So free markets are a terrible idea now and countries practicing import substitution weren’t impoverishing their people.
US hypocrisy at it’s finest.
„Free market“? Speaking of hypocrisy. Chinese car brands are so heavily subsidized they probably cost the Chinese economy more than they make selling them at the moment. China is clearly trying to drown the global market with cheap cars so they can ramp up prices immensely once they have killed the competition and have become a monopoly. China hasn‘t been the extreme low income country to produce super cheaply for a long time and they couldn‘t produce cars this cheap in a free market situation.
Many countries and the EU have measures against such practices because state run operations with the sole purpose to destroy an industry (which this is) undermine the very idea of the free market or even trade relationships.
Alternatively we could start subsiding local car makers and play the same little game China is playing but more cars is honestly the last thing we need right now. Tariffs are a much smoother option to deal with this even when they have a bad rep.
Ideally we use that generated money from tariffs to subsidize public transport so we don‘t get cheaper cars but cheaper alternatives but that‘s still just a dream I‘m afraid.
Whatever the case, one should look at super cheap cars and what that means in the long run more critically.
Alternatively we could start subsiding local car makers
We have been. Bailout after bailout. For the longest fucking time, and have had insane trade rules and tarrigs in place for decades and decades. I’d argue this is what it looks like to have another country finally being able to play on a level playing field.
After the auto industry intentionally killed public transport.
The fact that one of the most powerful monopolies in the world went bankrupt and was forced to be bailed out by taxpayers more than once should really be a disqualifier for any future endeavors.
you accidentally forget to pay ur credit card minimum for one month and you’re docked so many credit score points that you’re ineligible for being given a loan.
but we bail out these megacorps time and again and just keep letting them operate like nothing’s amiss
shit’s borked (intentionally, to favor those with means)
GM received more than $7 billions of subsidies and around $50 billions of “Federal loans, loan guarantees and bailout assistance”.
US auto manufacturers are getting their fair share of subsidies.
To be fair GM sold or closed a lot of its brands and foreign subsidiaries, and paid back the loan.
I fucking hate what the US auto industry has historically and is currently doing (making constantly bigger and more expensive trucks in a time we need smaller lighter EVs), but it’s actually a bit different from the SpaceX or EV credit subsidies and more of a low interest loan.
The US has far too many dispersed rural towns for public transit to cover. Yes we need more high speed rail and light rail, but we’re gonna need personal cars because of distances, weather and employment practices for a long time still. And there’s no reason they need to be 3 ton high speed blind spots.
Is it a level playing field? In China workers rights are pretty non-existent and there’s no OSHA equivalent, at least not to the degree we have in the US. Then add in government subsidies, lower worker pay, reduced R&D costs because they pilfered the engineering from a US company, and you end up with a very lopsided market.
To be clear, I am in no way defending the US auto industry. They have little customer loyalty for a reason – low quality, overpriced, subscription dependent vehicles with terrible warranties, expensive service requirements, and invasive telemetry. They need more competition to force them to make more consumer-friendly decisions, but China is hardly a fair competitor.
In China workers rights are pretty non-existent and there’s no OSHA equivalent, at least not to the degree we have in the US
How much maternity leave d’you get in the US? Cause in China it’s a minimum of 90 days up to 180. And an extra 15~30 days of pat leave. Mandatory paid holiday? US: 0 China: 11. Sick leave? US: 0 China: months (at reduced rate). Vacation? US: 0, China: 1 to 3 weeks.
An employer that fails to allow an employee to take annual leave must pay that employee 300% of the employee’s daily wages for each unused vacation day
The work sfatey certainly remains an issue, like any developing country, but things are rapidly improving.
Efforts at work safety shall be oriented around people and reflect the principle of people first and life first, with top priority given to people’s life safety. The philosophy of safe development shall be adhered to and the principles of safety first, prevention as the main target as well as comprehensive administration shall be followed to forestall and resolve major safety risks at the source.
http://en.npc.gov.cn.cdurl.cn/2021-06/10/c_786248.htm
Things aren’t all roses in China, but y’all have to get off of your high horse when you know fuck all other than bland ass propaganda.
When was the second bailout? Or the first if you’re referring to something older.
You can‘t compare a bailout with an aggressive offensive. Especially since western car makers and many other manufacturers outsourced to China in the process. There are few to no parallels to be drawn here. A more accurate, albeit tasteless comparison would be the China opium wars. Because that‘s essentially what they‘re aiming to do: Making us addicts to their product. They‘re selling us the stuff at a loss because they know we‘ll come back for more and before we know it we‘re completely hooked. It‘s the exact same thing they‘re doing with Temu and TikTok.
We have subsidized the big three many times, and they return nothing back. At this point, they should be nationalized.
You have a very simple way of looking at things and are part of the problem that is going on.
Your ignorance is showing. Tuck it in.
You tankies really have a way with words.
Free markets were always a terrible idea, the USA economic system was basically founded on principles of regulation of goods like tea, tobacco, and alcohol.
It’s not a free market.
BYD is heavily subsidized .
Pretty sure big oil and car companies have been bailed out by the US government in the past. Plus america designs most of its cities so that you need to own a car. Seems like both markets are equally “free” at the end of the day.
The majority shareholder at GM is the US treasury.
One of the majority holders at Stelantis is their workers’ union.
A one time loan which made money is hardly a subsidy by comparison to China right now. That’s an absurd comparison. Apples to oranges. Hell apples to baseballs.
There is also CAFE standards that made small, effecient vehicles require extremely high emissions standards while allowing looser standards for larger, less effecient vehicles. Effectively limiting foriegn market influence while increasing both the price and size of the average vehicle on American roads.
That’s not a competitive subsidy though. Anyone can and don take advantage of those emissions. The US does not have access to China subsidized materials or labor to compete in that market.
BYD could build here and take advantage of that.
The US actually heavily tariffs foreign-made vehicles that could skirt the CAFE requirements the way American trucks do. Light trucks suffer the Chicken Tax and can only be made in Canada, US or Mexico to bypass that. Been that way since the UAW boss asked LJB to do something about the German imports growing.
So build them here, like every other foreign auto maker.
They accomplish two completely different effects by two completely different mechanisms. The former being available to every manufacturer.
They have never considered actually competing have they?
They’ve actually done the exact opposite. The lobbying, the import laws, the absence of a foreign export market, and the manufacturing of cars that would never pass safety laws anywhere else, all resulted in the kind of dogshit that Americans have to experience now. Why improve if you’re the only player
They do. For example here. Just not in your country.
They don’t compete here either.
They’ve stopped producing passenger cars, and the Chicken Tax means they don’t have to compete on trucks.
Couldn’t have a thought further from his mind
Detroit is easy to hate but there’s more wrong here than how much can-do energy they wake up in the morning with. If they competed on features and quality they could never compete on price. Everything we do to keep the dollar strong makes it impossible to manufacture here.
Nah man, that’s not the purpose of unrestrained capitalism. The point is to get big enough that you can buy out all the competition, then make your product cheaper and cheaper once there’s no one to compete against. It’s a bit like an economical algae bloom.
Michael Dunne has been competing the entire time, for the Chinese. His statements here aren’t fear, they’re shillery.
Oh no! The type of capitalism where we have to compete!
Make it go away, Daddy Trump!
Tbf notoriously China subsidizes BYD to net loss so its not exactly capitalism.
Did you forget all the bailouts US car manufacturers received?
Sadly, ever since “too big to fail”, any large corporation is now nearly indistinguishable from the federal government. Just another example of socialism for the rich, capitalism for the rest of us.
To clarify, the bailouts of US car companies were Chrysler around 1980 and GM and Chrysler around 2008. To help them avoid bankruptcy and the resulting loss of jobs, they received loan guarantees (like having a cosigner) and direct loans, all of which they paid back. I think the public generally has a misconception that a corporate “bailout” means they just giving them money, but it doesn’t.
Note - I’m not trying to convince you not to hate corporations, and there’s no need for a lecture on how evil they are, I know they are. Just clarifying that one topic.
The program started under W and ended under Obama and I think at the end the government actually made money off the deal.
Don’t confuse this with the COVID PPP loans that were given out by Trump, forgiven by Trump, and then had a lot of the records about them destroyed by Trump.
No confusion at all, I was talking about car company bailouts only, since the other person mentioned “all the bailouts US car manufacturers received”. I think the Bush/Obama thing you’re referring to was TARP, which was for financial institutions.
Not the same thing?
What do you think Walmart does when they enter a new market, the eat losses till the local competition folds and they are the only option left
Well don’t forget that Walmart itself is literally government subsidized when the people employed there still need food stamps or other welfare programs.
Your point is? They are both shit, agreed. The fact that we have asshole corps here, doesn’t mean we need more of them. We need to fight Walmart, not bring in the Walmart of cars.
The US subsidizes farms and petroleum.
It’s state sponsored capitalism and China has pumped a ton of money into BYD to get them to where they are.
I can see them giving larger tax breaks to companies in the US, but current administration is all in on tariffs as the way to increase our domestic production. It doesn’t make ours any better or cheaper, just everything else more expensive.
State sponsored capitalism is what everyone does. The only reason Tesla even exists is because of US government support
deleted by creator
So do a lot of other governments, to be fair. It’s one of those industries that employs a lot of people, and it’s always bad press to close it when a bit of money could have kept it. Certainly cheaper than putting thousands of people on benefits.
Plus there’s subsidies for domestic sales as well. The UK at least had a grant for plug in cars that they ended a few years ago, presumably just to get the infrastructure up and running.
But then the new vehicle price is neither here nor there in the long term, since most people drive used vehicles anyway. What matters is how many vehicles trickle down to the masses, and whether wear on the battery is a concern. Some of the early smaller models didn’t have great batteries to start with, but as a daily driver to the shops and work it’d probably be fine. For some reason the conversation always drifts over to “but what about that one time you drove across the state” or “remember that time you transported a fridge”, as if that’s something people can’t work around for the once a year they do it.
fair game IMHO. if you look at china as one big agent, then they can indeed act like that.
Newsflash: American car manufacturer says “Our cars are crap and overpriced”
Michael Dunne is actually someone who worked in Chinese Automotive manufacturing. He’s the Chinese car manufacturer saying “Chinese cars are good and cheap.”
His word is basically meaningless.
If you’re one of the largest and oldest car manufacturers in the world and the most “innovative” thing you’ve managed to do in the last 20 years is rebrand Buick into a young family brand, then you probably need some good competition.
Don’t forget the courage to not support CarPlay/Android Auto … just stupid.
the most “innovative” thing you’ve managed to do in the last 20 years is rebrand Buick
… then you simply have no excuse anymore to exist at all.
Well they wouldn’t if not for that hefty bailout by the American taxpayers that they got back in 2008.
Ford was the only one not to take a buyout, FYI.
Ford wouldn’t survive BYD either, though.
Greed rules the Western world.
In September 2009, Ford entered into an agreement with the Department of Energy and borrowed $5.9 billion
They still hadn’t paid it back in full in 2022.
P.S. Actually the average american would be benefited from that
Ford has been busy corporate decisioning itself into irrelevance for decades now. The only reason Ford is even still around is the F series.
Good. Fuckem. They make shitty, oversized trucks that are a danger to pedestrians and people who drive reasonably sized cars anyway.
My boss in the UK got one. In bright red. It looks like he’s driving a fucking fire engine.
My old boss was a huge man who went around in a little yellow convertible. We called him Noddy.
May I suggest calling him Fireman Sam?
Yeah, our VP rides around in a 2-door coupe and he’s very tall, while my coworker (who is shorter) drives a big SUV because “he doesn’t fit in smaller cars.” I’m also tall and drive a Toyota Prius, which is small.
At the end of the day, none of that’s legitimate, it’s just an excuse to buy the car you prefer.
Larger cars should cost more because they take up more space, wear out the roads faster, and impact the environment more.
At the end of the day, none of that’s legitimate, it’s just an excuse to buy the car you prefer.
Since when is buying what we prefer considered negative? Calling it an excuse seems short-sighted.
Buying what you prefer itself isn’t an issue, but that should be the reason instead of “I need it because X, Y, Z.” Most truck/SUV owners don’t need a truck/SUV, they just want one.
My issue with trucks and SUVs are that they make the road more dangerous, since there’s only so much a car manufacturer can do to protect against a vehicle more than twice as massive. That, and they’re artificially cheap here in the US because of stupid regulations intended for farmers that got applied to them to reduce emissions standards.
Some people don’t need a car but will buy one anyway, not sure what point you’re making there. I see no problem in people buying what they want over what they need. Choice is good and if you want to spend more on a vehicle for any reason, that’s OK.
Buses, dump trucks, ambulances, 18 wheelers, tow trucks etc. are all heavy and dangerous. The focus should be on better designed roads and better driver training, not limiting what people can drive.
I see no problem in people buying what they want over what they need.
Neither do I, I just don’t like it when people excuse their choices by using terms like “need.” People make a lot of silly choices because they claim to “need” something.
I just want people to be more honest with themselves and others about needs vs wants. If we classify things properly, I think people will naturally be more efficient with their resources and we’d have less consumer debt and whatnot.
His old one was very similar, but a darker colour so we called him The Fall Guy.
Or rather the few of us in the office old enough to remember that show did.
Dam maybe some of the American automakers who took billions in subsidies should have built cheaper cars instead of the largest trucks possible to skirt regulations.
I literally can’t afford an American car, i can afford a BYD tho.
I can afford neither, but if I had to save up for one it would be the BYD.
American cars are just large, stupid and inefficient. Also the parts are very expensive here in New Zealand
I bought a used Chevrolet Bolt '23 which is the closest I could get, they’re still relatively cheap and mine has been working great.
American cars have sucked compared to Asian cars since the 1970s. I don’t understand why people are acting all surprised that this is true in respect to BYD. Sure in the past products designed in China were stereotyped as poor quality knock offs of western designed goods, but in the past decade Chinese engineers have increasingly proven themselves as perfectly capable of making solid, innovative designs that improve upon those of their competitors. I think it’s kind of fucked up that everyone is so suddenly upset about China’s role in the world economy since everyone was completely fine using them for cheap labor over the past several decades and are just mad that Chinese companies are beating them at high skill labor and technology. Chinese companies do have an “unfair advantage” given how much they are backed by the Chinese government but American companies receive all sorts of money from the government for all sorts of things as well.
Americans have come to think of Chinese products as bad quality because of the American companies who engage them for cheaper labor. Walmart was known to order products made to a certain spec one year, then the next year demand the company increase production, but for the same amount paid as the previous year. The Chinese company, not wanting to lose the contract, obliges, but corners have to be cut. It should be called Americanesium, not Chineseum.
Derek Guy (Die, Workwear!) posted a thread a while back (I think about 6 months ago) about how the Chinese can and do make great quality products, pointing out high quality fabrics. Give them money to buy good raw materials, give them a decent wage, and they’ll put out a good product. Honestly, they probably have a more fair work ethic than some American companies that just feed their CEOs massive salaries or are owned by private equity.
Honestly, there’s a wide range of quality of stuff produced in China, but the expensive stuff isn’t getting brought over. The better stuff is either being used domestically or exported to India/SEA. From my limited experience importing stuff, the biggest common factor is the lack of final quality control. I ordered some small diesel engines because no else makes those but Yanmar and Yanmar prices themselves way out of my range. Even Yanmar doesn’t sell a 5hp engine. The 196cc Chinese diesel was well designed, the parts well built, but final assembly lacks consistence on the bolt torque spec and there was metal shaving left in the crank case. The bigger, more expensive diesel made by a different company had much better quality control, although it’s still necessary to flush the crank case. No one over there seems to do that.
Its largely american cope that they are not that good at manufacturing anymore. Chinese factories build things to spec, and the customer asks for cheap, so they get cheap.
Exactly!
They went through a period in the 90s where they had a huge leap in quality and almost matched Japanese imports of the time. I’d say GM is the only one who’s drivetrain quality is still on any comparable level with Asian imports. Ford gets some parts really right but then their beancounters make really dumb cuts to critical components that make many of their vehicles near lemons. I can’t think of a worse car manufacturer in the world right now than Stellantis, and they aren’t an American company anyway.
The “unfair advantage” bit has been incredibly funny to me ever since I sat in a call to prepare a joint research proposal and the representative of a certain large euro automotive supplier told us that their company would only participate in any project if they got at least a certain amount of government funding.
I am pretty sure there is some financial fuckery going on with BYD. My parents own two, and they are very nice, but way under priced compared to every other EV manufacturer.
Can’t prove anything of course, but there is something odd going on when everyone else is 20-30k more expensive.
Hard to feel sorry for GM though, they suckled at our governments (Australia) teet for decades before giving up and leaving entirely. At least if BYD is being propped up we are at least getting good cheap cars from it.
The financial fuckery is that they’re very heavily subsidized by the CCP. It’s not sustainable.
I’d argue it is.
Just look how Amazon got where it is now: Sell way under market price, till local competition closed shop, then squeeze.
I think your muddying sustainable and successful. It definitely can be successful, but its not sustainable.
Its also high risk, especially if you can’t crank up the prices enough later
Sustainable implies that they can keep doing it forever without changing. Switching later means what they are doing is not sustainable. It might be successful, but its not sustainable.
There’s sustainable practices and sustainable businesses. The latter is what others are arguing. Undercutting competition to take over a market is a sustainable practice IF you can hold out long enough. I’d wager the country of China can hold out longer than General Motors.
But the business model has to change in order to survive. The company cannot undercut forever, it actually needs to change in order to survive. The business model of today is not sustainable. They may have a large warchest, they may be able to crush GM, but once they do, or the warchest runs out, the business model must change.
If you want to make the argument that their overall plan with the later change is sustainable, thats fine, but this current phase is not sustainable.
BYD is already facing scrutiny for running Evergrande like accounting, and a lot of political pressures from other Chinese manufacturers. The risk is that they collapse like Evergrande, and that they drag public debt into it. The CCP might prop them up, so it light be safe. A car is different from a book, because you need lifetime service for it. If they go under, you might lose access to parts.
It might just be that, since BYD is serving such a large domestic market/population, that allows them to have cheaper cars? Something something, economies of scale. I’m no expert though.
There is a limit to that effect, though. And most observers agree that the state is subsidizing heavily.
You forgot the part where they raised prices on everything.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ttu55nEtC6o - How BYD overtook Tesla?
Brazil shuts BYD factory site over ‘slavery’ conditions
From 2016 and still true today:
Chinese Government Subsidies Play Major Part In Electric Car Maker BYD’s Rise
Yeah, subsidies and other benefits from governments exist but China is going all in.
My only point of confusion is that a 20k loss on every car is insane. I’m guessing its a bit of BYD is subsidised somewhat, and everyone else is price gouging somewhat. No idea the ratio.
Also odd that other Chinese brands (really only tried MG) dont seem to have the same high quality, high pricing that suggests the same level of crazy subsidies.
Honestly, there is just so much fuckery going I just have no idea what is what.
Rivian is losing about $30k per vehicle, but with much lower production numbers.
Thats crazy. Are those public numbers from rivian?
Rivian’s financial statements provide insight into its per-unit losses, though calculating an exact figure requires analyzing multiple variables. The company’s cost of goods sold (COGS), which includes direct production expenses, regularly exceeds revenue, leading to negative gross margins. According to its latest SEC filings, Rivian reported a gross loss per vehicle of approximately $39,000 in 2023, though this figure fluctuates based on production volume and operational efficiencies.
Not exactly a number they put in a press release, but as a publicly traded company it is published quarterly.
China subsidises industries it wants to dominate in, allowing them to sell for less than cost. It’s why the EU also tariffs Chinese cars.
Also for anything the big 3 make in the US, I believe they use union labor? Not sure if they did for Aussie market cars.
The same thing happened in the 80s with Japan. The Japanese were no longer making crappy cars but small and very reliable, affordable cars. Detroit was still making rust buckets, obsessing over powerful engines with bodies that rotted out and defects galore. Detroit got beaten up badly (Chrysler had to get a gov bailout) until they cleaned up their act and improved their products. Protecting Detroit from competition would’ve just saddled US consumers with decades more of crappy, overpriced, low quality, cars.
https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/how-detroits-automakers-went-from-kings-of-the-road-to-roadkill/
We still don’t let in the small pickups the rest of the world enjoys.
defects galore
A friend of mine from high school attended the GM Institute and became an engineer for them. One of his first projects was on a team that bought a Lexus and an Infiniti when they first came on the market and took them apart to see how many production defects they had. He said a typical American car at the time (and this was in the '90s after quality had rebounded somewhat from its disastrous nadir) had 300-400 defects. The Infiniti they took apart had 2. The Lexus had 0.
Did Japan back then pay their assembly line workers the equivalent of $5k USD/year (in today’s dollars) and have nearly no worker protections? Not a rhetorical question; I just don’t know. Seems like Japan had a better standard of living back then compared to Chinese workers now, so I would guess their workers were compensated and treated better.
Not defending US auto corps (or any corp for that matter). The regulatory capture in the US is insane, and workers aren’t treated as well as most of the rest of the first world.
deleted by creator
Back then American industries were just complacent due to insufficient competition, and Japan’s industrial development was a bit of a miracle (that “living in year 2000 since 1980s” joke).
Japan back then had (and still has) an interesting socioeconomic system, a bit similar to samurai clans went cartels, where workers are supposed to work all their life in one place (or close to that), don’t squeal about worker rights and such, but be covered by lots of company-provided social nets and guarantees.
Protecting Detroit from competition would’ve just saddled US consumers with decades more of crappy, overpriced, low quality, cars.
And it did. Japanese companies maintained a solid portion of the market in the US, a notable lead in quality, and many consumers no longer willing to waste money on crappy overpriced low quality cars from American companies. American cars were forced to get better and they’re better off for it, but they resisted the entire time, just like today.
Maybe GM could, I don’t know, innovate?
They have some wonderful new finamcial products released just this quarter!
As an European living in Asia and can’t help but cringe at American cars. They’re so far behind. And it’s the car country. Japan has better cars and better rail. Embarassing.
Targeted tariffs and protectionism can help a situation like this, combined with subsidies like the ones Trump cancelled, to give legacy manufacturers a temporary respite to retool and innovate. However backtracking on your transition, reverting to the tried and true short term profits is just hiding your head in the sand. GM will find itself increasingly marginalized and more years behind. You can’t hide behind trumps skirt forever
Capitalism is all about competition unless it’s not.
Former GM Executive: BYD cars are better and cheaper than American. If we let BYD into the U.S. Market, we wouldn’t be able to be greedy and enshitify our products any more, which would end up destroying american car manufacturers. FTFY.
P.S. Actually the average american would be benefited from that
Well, nearly half a million mostly union jobs would also be lost, causing a minor recession at the very least. Even if the jobs partially come back in the form of BYD plants, they probably wouldn’t be union jobs.
So they dont care about making cars for the world market, they just want regulations to allow them to milk the american market…
I mean, didn’t Japanese and Korean automakers already do that?
Yes. They did. That’s called competition. It forces companies to improve by destroying them, except they don’t want that. And politicians don’t want that, cause it makes corruption unstable.
Killed Detroit too, though. But, eh, helped other parts. It’s life.
Thus already in the 90s with the TRON OS a different approach was chosen by US regulators - threaten Japan with sanctions if it’s allowed to compete with Windows inside Japan .
They can’t threaten China, but they can prevent Chinese competitive goods from entering US market and improving its economy again.
Bad economy - poor and stressed people, poor and stressed people - worse political decisions, worse political decisions - good for middlemen which in our age shouldn’t exist frankly. We have the technologies for direct democracy, it’s not 1920s.
We have the technologies for direct democracy
One from the list, yes.
