Biden hikes US tariffs on of Chinese imports
reuters.com
reuters.com
Meanwhile Ford loses $100,000 on each EV it sells
No they don't. The calculation of that number incorrectly included the fixed costs.
Someone has an HN post if you’d like to discuss
https://apnews.com/article/china-byd-auto-seagull-auto-ev-ca...
(see my above comment on how the Chinese gov't eliminated foreign competition to protect CATL/BYD since 2016).
Unfortunately, I remember when this was "racist" about 4-6 years ago. As we enter another election cycle, can we please put silly politics aside and maintain focus on the larger picture, in the off chance someone unpopular is elected?
For instance, look at how they came to dominate the battery manufacturing. Foreign battery makers still have limited acccess to China's local EV market after the Chinese gov't forced them out under Xi's Made-In-China 2025[1]:
... China requires auto makers to use batteries from one of its approved suppliers if they want to be cleared to mass-produce electric cars and plug-in hybrids and to qualify for subsidies. These suppliers are all Chinese, so such global leaders as South Korea’s LG Chem Ltd and Japan’s Panasonic Corp. are excluded.
... Foreign batteries aren’t officially banned in China, but auto executives say that since 2016 they have been warned by government officials that they must use Chinese batteries in their China-built cars, or face repercussions. That has forced them to spend millions of dollars to redesign cars to work with inferior Chinese batteries, they say.
... “We want to comply, and we have to comply,” said one executive with a foreign car maker. “There’s no other option.”
what a fun euphemism for "something that doesn't enforce US economic hegemony". you just can't help yourselves using this morally-coded language. it's geopolitical competition and you benefit personally from supporting the US - enough with the grandstanding
After the fall of the Berlin Wall and the total collapse of China's centrally planned economy decades earlier, China begged to join the world order created by the West and for their own interests. China was refused first, not least because of their human rights violation, but also not everyone believed in China's fake sincerity in adhering to the Western liberal value system, however imperfect, and many had also presciently warned that China would abuse the system to their advantage.
China was finally allowed in under the Clintonite charlatans' flawed narrative under the faux "globalization" banner that if we make China rich, China would become a liberal democratic China and we could all coexist and trade in peace. And you know the rest of the story. China, for its part, just had to keep its head down and get rich; and as Deng Xiaoping once advised, bide its time as the Western societies starts falling apart, but your dear leader Xi got too ambitious and too greedy.
It's just too bad that Xi reared its ugly head too early. There were some early warning signs how China wanted to equalize its historical century of humiliation and restore its former glory -- by weaponizing their dominant market position in critical global industries such as the rare earth metal supplies; and now green energy industries. But I digress.
Now to answer your questions, no China doesn't get to dictate terms. If you haven't noticed yet, de-coupling is real and already started several years ago. While it's going to take some time, the train has already left.