10
Yes, that's called protectionnism and there is nothing wrong about it.
As an addition to that, the Canadians have different view:
Protecting Canadian workers: CLC welcomes tariffs on Chinese imports -- (Archived)
Canada’s unions are pleased with the government’s announcement to impose tariffs on Chinese imports, including a 100% tariff on electric vehicles and a 25% tariff on aluminum and steel, matching recent U.S. actions. Coming into force on October 22, this marks one of the most significant shifts in our supply chain in decades and it’s a necessary step in protecting Canada’s economy, our workers, and the investments we’ve already made in the electric vehicle (EV) industry.
I am wondering what the European automobile workers say about the slave-like working conditions of their peers in Xinjiang? The low prices of Chinese EVs are to a large extent possible because of such cheap forced labour, we must not forget that.
That's really not the case, Chinese automotive workers tend to be upper middle class, they tend to own their own home(then again that's nearly all Chinese adults), and have about 6 weeks vacation on average(Rivian being the best with 8 weeks).
Your propaganda is older than you are.
Also state subsidies.
Also not extracting profits for the shareholders (for now).
European cars could be much less expensive if the car makers weren't required to make profits for their owners above all else.
Chinese companies have been focusing on their bottom line very much as companies elsewhere. They can rely on an ongoing stream of cheap labour, and, therefore, extremely low operating costs, as workers have no rights whatsoever.
Well, the EU determined otherwise
I wrote, "Chinese companies have been focusing on their bottom line very much as companies elsewhere. They can rely on an ongoing stream of cheap labour, and, therefore, extremely low operating costs, as workers have no rights."
What has that to do with the EU?
This is confusing. We’re imposing tariffs because China subsidises their EV production in order to kill competition elsewhere and bring even more manufacturing there.
It is important to note that these are western European workers. For them the Chinese competition is largely irrellevant as their companies have been moving production to eastern Europe for a while now and they realize that their problem is structural.
All what the trariffs on Chinese EVs will do is conserve the status quo for European car makers a few more years, which doesn't help western European workers at all.
Ah, right you are. I’m not sure EU common market can be reworked so that it doesn’t happen, at least without central fiscal policy and budget. Tariffs are still needed regardless unless we want to become dependent on our global adversary rather than Slovakia.
I guess the answer lies up the supply chain: Automakers have historically provided well-paid, cushy union jobs to their direct employees. However, that business model has increasingly depended on squeezing the supply chain. E.g. a relative used to work at a automotive supplier around 10 years ago — their blue collar workers got the 8.x€/h German minimum wage while employees at VW in the same region got 3x that plus an assortment of benefits.
At the same time, modern cars include a lot of electronics that aren't even produced within the EU at all (and EV batteries are the worst bit here). Hence, European car manufacturers depend on products imported from China to create functionally and economically competitive cars. A trade war with China could upend that symbiosis.
(Fwiw, you'll also notice that one of the union representatives at the end hints that they want government subsidies of some sort.)
Fwiw, you'll also notice that one of the union representatives at the end hints that they want government subsidies of some sort.
That would be incompatible with EU common market although with the weight of France I guess rule bending is not out of question. This sounds like a viscous cycle though, trying to outspend China which has fiscal and monetary policy built entirely on stimulating domestic growth, at the cost of crazy capital controls.
There are lots of options for legal subsidies. Really, the only issue is whether you can legally specify that you only want to incentivize domestic production (like the IRA does in the US).
Just from my German context, I can name a couple of subsidies that have helped/are helping the car industry, particularly by making it a lot cheaper to own a (new) car:
- The "diesel privilege" boosts diesel cars for extremely dodgy environmental reasons (you need a bit less diesel to go the same way than petrol ...). To this day, the tax on diesel is lower than on gas in Germany. (Dieselgate is the indirect outcome of this: It happened as German car manufacturers started trying to export their domestically opex-reduced diesel cars to countries where owning a diesel car brought no opex benefit, while those countries tightened emissions standards.)
- The "environmental incentive" was supposed to boost the automotive industry in 2009/2010 and allowed you to get paid for scrapping 9+ years-old cars.
- The "company car privilege" allows for very low taxes on employer-leased cars.
- The "environmental bonus" used to provide a subsidy for buying new electric/hybrid cars.
- The "greenhouse gas reduction quota" allows you to sell the "saved" CO2 emissions of your electric car every year.
- The "commuter's lump sum" begets you income tax rebates if you use a car to travel to work.
this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2024
10 points (100.0% liked)
Europe
1382 readers
571 users here now
News and information from Europe 🇪🇺
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in !yurop@lemm.ee. (They're cool, you should subscribe there too!)
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
(This list may get expanded when necessary.)
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the mods: @federalreverse@feddit.org, @poVoq@slrpnk.net, or @anzo@programming.dev.
founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS