this post was submitted on 15 May 2024
87 points (93.9% liked)

World News

32258 readers
584 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
all 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 48 points 5 months ago

It might not work eh? Might it though? I hate this kind of weasel headline almost as much as the constant "slamming". Just say what you're going to say.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It'll work just like adding another lane will solve traffic.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

"We're pushing the can down the road. Problem is, we're running out of road."

[–] [email protected] 28 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The Biden Administration wants to hurt Mexico in order to protect American Automotive interests.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The US has done a great job of fucking Canada, now they're turning their attention to fucking Mexico, too.

It's giving Sino-Soviet split.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago

Yeah I hate American pharmaceutical companies so much trying to pry Pharmacare from the hands of everyday people.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Not that I doubt it, but what did the US do to Canada?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 months ago (1 children)

We've had logging tariffs on them for a bit, especially at the start of the pandemic when lumber prices were insane and getting rid of them would've helped lower prices a bit.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Illegal tariffs. The Canadian lumber industry has taken them to court several times and win the cases. And nothing was changed. The US loves NAFTA when it benefits them. Not so much otherwise.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 months ago

Exactly. The US decides when it wants to follow the rules it created.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

NAFTA no longer exists, the trade relationships are governed by USMCA now.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 months ago

"Joe Biden wants to stop the bleeding in his poll numbers in Michigan" would be a better headline.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 5 months ago

Big 3 had a decade to compete with Tesla whose cars are already considered lower grade by today's EV standards because of quality issues.

Instead they spammed anti direct sell litigation while R&D twiddled their thumbs.

They'll do the exact same thing again and eat some more bailouts after they inevitably fail again.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 months ago

It's not going to work. It's like when they tried to protect the US market from Japanese cars in the 70s and 80s. Look at the roads now, two of the big three (well, now four) american car manufacturers have gone bankrupt more than once. The one that hasn't only makes trucks and one flagship sportscar now. US EVs can't compete with Chinese made ones, it's just that simple.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 5 months ago

Trying to buy uncompetitive US companies a bigger market share more like

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Buy EVs time or protect american oil?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

You must buy iphone, borger, and ford f-150 or the american economy will collapse. /s

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

protect the us militarys ability to force car manufacturers to make tanks/drones during wartime.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago

For an administration so desperate to cut back on global emissions, keeping cheap and apparently reliable foreign electric vehicles out of US market seems so backwards.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago

Also, it might work. No one knows, this is news.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

US companies internationally will still struggle though. Might even make the US car market even more of a galapagos.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (3 children)

While I’m sure there are financial motives behind this that are backed by the US car industry, it also makes sense if you anticipate a war with China sometime in the future. You don’t really want a large proportion of your population driving cars manufactured by the enemy that can be switched off remotely.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

We shouldn’t be preparing for war with a rising world power, we should be trying to achieve partnership.

But as Americans say: China bad, the slavery in MY prison system is justified.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

We shouldn’t be preparing for war with a rising world power, we should be trying to achieve partnership.

Historically that has been a very grave error.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That's not the worry. The worry is that China is accumulating all of this industrial capacity (like the US pre-WW2) and that car factories really aren't that different from APC/tank factories.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

car factories really aren’t that different from APC/tank factories.

What is this bs?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

switched off? how about flooring it into valuable targets? seizing up the freeways? locking up certain passengers?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Sure, I went for the economic impact option, but causing chaos is certainly another way they could go.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

These vehicles can do much more. They usually have cameras (some are even required by law). Most of them are always connected to the internet, they could intercept and disturb communications.

This is true for most modern cars.