3 ms·

Industry talking points, meant to convince you to subsidize them.

Retric 9mo ago
You don’t need to subsidize domestic companies to adjust for currency exchange rate manipulation. The government could for example impose a tariff that covers half the difference thus maintaining an unfair advantage for Chinese companies. Thus profiting from the manipulation without placing excessive burden on domestic companies.
- eggnet 9mo ago
  I assume you're joking, but this is just sales tax.
  - Retric 9mo ago
    Tariffs are quite different than a sales tax because they can select winners and losers in a market. Cane sugar vs sugar beets etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_beet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_beet However, they don’t have to be high enough to change who wins, even small ones adjust how much foreign subsidies manipulate the market. Foreign governments should consider how much US corn syrup impacts domestic consumption for example as a separate issue from how it impacts domestic sugar production. China’s currency manipulation has second order effects that benefits Americans. We don’t necessarily want China to stop, instead the goal should be to minimize the harm while extracting maximum benefits. A small tariff that caused them to double down on currency manipulation would be a massive win.
- rapidfl 9mo ago
  Agree subsidies does not seem like the correct incentive structure. But that's what the other guy is doing so I guess that's what we have to do. In general, can the EV industry survive without government subsidies? Maybe now it can in the US. Also not convinced EVs (as they are currently) are vastly superior to ICE cars. Not accounting for the potential for ICE cars to vastly improve if there wasn't so much vested interest. So the whole EV industry seems a bit unsustainable...
  - Retric 9mo ago
    For almost everyone with home charging, EV’s are a substantial win even without subsidies. There’s so many little wins like being able to turn the car on to warm up in a garage without filling it with exhaust. That’s a long way from every driver, but the EV industry doesn’t need to make up every car sale to survive just fine. ICE cars can’t get vastly better they are simply too close to fundamental limits. It’s quickly becoming a competition between hybrids and EV’s.
    - rapidfl 9mo ago
      That's my point about ICE not innovating enough. And of course hybrid would be one of the innovations. Also it should have more electronic luxuries and connectivity to match the newly designed EVs. Hybrids would carry a bigger battery that can pre warm without engine running. ICE itself is close to fundamental limits. But iiuc other parts like frames and chasis are not, like they could be lighter and stronger. ICE cars have bigger mileage than equivalent EVs? Meaning you fill gas once every few weeks in 5 mins. > EV’s are a substantial win even without subsidies Why are they subsidized then? It is somehow better than no subsidies from the company's viewpoint.
      - Retric 9mo ago
        > Meaning you fill gas once every few weeks in 5 mins. Home charging supplies more energy with less cost and effort. It’s physically impossible for ICE cars to win here as I will park at home and stay at home for a while, I don’t need to go to a gas station and then stand around for a few minutes. > Why are they subsidized then? Initially it was all about helping the technology become competitive, which it has. As to why it’s a good idea, ICE cars have negative externalities due to tailpipe emissions. Much like cigarettes burning stuff = public health hazard. Mandatory catalytic converters help, but as I benefit when you buy an EV instead of a ICE car I don’t mind chipping in for some of the cost of an EV. The alternative of simply taxing ICE engines or gas etc would be equally effective tool, just harder to pass politically.
        9mo ago

You don’t need to subsidize domestic companies to adjust for currency exchange rate manipulation. The government could for example impose a tariff that covers half the difference thus maintaining an unfair advantage for Chinese companies. Thus profiting from the manipulation without placing excessive burden on domestic companies.

eggnet 9mo ago
I assume you're joking, but this is just sales tax.
- Retric 9mo ago
  Tariffs are quite different than a sales tax because they can select winners and losers in a market. Cane sugar vs sugar beets etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_beet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_beet However, they don’t have to be high enough to change who wins, even small ones adjust how much foreign subsidies manipulate the market. Foreign governments should consider how much US corn syrup impacts domestic consumption for example as a separate issue from how it impacts domestic sugar production. China’s currency manipulation has second order effects that benefits Americans. We don’t necessarily want China to stop, instead the goal should be to minimize the harm while extracting maximum benefits. A small tariff that caused them to double down on currency manipulation would be a massive win.
rapidfl 9mo ago
Agree subsidies does not seem like the correct incentive structure. But that's what the other guy is doing so I guess that's what we have to do. In general, can the EV industry survive without government subsidies? Maybe now it can in the US. Also not convinced EVs (as they are currently) are vastly superior to ICE cars. Not accounting for the potential for ICE cars to vastly improve if there wasn't so much vested interest. So the whole EV industry seems a bit unsustainable...
- Retric 9mo ago
  For almost everyone with home charging, EV’s are a substantial win even without subsidies. There’s so many little wins like being able to turn the car on to warm up in a garage without filling it with exhaust. That’s a long way from every driver, but the EV industry doesn’t need to make up every car sale to survive just fine. ICE cars can’t get vastly better they are simply too close to fundamental limits. It’s quickly becoming a competition between hybrids and EV’s.
  - rapidfl 9mo ago
    That's my point about ICE not innovating enough. And of course hybrid would be one of the innovations. Also it should have more electronic luxuries and connectivity to match the newly designed EVs. Hybrids would carry a bigger battery that can pre warm without engine running. ICE itself is close to fundamental limits. But iiuc other parts like frames and chasis are not, like they could be lighter and stronger. ICE cars have bigger mileage than equivalent EVs? Meaning you fill gas once every few weeks in 5 mins. > EV’s are a substantial win even without subsidies Why are they subsidized then? It is somehow better than no subsidies from the company's viewpoint.
    - Retric 9mo ago
      > Meaning you fill gas once every few weeks in 5 mins. Home charging supplies more energy with less cost and effort. It’s physically impossible for ICE cars to win here as I will park at home and stay at home for a while, I don’t need to go to a gas station and then stand around for a few minutes. > Why are they subsidized then? Initially it was all about helping the technology become competitive, which it has. As to why it’s a good idea, ICE cars have negative externalities due to tailpipe emissions. Much like cigarettes burning stuff = public health hazard. Mandatory catalytic converters help, but as I benefit when you buy an EV instead of a ICE car I don’t mind chipping in for some of the cost of an EV. The alternative of simply taxing ICE engines or gas etc would be equally effective tool, just harder to pass politically.
      - 9mo ago