5 ms·

> Well, you’re wrong. There’s not much else to say bout that. That's an opinion, not a fact. > Because it prices the vehicles below points where others can co

> Well, you’re wrong. There’s not much else to say bout that. That's an opinion, not a fact. > Because it prices the vehicles below points where others can compete. This is way too expensive for something like that to last. The rush to the bottom is already killing so many chinese automakers locally. The idea that they can sustain such a money bleed globally is hard to believe.

galangalalgol 7mo ago
The ev and chip market may indeed be insurmountable to their subsidy model, but it has worked on so many other sectors that now only exist in China. They do have troubles discontinuing subsidies to sectors that capture government. But mostly the subsidize to bootstrap has worked wonderfully for them. Tariffs are one counter. But subsidizing your own existing sector to counter it is necessary as well and tariffs have the down side of making your industries uncompetitive globally. Argentina demonstrated this for us. An evenhanded subsidybthat doesn't pick winners is also necessary. China broke capitalism the same way VC does. Come in with a big enough bank roll and it doesn't matter if you are better if you can keep spending until the competition folds. The open question is if China's demographic issues will outpace productivity gains.
ericmay 7mo ago
> That's an opinion, not a fact. It’s not an opinion. You’re welcome to go read China’s own self-published strategic plans on this or a litany of news and policy journals discussing this. > This is way too expensive for something like that to last. How can you claim it’s too expensive if you’re claiming you don’t even buy that it’s happening?? > The rush to the bottom is already killing so many chinese automakers locally. The idea that they can sustain such an money bleed globally is plain asinine. Look at German automakers in China for a view of the future. As Chinese automakers compete and then consolidate they’ll raise prices of course but the level of competition and capacity build out will still have them underpricing other automakers due to economies of scale, cheap labor, and advanced manufacturing. They don’t need to sustain it really, globally they’re already poised to win which is why US, EU, Japan are going to have a lot of import controls, tariffs, and will utilize other tools to protect domestic industries.
- epolanski 7mo ago
  > It’s not an opinion. You’re welcome to go read China’s own self-published strategic plans on this or a litany of news and policy journals discussing this. I didn't say they don't prop their carmaking, battery or ev industries. I said that I don't buy the argument it's bad for us. > They don’t need to sustain it really, globally they’re already poised to win which is why US, EU, Japan are going to have a lot of import controls, tariffs, and will utilize other tools to protect domestic industries. Protectionism historically only helps industries in their earliest stages when you need to kickstart them, never when they are mature. At the end of the day western consumers and workers are always left with the bill if they cannot compete. It's us who will end up paying twice the amount for cars that aren't competitive, and don't have incentives to compete because they are protected anyway. You also need to understand I'm European. Not American. German/Italian economies are strongly export dependent. Exports amount for 50% of german economy and 30%+ of Italian one. Protecting internal markets achieves little to nothing, which is why Germany and Italy were among those less willing to tariff chinese cars. US has a giant internal market and is not a good exporting economy, it's core exports are financial and IT services.
  - ericmay 7mo ago
    > I didn't say they don't prop their carmaking, battery or ev industries. I said that I don't buy the argument it's bad for us. And I explained why it was bad for us. > Protectionism historically only helps industries in their earliest stages when you need to kickstart them, never when they are mature. Never is a strong word. You're assuming that the Chinese EV industry isn't still in the kickstarting stages. The goal is to, via subsidies and capability to deindustrialize other parts of the world. Through that lens you can see their actions quite clearly. As a European you should be particularly worried if you value labor. When you say things like German and Italian economies are export dependent it begs the question: what happens when those exports to their #1/#2 export market (China) collapse, and then China - because as you said of course Germany and Italy aren't willing to tariff Chinese cars - comes in to the EU and then outcompetes German and Italian automakers too? What does that leave you with? It leaves you with: China - dominating EV sales and a massive player in the auto market. America - protected domestic industry that's not reliant on exports, little to no competition from China Japan - serving US/EU global markets and protecting domestic industries Europe - Collapse of industrial capacity to make vehicles, maybe with tariffs or import controls will have workers at Chinese factories making cars (with profits and capital of course heading back to the home market). Follows the British model a bit with focus on luxury automobiles (Ferrari, Aston Martin, things like that) I hear your point about subsidies in American and European markets and how regular people are "left with the bill", but that's mostly because regulators and those working in government are incompetent, by and large, not because there aren't actions one can take. China serves as a clear counter example. And then you could also look at other countries and steps they've taken to shore up their domestic industries or otherwise.
kubb 7mo ago
It seems like you're ignoring real-life things that happened to fit your world model.
danaris 7mo ago
> That's an opinion, not a fact. No, that's not how this works. It's either a correct fact or an incorrect fact. And if you don't know whether it's correct or incorrect, that doesn't mean nobody does, and it certainly doesn't mean it's an opinion. An opinion would be "I think the way China is subsidizing its EV production is bad."

galangalalgol 7mo ago

The ev and chip market may indeed be insurmountable to their subsidy model, but it has worked on so many other sectors that now only exist in China. They do have troubles discontinuing subsidies to sectors that capture government. But mostly the subsidize to bootstrap has worked wonderfully for them. Tariffs are one counter. But subsidizing your own existing sector to counter it is necessary as well and tariffs have the down side of making your industries uncompetitive globally. Argentina demonstrated this for us. An evenhanded subsidybthat doesn't pick winners is also necessary. China broke capitalism the same way VC does. Come in with a big enough bank roll and it doesn't matter if you are better if you can keep spending until the competition folds. The open question is if China's demographic issues will outpace productivity gains.

ericmay 7mo ago

> That's an opinion, not a fact. It’s not an opinion. You’re welcome to go read China’s own self-published strategic plans on this or a litany of news and policy journals discussing this. > This is way too expensive for something like that to last. How can you claim it’s too expensive if you’re claiming you don’t even buy that it’s happening?? > The rush to the bottom is already killing so many chinese automakers locally. The idea that they can sustain such an money bleed globally is plain asinine. Look at German automakers in China for a view of the future. As Chinese automakers compete and then consolidate they’ll raise prices of course but the level of competition and capacity build out will still have them underpricing other automakers due to economies of scale, cheap labor, and advanced manufacturing. They don’t need to sustain it really, globally they’re already poised to win which is why US, EU, Japan are going to have a lot of import controls, tariffs, and will utilize other tools to protect domestic industries.

epolanski 7mo ago
> It’s not an opinion. You’re welcome to go read China’s own self-published strategic plans on this or a litany of news and policy journals discussing this. I didn't say they don't prop their carmaking, battery or ev industries. I said that I don't buy the argument it's bad for us. > They don’t need to sustain it really, globally they’re already poised to win which is why US, EU, Japan are going to have a lot of import controls, tariffs, and will utilize other tools to protect domestic industries. Protectionism historically only helps industries in their earliest stages when you need to kickstart them, never when they are mature. At the end of the day western consumers and workers are always left with the bill if they cannot compete. It's us who will end up paying twice the amount for cars that aren't competitive, and don't have incentives to compete because they are protected anyway. You also need to understand I'm European. Not American. German/Italian economies are strongly export dependent. Exports amount for 50% of german economy and 30%+ of Italian one. Protecting internal markets achieves little to nothing, which is why Germany and Italy were among those less willing to tariff chinese cars. US has a giant internal market and is not a good exporting economy, it's core exports are financial and IT services.
- ericmay 7mo ago
  > I didn't say they don't prop their carmaking, battery or ev industries. I said that I don't buy the argument it's bad for us. And I explained why it was bad for us. > Protectionism historically only helps industries in their earliest stages when you need to kickstart them, never when they are mature. Never is a strong word. You're assuming that the Chinese EV industry isn't still in the kickstarting stages. The goal is to, via subsidies and capability to deindustrialize other parts of the world. Through that lens you can see their actions quite clearly. As a European you should be particularly worried if you value labor. When you say things like German and Italian economies are export dependent it begs the question: what happens when those exports to their #1/#2 export market (China) collapse, and then China - because as you said of course Germany and Italy aren't willing to tariff Chinese cars - comes in to the EU and then outcompetes German and Italian automakers too? What does that leave you with? It leaves you with: China - dominating EV sales and a massive player in the auto market. America - protected domestic industry that's not reliant on exports, little to no competition from China Japan - serving US/EU global markets and protecting domestic industries Europe - Collapse of industrial capacity to make vehicles, maybe with tariffs or import controls will have workers at Chinese factories making cars (with profits and capital of course heading back to the home market). Follows the British model a bit with focus on luxury automobiles (Ferrari, Aston Martin, things like that) I hear your point about subsidies in American and European markets and how regular people are "left with the bill", but that's mostly because regulators and those working in government are incompetent, by and large, not because there aren't actions one can take. China serves as a clear counter example. And then you could also look at other countries and steps they've taken to shore up their domestic industries or otherwise.

kubb 7mo ago

It seems like you're ignoring real-life things that happened to fit your world model.

danaris 7mo ago

> That's an opinion, not a fact. No, that's not how this works. It's either a correct fact or an incorrect fact. And if you don't know whether it's correct or incorrect, that doesn't mean nobody does, and it certainly doesn't mean it's an opinion. An opinion would be "I think the way China is subsidizing its EV production is bad."