Tesla would be fucked without tariffs.
tariff concerns should be discussed via WTO, not unilateral sanctions.
otherwise all this "rules based order" is not worth paper it is written on
why would anyone trust usa's word if any agreement/word/promise can be torn unilaterally?
I suspect we're going to see the answer to that question play out over the next several years.
In general, the US would introduce retaliatory tariffs in that scenario; the game theory of the situation basically requires that.
Despite popular belief, the CCP is also not actually completely immune to public discontent (it often seems to be really quite scared of it), and would likely be willing to kick off a major trade war, as it would cause price increases.
You can see the effects of the free market in many industries which have been decimated by globalization.
We used to be able to get a manufacturing job which would provide for a family, but decided it was okay to allow big corps to use slave labor on the other side of the planet and just ship everything across the world (not great for carbon emissions). Just look at the rust belt.
It’s not a bad idea to say that we should have the free market stop at our border. Other countries don’t play by the same rules that we do and can even have entire industries propped up by a foreign government in order to take up market share.
Removing industry from an area brings nothing but misery to the people who live there. Are you suggesting that some sort of communism should have been implemented in the rust belt where we give these people free money or something?
The Chinese market is way larger than the US one, they have everything they need to lift themselves out of poverty by building things for themselves. The US became the richest country in the world by building everything here and reaping the rewards with greatly increased prosperity.
There is no reason to send all our good paying jobs to the other side of the world, and ship all goods across literally the entire planet, the process of which emits and insane amount of C02, just so that the owners of mega corporations can make a few extra dollars per unit.
Let capitalism dictate where the cars get made. It is the American way.
This attitude is why Trump won. A statement like that sounds like you've stopped trying to make anything better, or to articulate a competing plan and convince voters to support it.
So, in this way, the self-loathing defeatism is partly responsible for people like Trump gaining more power.
In my opinion the reason why we're in the dark ages of EVs is that a majority of Americans have range anxiety so our EVs have to weigh a lot and cost a lot to have 250 mile batteries, whereas everywhere else you can buy a car with an 80 mile range for a price poor people can actually afford.
Note - the range anxiety is both because of our car-centric (sub)urban design encouraging lifestyles where you drive 100 miles a day, and because of how a large number of urban dwellers and even suburban non-rich have no garages to do home charging. (And it's objectively far worse to own an EV for anyone who can't charge it at home.) All of this causes people to refuse to buy cars with say, 75-100 miles of range unless they're hybrids.
The same party that happily ran over peaceful protestors with tanks, and never even so much as apologized for it, is still in power almost 40 years later. They openly put their people in prison just for criticizing the Party.
People compare the CCP to Western countries' misdeeds against their citizens when there's not even a comparison. For instance, when the US illegally wiretapped on the AT&T and Verizon networks to slurp up all the call data they wanted, they didn't actually use that data to imprison citizens for their speech, even ones who said things like "Bush is a war criminal." China both does the privacy invasion itself, and quite openly uses anything they can uncover to persecute anyone they deem a threat to their power.
USA does this as well, its just critique of government by a single person is not a credible threat to the US government. Mind you, all these "freedom fighters" ended up being financed by the USAID, so literally were foreign agents.
Whistleblowers get the whole book thrown at them, Snowden and Assange got nearly killed by CIA, Iraq files whistleblowers get book thrown at them.
USA is just as bad empire as China, and probably even worse, because of the millions of murdered innocent people over the decades of forever wars.
China has no such track record
> millions of murdered innocent people [...] China has no such track record
No, China, since becoming Communist, has specialized more in murdering their own citizens.
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/help-me-understand-all-the-...
Anyway, thanks for providing a great exhibit of exactly what I was talking about: either CCP propaganda, or hopelessly naïve Westerner bent on believing in these two nations' moral equivalency. This is the same level of honest discourse we'll see heavily promoted on TikTok when China invades Taiwan in a few months or years, saying "China and the US are the same, so who cares if they take over a democracy by force."
Do you also think US civil war was Americans genociding own citizens?
I dont care what China does to chinese, I care more about what America does to other countries like in the middle east or Afghanistan
It is clearly problematic when it is weaponized to destroy a nation-state’s industrial output surreptitiously.
are we talking about the US or China or Canda or Mexico here? i can't keep track of who the "bad guys" are that are supposedly weaponizing and who the victims are.
With statements like yours, it feels like the left is rooting for the most catastrophic outcomes possible for that whole country, just to spite Trump. Even though we'd all lose and Trump wouldn't be affected either way.
I'm not American or a "leftist" for reference. I have no ill will towards the American people, neither the Chinese or any other. Governments on the other hand.... But regardless if I can buy a car for 1/2 the cost from one belligerent major power over another. Yeah - I'll take the half price car.
> With statements like yours, it feels like the left is rooting for the most catastrophic outcomes possible for that whole country, just to spite Trump. Even though we'd all lose and Trump wouldn't be affected either way.
This only makes sense if the poster is American though right? Otherwise, they are just being pragmatic.
If you really think Trump is going to try to literally take territory though, you've really been trolled. He has said all kinds of ridiculous shit in his 'political career.' That's his one signature thing.
the question should be: Should American consumers be allowed to drive green environmentally friendly cars for $10k or should they be forced to shell out $50k (+interest) to billionaire elon musk
Irrespective of what country, and your belief/disbelief in the threat level, you have to see that a highly internet-reliant device that would bring much of the country anywhere (thanks to car-centric infrastructure) would be a perfect target for a hostile nation, no? With one click you cripple the workforce. Again, speaking nothing of which country is or is not hostile.
Verizon, ATT, Tmobile and their APNs are controlled by the FCC, and any regulation can force vehicle traffic to be isolated if there is credible threat.
but, why would BYD or other nation sabotage its own future profits by bricking cars?? it doesn't make sense.
if I sell you gadget, I would never brick it, cause I am going to lose all future profits
> Verizon, ATT, Tmobile and their APNs are controlled by the FCC, and any regulation can force vehicle traffic to be isolated if there is credible threat.
This response would *not* be soon enough. One response from a server, and the car could be bricked forever, explode/short circuit causing a fire, self-drive into the nearest government building, etc. A car is a huge weapon, especially when remotely controlled. This software could be pre-installed from the factory, with commands injected via side channels. I could imagine a hundred ways to do this.
> but, why would BYD or other nation sabotage its own future profits by bricking cars?? it doesn't make sense.
I'm precluding this situation with a background level of hostility between nations... they don't care about maximizing profit, but maximizing damage. It would be a government stepping in forcing this.
second, you assume China will resort to bricking civilian cars, when they have better options like actual weapons. Bricked car can easily be towed away, there is no way China can cause damage.
the best way for China is to keep manufacturing cars and selling them to USA for $$$ - this will ensure the relationships are beneficial to China (mutual trade is better than military conflict)
You have the tools to reverse-engineer every single chip in your car to ensure they aren't backdoored?
> second, you assume China will resort to bricking civilian cars, when they have better options like actual weapons.
Again, my argument has nothing to do with China, I'm simply saying cars would be a great thing to weaponize. Much easier than smuggling a weapon into the US, you just sell a car to a consumer and you have functionally a remote-controllable bomb.
> Bricked car can easily be towed away, there is no way China can cause damage.
Not if it's driven away and used in an attack first. did you read my reply? You still haven't actually responded to my point that internet-connected cars would be an excellent weapon by a hostile nation.
Any backdoors would be easily detectable and preventable just by .... not connecting the car to the Internet, or folding connection to isolated VPN not accessible from the outside.
all vehicle traffic can be inspected and sinkholed with IoT firewall, if you really want it
Good point though. My current cars drive just fine without internet - I would hope future cars would continue to do so, even if GPS doesn't work, can't find a charging station, etc. Otherwise, I'll be stuck with gas cars until the day they take my license..
The Mi SU7, a pretty competitive EV with Model 3, starts at around $30k (still a pretty decent price).
There is alot if variety for cars. The US market can't be the only market keeping every European and Asian car manufacturer in business.
On 12/17/24 they hit a 52 week high around $490 per share. Since then, in less than two months, they have lost one third of their value. https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/TSLA/
Musk has single-handedly alienated his core domestic buying demographic in favor of a group that, when polled, says they would not consider an EV at rates of around 70%.
EU markets in which TSLA was viable but contested are even worse.
This while Tesla's strongest international competitor is passing on units sold, executing better, and underpricing them.
As someone who has followed Tesla since the Model S, previously held Musk in some regard, and test drove a Model 3 I find this such an abject travesty of an outcome for what should have been a great US based global car maker and someone who had the potential to accomplish such good for the world with their incredible wealth and privilege.
This is based off what? Couldn’t this be argued for literally any company?
Other US competitors aren't at parity with Tesla or BYD. Nikola went bust. Legacy automakers turned out mediocre EVs. Rivian is the only true competitor, but they are a luxury brand and don't have Tesla's crown jewel (the Supercharger network).
Musk also had zero experience or track record making cars when Musk took over, nor any hardware products of any kind, for that matter, or running a manufacturing org.
Occam's razor would indicate it's very improbably to credit success all to him.