World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
I think the word they're looking for is in fact "outcompeting."
Yutaro-Katori-with-butterfly-meme: Is this capitalism?
Outcompeting by having a nation subsidize the cost. Until local manufacturers go out of business because they can't compete. Then China owns the entire industry she jacks to the price.
It's like no one has been paying attention.
It's weird that this has to be explained to Americans - this is how much of Big Tech got to where they are, except they call it "disruption".
BTW this shows perfectly that free markets are not a be-all-end-all thing. It's a tool, and if it produces outcomes that you don't like, you can adjust it for better outcomes. The hypocrisy here is not that they pretend to worship the market then cry foul when China enters it on their terms, but that they do adjust it for their benefit all the time, and only pretend to worship it when people ask for their fair share.
While we've seen this cycle play out quite a few times in Big Tech, I think a lot of people just aren't aware of what it is. I've had friends decry how, "Uber is now basically as expensive as a taxi." I point out how Uber is only recently profitable and see people's minds get blown.
Uber's costs are because of oversized compensation packages for executives and lots of R&D put into autonomous driving. The bulk of the actual cost of operation is on the shoulders of drivers who wear down their vehicles for the sake of Uber. All Uber does is provide an app, which is laughably cheap by comparison.
Larger population means larger representation. If you say the Netherlands only has about 100,000 idiots, that's roughly half a percent of their population.
Half of a percent of the US population is over 1.5 million. And I promise you, we have a waaaaaaay higher percentage of idiots than that.
You mean Ford, GM, and Chrysler who make useless pieces of garbage and also outsource production to Mexico?
Who also got bailed out by the federal government for going bankrupt back in 2009?
GM, who just announced a $6 billion stock buy back once they knew tariffs would keep them safe from having to compete with Chinese EVs, that GM?
This sort of stuff is realistically why I have no sympathy for the major US automotive manufacturers. The only reason I don't just say "Screw them, let Chinese EVs drive them out of business," is because it would put so many people out of work in their plants who have no role in these decisions. Barring some fantasy where the Chinese companies establish US plants and offer equivalent or better union contracts for current employees at GM, Ford and Chrysler, these companies should simply be bound hand and foot in terms and conditions whenever something is done by the government to help them. Like, make those protectionist tariffs conditional on them hitting investment targets in relevant technologies, raising worker pay and benefits, reducing cost to the customer and a ban on stock buybacks for the duration of the tariffs being valid.
It isn't 1970 anymore. Those three manufacturers are barely a blip on the radar in the US.
If they were barely a blip, they wouldn't have been bailed out for ~~17.4~~ 50 billion dollars.
Perhaps "barely a blip" wasn't the most accurate phrasing but they're not exactly crushing the competition. GM is at 16.5% while Toyota is #2 (14.4%), Ford #3 and Hyundai is #4. Stellantis isn't even a US company so I don't know why people still think of Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep as American brands. The whole market is pretty mixed and these tariffs on Chinese vehicles are protecting the market not US companies.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/teslas-us-market-share-now-tops-volkswagen-subaru-and-bmw-161055575.html
The bailouts were given to save US manufacturing jobs and all these companies besides Ford have fully paid back those loans.
I mean the US is also doing that. It's not a subsidies issue; it's the fact that Chinese companies are using subsidies to actually make things while US companies are just pocketing them.
Is the US? What us car company is doing it to such a degree name countries are blocking their goods?
Exactly, if subsidies were actually invested properly countries might actually care about USA vehicles
I mean nobody is blocking US goods, but the subsidies are definitely a thing. Also why would China even block US EVs when they're uncontestedly winning that market?
I get a craving for corn whenever someone says subsidies.
Ah, I see. So it's cool when we do it (fossil fuel and ag subsidies, the auto industry bailout in 2008, etc.) but not when they do it.
Got it.
You're introducing an argument as a way to undermine the viewpoint that's opposite to yours.
No one said it's fine "when we do it". That's not the point being discussed.
The other bigger issue here is that these new cars are coming from a region that has a horrendous track record for safety and quality. EVs when done right are still a considerable risk with battery fires, but the ones manufactured in China are much worse for quality and safety. In the next few years, as these cars flood markets around the world, it will be a massive issue.
They seem safe enough to pass the EU’s safety standards, which are much higher than the US. Also this blanket “quality issues” argument without specific evidence is terrible. If we’re going off of quality in recent history, American manufacturing is down the toilet in terms of quality - just look at Boeing.
People wrongly assume all Chinese manufacturing is aliexpress fodder.
https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/byd/dolphin/50011 Seems relevant
I'm sorry but 1 star out of 5 on the European NCAP is terrible ! This car is a death trap !
I would never set a foot in a Chinese ....
Oh wait ! I was looking at the Jeep wrangler, never mind.
The BYD has a 5 star rating as well as an the other chinese cars I checked.
Euro NCAP - Jeep Wrangler
Lmao this is coming from the same safety organization that approved the Tesla Cybertruck?
I'll take my chances with a car that's seen EU approval.
https://www.carscoops.com/2024/03/chinese-evs-become-virtually-uninsurable-in-the-uk-says-report/
The reality is that I don't think any EV is "safe" as far as the batteries go
It's funny because your article states the vehicles are fine. Good job on dropping a link you did not bother clicking yourself.
I think you're missing what I'm saying here. I'm pointing out that Chinese auto makers don't have the same processes as more experienced companies. They're just slinging out cars into foreign markets with almost no extra work.
Besides, the article didn't say the cars are "fine", it quoted someone saying that they've seen some cars that would have been fixed quickly if it was a domestic brand because of part availability.
But but but, rampant capitalism good
Lmao there's a guy who usually posts a long response to these "subsidies" claims bullshit, but I think they got into a pissing match with a mod in the comments and got banned lmao.
Jist of it is: China's subsidies are negligible compared to the US, and what they've actually done is created a competitive domestic market with a large number of players. Unless you think Chinese people are all puppets, even if China (as a country) owns the industry it would not prevent internal competition that drives down prices. Moreover, China does not offer per-unit subsidies on export. In fact, Chinese EVs exported to Europe are something like 40% more expensive than domestically for the same model.
The ol' Wal-Marteroo
Tesla has been subsidized by years. The difference is china delivers and in America an asshole get rich.
So the CCP party members aren't getting rich?
Of course, they and the Wang Chaunfus.
I mean they are but they're also delivering.