/format:webp/0*R013...
  - jorvi 3y ago
    These days, smartphones and PCs are pretty much critical to function in society. We accept that those are for-the-most part made in China, despite “funding a dictatorship”, because we realize that we can’t expect someone on median income to pay $3000 for a phone or $5000 for a laptop. Much as I’d like it to be different, cars are also still critical to function in much of society. We want everyone in EVs ASAP. Where would one get these good quality cheap EVs, even at some geopolitical cost..
    - cscurmudgeon 3y ago
      The way to do that is by funding local companies and increasing density and public transport. You also made an error. Cars are essential. EVs are not the only type of car.
      - jorvi 3y ago
        > The way to do that is by funding local companies.. You do not understand the car industry. Giving them less competitive pressure will not increase car quality or lower sales price. > ..and increasing density.. Increasing density during an already extreme housing crunch? Genius. > ..and public transport. I would love to see better public transport, but most voters are not ready to pony up the taxes for a public transit network that has enough fidelity to sufficiently replace cars. > You also made an error. Cars are essential. EVs are not the only type of car. Hydrogen is not happening, and staying with ICEs means screwing over the planet.
        AnthonyMouse 3y ago
        > Giving them less competitive pressure will not increase car quality or lower sales price. Subsidies and protectionism don't work the same way. Protectionism allows them to produce overpriced junk because the domestic market is required to buy it. Subsidies allow them to spend on R&D and build economies of scale which can result in sustainable competitiveness even after the subsidies are gone. > Increasing density during an already extreme housing crunch? Genius. How do you imagine housing supply is increased when substantially all of the existing lots already contain existing (mostly low density) housing? > I would love to see better public transport, but most voters are not ready to pony up the taxes for a public transit network that has enough fidelity to sufficiently replace cars. Higher density is a prerequisite for functioning public transport. Sending a mostly empty bus to the suburbs is basically useless. > Hydrogen is not happening, and staying with ICEs means screwing over the planet. The chances of converting 100% of new car sales to EVs overnight are zero. Meanwhile selling two 50MPG hybrids is about as good as selling one EV and one 25MPG SUV.
- cscurmudgeon 3y ago
  Literally https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/we-should-improve-society-somewhat https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/we-should-improve-society-som...
MomoXenosaga 3y ago
Yes let's hope Trump doesn't win.
- cscurmudgeon 3y ago
  Didn't German diplomats laugh at Trump when he warned them of Russia. Now they live off US tay payers money.

Did EU not learn from funding Russia. It is not a good idea to empower dictatorships.

jorvi 3y ago

I sure hope you didn’t type this on a mobile device, or any PC made after the 2000s.

dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
You're making his point.
- jorvi 3y ago
  His point is overly dogmatic. With the Russian gas dependence, shutting down supply meant industries would shut down and (with a freak winter) people might be unable to heat their homes. If Chinese EVs become common in the EU market, it diminishes EU car manufacturing and then China does a rug pull and stops exporting to the EU.. American, Korean and Japanese EV manufacturers will fill the gap in marketshare, perhaps at a slight premium but still well below current EV prices. What horror. And it isn’t like Volkswagen will roll over and die. They’ll just face market pressure to innovate and become more efficient.
  - cscurmudgeon 3y ago
    Meanwhile, you completely ignore China using EU money to build its offensive capabilities against Taiwan.
    - jorvi 3y ago
      China must have some magical coffers that they are simultaneously losing $50 billion+ a year on subsidizing Chinese EV makers.. but somehow also earning money on it and spending it on national defense? I don’t like the direction China is headed either, but anyone with even an ounce of pragmaticness realizes that we still live in a world of global trade. Also, the US is trading with China to the tune of $750 000+ billion a year. So, I guess they should cut off all that trade to stop funding their future adversary.. or perhaps it is not so simple?
      - dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
        Huh? China has something like $4 trillion in reserves plug ongoing taxation, it can and has subsidised EVs and other industries more than that. The point is that we've made a mistake and we're in a pickle. We're dependent on our adversary and we should be looking to get out of that situation in a way that doesn't disadvantage ourselves further. Are you just saying there's nothing that can be done? Just looking to change direction is a useful step.
        jorvi 3y ago
        > Huh? China has something like $4 trillion in reserves plug ongoing taxation, it can and has subsidised EVs and other industries more than that. That is not the thing I was giving a counterpoint to though. That was "EU trade is funding aggression against Taiwan" (with the implication that importing cheap EVs would increase the net inflow of capital). > The point is that we've made a mistake and we're in a pickle. We're dependent on our adversary and we should be looking to get out of that situation in a way that doesn't disadvantage ourselves further. > Are you just saying there's nothing that can be done? Just looking to change direction is a useful step. But at least here, we aren't in a pickle. China has little leverage here, and they can't easily increase that leverage either. Let me simplify my point: if China wants to massively subsidize the electrification of the EU's car population, why not let them? They won't reach global market dominance, and it both speeds up our electrification and saves our citizens' money. The only one's getting pinched are the shareholders of EU car companies. I feel similarly about solar panels, even though China has achieved market dominance there. They cannot leverage their position there, because solar panels are not a prohibitively difficult product to set up a supply chain for, and the demand for them is somewhat elastic. It would slow down the closure of fossil power plants and maybe force a few old one's to reopen, but that's it. With EVs, buyers would just switch over to other brands and part of the global supply would get redirected as EU prices go up. I worry much more about China's grip on rare metal processing and mid tier chip production. The rare metals go into "everything" hot right now, and everyone is so focused on high-end chip production that they're forgetting how many everyday products run on "low" density chips.
        3y ago
Epa095 3y ago
How is it at all relevant that most of OPs phone is (presumably) made in China? https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:750/format:webp/0*R013OVA6f61IqN10 https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:750/format:webp/0*R013...
- jorvi 3y ago
  These days, smartphones and PCs are pretty much critical to function in society. We accept that those are for-the-most part made in China, despite “funding a dictatorship”, because we realize that we can’t expect someone on median income to pay $3000 for a phone or $5000 for a laptop. Much as I’d like it to be different, cars are also still critical to function in much of society. We want everyone in EVs ASAP. Where would one get these good quality cheap EVs, even at some geopolitical cost..
  - cscurmudgeon 3y ago
    The way to do that is by funding local companies and increasing density and public transport. You also made an error. Cars are essential. EVs are not the only type of car.
    - jorvi 3y ago
      > The way to do that is by funding local companies.. You do not understand the car industry. Giving them less competitive pressure will not increase car quality or lower sales price. > ..and increasing density.. Increasing density during an already extreme housing crunch? Genius. > ..and public transport. I would love to see better public transport, but most voters are not ready to pony up the taxes for a public transit network that has enough fidelity to sufficiently replace cars. > You also made an error. Cars are essential. EVs are not the only type of car. Hydrogen is not happening, and staying with ICEs means screwing over the planet.
      - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
        > Giving them less competitive pressure will not increase car quality or lower sales price. Subsidies and protectionism don't work the same way. Protectionism allows them to produce overpriced junk because the domestic market is required to buy it. Subsidies allow them to spend on R&D and build economies of scale which can result in sustainable competitiveness even after the subsidies are gone. > Increasing density during an already extreme housing crunch? Genius. How do you imagine housing supply is increased when substantially all of the existing lots already contain existing (mostly low density) housing? > I would love to see better public transport, but most voters are not ready to pony up the taxes for a public transit network that has enough fidelity to sufficiently replace cars. Higher density is a prerequisite for functioning public transport. Sending a mostly empty bus to the suburbs is basically useless. > Hydrogen is not happening, and staying with ICEs means screwing over the planet. The chances of converting 100% of new car sales to EVs overnight are zero. Meanwhile selling two 50MPG hybrids is about as good as selling one EV and one 25MPG SUV.
cscurmudgeon 3y ago
Literally https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/we-should-improve-society-somewhat https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/we-should-improve-society-som...

MomoXenosaga 3y ago

Yes let's hope Trump doesn't win.

cscurmudgeon 3y ago
Didn't German diplomats laugh at Trump when he warned them of Russia. Now they live off US tay payers money.