210
submitted 2 years ago by schizoidman@lemmy.ml to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 47 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Why is competition for US auto makers a bad thing ?

[-] Allonzee@lemmy.world 51 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Because "free markets, competition, being voluntary" are propaganda by capitalists using their owned media and purchased government to make its victims double as its defenders.

The goal of market capitalism is to end competition often by buying out up and coming rivals to kill the threat, manipulate the markets to your advantage using anything from bribery to cost benefit analysis of potential consequences/fines for sociopathic actions to potential profits, and conspire with your economic sector to coerce the workers you need into accepting less.

This is just expanded indentured servitude with a marketing team.

[-] BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world 25 points 2 years ago

Because we don't like free markets. We like the illusion of choice, but the security of monopoly.

[-] Allonzee@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Thats a new spin to me. The only thing monopolies secure is their own existence.

[-] SturgiesYrFase@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 years ago

I do believe that is what they meant

[-] flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works 21 points 2 years ago

This isn't competition, it sounds like the CCP heavily subsidises the manufacture, in an attempt to kill the American industry off.

Thinking in decades or centuries is a very powerful tool!

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago

This isn’t competition, it sounds like the CCP heavily subsidises the manufacture

China: "Here, have a bunch of cheap electric vehicles to replace your aging fleet of ICE engines. Don't worry, we're picking up a part of the tab."

Americans: "What a great deal! We'll buy them in droves."

State Government: "Not so fast! This wouldn't be fair to honest, hard working domestic car companies like Tesla and Volvo and Toyota."

Thinking in decades or centuries is a very powerful tool!

Shame we're only capable of thinking about the next quarter's profits.

[-] SeattleRain@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

The US subsidizes their EV industry twice as much as China. The real why China can do this is because the US has gutted their industrial base in favor of financialization while China built up their industrial base.

[-] flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

Yeah, sure - that's still China trying to undercut and ensure the US remains reliant on them long term...

[-] SeattleRain@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

No that's just the US not being competitive because stock buy backs and layoffs are easier than building good cheap cars.

[-] flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

...or both. Think about it, if what you've said is completely true (I don't disagree, BTW), why would they bother subsidising?

They're trying to ring fence the market. That the US is helping then is only vaguely related

[-] SeattleRain@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

But it's not both. How can you produce something for cheaper with less subsidies unless your just better at it.

It's like saying the winner of a race had an unfair advantage even after giving their opponent a head start.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

On top of the other things people are saying, I guarantee that the U.S. automakers will do a "China will take your jobs" thing if this happens.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Because they’d send them there… to save a buck.

Or rather a whole lot of bucks.

this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2024
210 points (100.0% liked)

News

36043 readers
2686 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS