You say that like its a bad thing...
I want the Big 3 to die horrible flaming death, but they need to get replaced by something else domestic. Letting anybody (let alone BYD) simply wipe out all our domestic manufacturing capacity is mega-bad.
Now, the But: But, it's very important to acknowledge who's responsible for the decline in US manufacturing. BYD isn't "wiping out", the US auto industry. China didn't sneak into the US and steal the factories, the government didn't edict that things be made in China, and tree-hugging hippy libtards didn't give everything away to commonism.
US auto industry ownership unilaterally sent US auto manufacturing to China!
And has thus reaped many many billions in increased profits, over decades, as a result of throwing American workers, American consumers, and the US's strategic competitiveness under the bus, for the purpose of their own personal profit.
Now, somehow, it's China's fault! for being the world's preeminent manufacturing center. And now somehow, US taxpayers (that's us, the idiot herd, not ownership) need to make big payments to Make Manufacturing Great Again.
This is just another example of the typical policy of socialist welfare for ownership, and neoliberal austerity for the idiot herd.
This is like how the taxpayers pay to build a nuclear power plant, then a private utility operates it for decades while money pours out of it, then, when it's time to clean up the super-fund site scale of radioactive pollution, that's again the responsibility of socialism.
Why should US auto industry innovate?
China's already making most of what we consume here, and they're making world leading innovation in the EV market. So why aren't we just importing the EVs from there like we import everything else?
It's not like this is all some big surprise. The problems with continuing to burn petro, the massive simplification of vehicular mechanisms and the improvements in lifespan and reliability resulting from electrification have all been known for decades. Where's all this capitalist competition driving technical innovation?
The answer of course, is nowhere. There is no such thing in modern US big industry capitalism. It's a big f_cking lie!
The only thing modern US capitalism is focused on innovating is how to f_ck the consumer, the worker, and the vendor, a little more completely, in favor of shareholders. I'm sure we all needed more financialization of everything.
I'm not an absolutist. I think capitalism is basically the only system that's ever been in place in human civilization, and the most straightforward way to prosperity is via that system. But (again with the But) it needs to operate more in line with what is preached: competitive markets leading to innovation that benefits everyone, not just shareholders.
Another large portion of the blame lies on the uneducated, irrational US consumer population. Denial of the realities of the consequences of continuing to burn petro, denial of the benefits of electrification across the board. While people talk about their need for "pride" and "faith". This sounds like a bunch of emo bullsh1t to me. Where's the objective, rational analysis? It's no wonder the US consumer gets shafted by industry, it's pretty much begged for.
So, while you're general assertions are true. The widely ignored realities of how we got into this mess, and who should be making changes to get us out of this mess, are almost never mentioned out load.
Oh, it's much, much worse than this. And don't blame "uneducated" or "irrational". These people know exactly what they are doing: trashing anybody who has the temerity to do even slightly better than them. "I'm miserable, so you should be, too" is the rule of the day to them.
So many people cheer any and every anti-union effort in spite of the fact that the unions were the only thing holding the tide at bay. Gee, maybe the fact that the powers that be hate unions so bad should give you some hint as to what is effective at opposing them?
It's only with AI finally threatening programming jobs that tech folks seem to be finding religion and discovering that everybody will cheer at their demise, too.
Um, welcome to the reality of the steelworker and autoworker from the 1980s, folks. Sorry you had to join us.
Now, can those of us who have been fighting this battle for four decades finally get some help?
It sounds like you're thinking of competition at the corporate scale.
It sounds like the commenter immediately previous is thinking of competition at the nation state scale.
Both (and more) are happening at the same time, and valid to optimize for.
> US auto industry ownership unilaterally sent US auto manufacturing to China!
While the US auto industry did move manufacturing out of the US, this statement is factually incorrect in multiple ways. First, the auto manufacturers largely moved their operations to Mexico and Canada, not China. And second, this happened after https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agre... an international trade agreement negotiated at the federal government level which made doing so possible and profitable. Doubtless industry lobbyists were involved, however the action was not unilateral in any sense.
Similarly, federal and international policy is capable of making it economically sensible to bring that manufacturing back onto US shores.
> China's already making most of what we consume here, and they're making world leading innovation in the EV market. So why aren't we just importing the EVs from there like we import everything else?
You rail against regulatory protectionism for US heavy industry but seem unaware that all nations with heavy industry engage in same. China imposes tariffs on importing US autos, as does most of Europe, Japan, S. Korea, and anywhere else seeking to maintain some form of local heavy manufacturing, which is seen as a national asset, particularly during war time and other emergencies like pandemics.
> The answer of course, is nowhere. There is no such thing in modern US big industry capitalism. It's a big f_cking lie!
Last I checked, 75% of Teslas components are US made.
> The only thing modern US capitalism is focused on innovating is how to f_ck the consumer, the worker, and the vendor, a little more completely, in favor of shareholders. I'm sure we all needed more financialization of everything.
This can be fairly directly traced to the Harvard Business School in the '80s. I think there's a legitimate axe to grind with them and vulture capitalists they trained. But it seems you're ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater over it. The US needs manufacturing to continue to prosper. Some amount of protectionism toward manufacturing is practiced worldwide, even by China, and can be acceptable here too. And while it seems you're very worried about addressing climate change, and I am too, I think we can work toward that as a nation without abdicating our agency.
Rather than a quote by quote response, I'm going to try to make a general statement.
I am aware that pretty much all industrial countries do implement some kind of protectionist import policies. As in the original comment, I'm not an absolutist, I'm not arguing that we should completely eliminate tariffs, or implement them against everything. In the real world, the best answer is almost always somewhere in between.
Here, we're specifically discussing the 1200 mile range of the new BYD battery just put out for field trials. While tesla did build an EV company mostly with onshore production, this was via a practice that is regularly being called a foul in criticism of the Chinese EV development model: government subsidies. Tesla received massive subsidies from the US federal government, and the California state government to establish it's factory in the east bay.
But this factory was to build cars, not new battery tech. This innovation aspect is seriously lacking in the US. With the current administration eliminating funding on much of the research that was in progress.
This industry resistance is primarily centered around protecting the revenue from what's ever more frequently being called "legacy tech", the petro industry. There are a lot of useful applications for petroleum, we don't need to burn it 8-/ It's not like they'll stop drilling because we use it for other products.
But instead of innovation, we're seeing "corporations are people" and "our bribery is our free speech" arguments propping up a resistance to disruptive, but broadly beneficial new technology.
This gets to my general point, which you mention in the Harvard Business School mentality: there is a sort of meme, "Capitalists hate capitalism". Without correct regulation, every major industry will seek to be a rent taking monopoly. Why wouldn't they. They get more this way.
But this isn't the promise of the benefits of the magical market forces. This is why I call it a lie. Telsa got government subsidies to build an EV, in the US, but this still didn't really do anything to push the US ahead in overcoming the shortcomings of EVs (namely the cost and capacity of batteries).
There are efforts trying catch up now, but as mentioned, a lot of that is now threatened.
So why shouldn't we, at least in the near term, accept the Chinese government's generous subsidies, and import their products now at low prices?
We don't have to stop our own R and D because of this, but in business logic, apparently that's the consequence. Again, capitalism (as it's currently running wild in the US) fails to solve the problem.
I was amazed at how many ongoing comments this article continues to get on HN. One thing that distressing, is how many center on the argument that "most Americans don't care about climate change".
This comes to my last point: most Americans have become lost in their "culture war identities". Remote rural residents could be some of the biggest beneficiaries of broad electrification. The propaganda of what I call, the "petro mafia", focuses on aligning with a demographic identity. This is why I say the wing-nuts and the woke-nuts are two sides of the same coin. Putting their identity group membership ahead of rational analysis of each individual issue.
Environmental destruction by the ongoing industrial revolution is producing real and mounting consequences. Anyone thinking this a some libtard deep-state brain-implant population control, has just lost their shit completely. Sadly, this is a lot of the current US population. Obviously the c-suite at major petro mafia corps know this is real, and catastrophic. They just know they'll die before the worst of the consequences come to bear, and they don't give a shit about future generations.
I digress, and the topic spirals out indefinitely. Thanks again for engaging conversation.
Friend, I've lived in Michigan, in an area of The Rust Belt known as Automation Alley, my entire life. I'm the 4th generation of my family to live here working in and around the big 3 auto manufacturers. I can tell you that every major manufacturer receives massive subsidies in the form of tax breaks, government investment, land, infrastructure, etc. Even the Chinese manufacturers. Always have.
> But this factory was to build cars, not new battery tech.
It seems they built the world's 4th largest battery factory in terms of production capacity in Nevada: https://electronsx.com/battery-gigafactories.php
> This industry resistance
The US has 6 of the world's 10 largest battery factories according to that link.
> But instead of innovation, we're seeing "corporations are people" and "our bribery is our free speech" arguments propping up a resistance to disruptive, but broadly beneficial new technology.
You sound frustrated with politics. I think it's designed to do that.
> But this isn't the promise of the benefits of the magical market forces. This is why I call it a lie. Telsa got government subsidies to build an EV, in the US, but this still didn't really do anything to push the US ahead in overcoming the shortcomings of EVs (namely the cost and capacity of batteries).
Your characterization of building the world's 4th largest battery factory, and the nation's largest charging network as "didn't really do anything" challenges your credibility.
> This comes to my last point: most Americans have become lost in their "culture war identities".
Much of your comment certainly seems this way to me. Lots of politically charged opinion which seems to contradict the numbers. Who profits from it?
If the big 3 US auto makers can't keep up with technical innovation, they should go bankrupt, displaced by more innovative competitors.
If the tri-opoly can't be displaced by domestic competition, it should be displaced by foreign competition.
Thankfully, there are folks in decision making positions who consider things like national security to be as important as the latest feature or lowest price.