• set_secret@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      We have byd in Australia, and Australia has extremely high standard car safety regulations. The byd cars pass those, so China can’t be that terrible at making stuff. Like iphones for example, i bet you have one of those.

        • set_secret@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Lol OK, an OTA update is just horrendous, clearly irrefutable proof of china’s horrible manufacturing standards, It’s not like idk Tesla and every other manufacturer of cars hasn’t had to do the same multiple times already.

          Maybe leave you xenophobia somewhere else or go back to reddit? Your quick google search is embarrassing you.

          • beejboytyson@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Wow, I show you proof you wrong and you answer is “what about them” and “your a racist!!!” Gl not being able to think, you brainrot is serious, start watching and listening to people smarter then you.

            • set_secret@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              It’s laughable how you think an OTA update is proof of “horrible manufacturing standards.”

              Newsflash: Tesla and almost every other car manufacturer do OTA updates and recalls all the time. It’s standard practice to fix issues and improve software without dragging cars back to the shop. Singling out BYD for this shows a lack of understanding of how the automotive industry works.

              Calling out xenophobia isn’t a “whataboutism.” It’s pointing out a real issue in your argument.

              And for the record, my brain isn’t “rotted.” It’s perfectly fine and capable of recognising logical fallacies and biased thinking when I see it. Instead of throwing around baseless accusations, maybe take some time to understand the broader context before embarrassing yourself with poorly thought-out arguments.

              Attacking others is usually a sign of intellectual insecurities. Perhaps work on your arguments rather than resorting to name calling and straw man tactics. It’ll make for a much more credible discussion

                • set_secret@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I don’t think i used any “buzz words” here, the language i used was pretty simple.

                  Please elaborate on the “buzz words” i have no knowledge of, and maybe expand on how you’re reaching those bizzare conclusions.

  • Pat_Riot@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Or , hear me out, what if US auto makers stop trying to force overpriced oversized trash on us? Maybe try to compete?

  • blindbunny@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Good, maybe GM will have the follow through to make an electric car successful now.

  • Feliskatos 🐱@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    China seems to be succeeding in EV vehicles, not just cars, airplanes too. I’m sorta pining for the days when we were talking about a North America Union. These days its all about protectionism and wars. :(

  • Allonzee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    The Earth is 🔥burning🔥, by our own hands, and we’d still rather play team sports for greedy sociopaths than prioritize even doing it a little slower with cheap EVs.

    The Earth will heal in a few million years once we’ve destroyed ourselves. ashes to ashes, dust to dust.

    • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      How does buying a cheap new car even if you don’t need it going to save humanity or prevent the earth from burning?

      • Allonzee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        The US is trying to keep these tiny ones out because they want you you buy their big gas vehicles or larger, more expensive electrics. Larger vehicles consume more resources, take more to produce, and even large electric vehicles draw more from the dirty grid than a small personal conveyance like these designed to move you and your groceries.

        And that’s a strawman to infer that our self-destruction hinges on this single point. This is yet another example on the heap of the larger problem. “it might hurt short term PROFITS for our greed mongers, so we won’t allow something that might begin to mitigate the scale of the problem.”

        That said, it sounds like you agree with them, and if that’s the case, I have good news, they’ll continue to get their way in every economic sector, and yes, cumulatively, our species is paying and will pay an even greater price for allowing blind, insatiable greed to make every decision.

        https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/20/mexico-central-america-us-heatwave

        If we cared about having a future for the species at all, Humanity’s only mission right now would be to END the global economy’s jihad of growth/metastasis, every major nation would institute child limits, and we would work to end consumerism and find homeostasis/equilibrium instead for the sake of our very survival, because this reverse terraforming we’ve done in decades will take millions of years for the earth to heal from. That’s nothing to Earth’s 3.8 billion year old story of life, but it might as well be eternity to our short term monkey brains.

        But as common economic decisions like this demonstrate, we have decided to burn the future so as not to disrupt the reckless party of avarice and gluttony for our owners today. Is what it is.

        • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          There are numerous small vehicles for sale in the US already but nobody buys them because they want a vehicle that’s good at more than one thing (being small) when forking over tens of thousands of dollars for it. Nobody is legislating to ban small or efficient vehicles they want to ban a foreign country from manipulating our markets by selling vehicles at artificially low prices due to billions in subsidies for their national brands.

          This idea that if we simply threw out all 200+ million vehicles in the US and replaced them with new, more efficient ones, global warming would suddenly end is ridiculous. This is just consumer mentality and treating cars like disposable iPhones with the mindset that you’re “being green.” If you want to help curb emissions, go buy a used Prius or EV instead of demanding that a factory build you a new car and do so at an artificially low price. Go buy a bicycle or electric scooter. You’re not reducing emissions by destroying a product that has already been built and is in good condition just to replace it with a newer version.

          I didn’t bother reading the rest of your comment since it devolved into unhinged rambling.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months 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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

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

        Or rather a whole lot of bucks.

    • Allonzee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

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

      The goal of market capitalism is to end competition, manipulate the markets to your advantage using anything from bribery to cost benefit analysis of potential consequences 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.

    • Aux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Because the US is an authoritarian pseudo democracy being run by cartels. And free market and capitalism is a death sentence for them.

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s hilarious to me that you neglect to mention that the Chinese government is heavily subsidizing the vehicles specifically to undermine other automakers.

        Not that the US are the good guys here, but this is just more of the trade war crap between China and basically everyone else.

    • flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months 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!

      • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months 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.

          • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months 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
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months 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
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months 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.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months 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.

        • Lad@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          There’s something very amusing about the nominally communist China beating the capitalist powerhouse USA at its own game.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Large professional centrally planned economies do a better job of managing scarce resources than a pack of ill-informed and uncoordinated Wall Street Lemmings.

            • WildPalmTree@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Sometimes. And when they dont, there is no one to stop them. It’s the age old problem of a wise despot. Just dressed in different clothes.

              • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                It’s the age old problem of a wise despot.

                When you’re governing wisely, there is no need to be despotic. Conflicts and contradictions necessitate a large militant police state to keep the lower class in line. But when you’ve got generous surpluses and a rising quality of life, people are generally happy and easy to govern.

                • WildPalmTree@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Despot means you have absolute power. It doesn’t mean you use it badly. It just means you have the potential to.

  • jaschen@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’m super conflicted about this. I want cheap EVs, but at the same time, China is intentionally dumping their prices to kill competition so they can later jack it up.

      • jaschen@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I mean, EVs are not going to save the earth. Investments/innovations into our infrastructures will.

        Nuclear power is the only thing currently that can save us. Unfortunately, we have ill-informed people not understanding what nuclear is.

          • jaschen@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            That’s the problem. Storage. Current battery tech just doesn’t scale. Nuclear fills those gaps for night time and cloudy days.

            We literally can just run 100% electric right now with zero emissions today if the world went nuclear. We already have the tech today. It’s scalable today.

            No need to wait to develop new battery tech. Our future is in our hands right now.

          • blindbunny@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            They’ll ignore this because it doesn’t fit their narrative of one capitalist owning all the means of power. Cool article though!

        • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          No single thing short of abolishing the entire US Military (the singles largest polluter in the world) isn’t going to be the thing to save is. It’s about taking ALL the steps you can to make the world able to be saved. Not a great lens to evaluate personal decisions bases on if it solves the whole problem right away or not.

          • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            Arguing for everyone to go out and scrap their current car just to buy a new one isn’t going to do anything for emissions. You realize building a new car creates more pollution than just buying or using one that already exists right?

            The commenter above is claiming that we’re all going to die if we can’t all go buy a new Chinese EV for $10k, which is absurd and counterproductive to reducing emissions.

            • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Arguing for everyone to go out and scrap their current car just to buy a new one isn’t going to do anything for emissions.

              Literally no one said that everyone should get a new car.

              The commenter above is claiming that we’re all going to die if we can’t all go buy a new Chinese EV for $10k

              No they’re saying market fairness doesn’t matter if you end up dead from climate change. Like the roughly 250,000 people a year who’s deaths can be attributed to it. Climate change is already on track to kill us, we need to actively stop it, no one thinks not being able to buy a Chinese car is going to kill them. It’s the thing that’s already killing them that we want to stop. A cheaper EV gives those who would otherwise be buying another ICE car a better option. They shouldn’t have to wait for arbitrary reasons to be able to make greener choices.

              • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                It won’t matter how fair things were if we are all dead.

                What other conclusion can you get from a comment like this? “We’re all dead unless we can all get our hands on these cheap Chinese EVs.” We can’t drive two cars at once meaning we must get rid of our current vehicles, no?

                Who’s going to be able to purchase these cars if hundreds of thousands/millions of union workers lose their job due to these Chinese subsidies undercutting everyone else? That has a cascading effect on the rest of the economy if you weren’t familiar with similar scenarios happening in the past like when the housing market was manipulated by banks handing out ARM loans to everyone in 2007. If you think this is all about American protectionism, why is Europe imposing the same tariffs on China for the very same reason? They’re much more accepting of climate change policy and taking steps toward a greener future. Perhaps they also see something that you’re not here.

    • schizoidman@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      The opposite of dumping is happening. For example the Kia EV5 is sold at [$20k in China](https://electrek.co/2023/11/17/kia-launches-20k-ev5-electric-suv-china-rival-tesla-model-y/) while the same made in China model is sold overseas [Starting at $46k](https://electrek.co/2024/04/04/kia-set-to-export-this-all-electric-suv-at-a-price-that-undercuts-tesla/)

      • jaschen@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        KIA is also dumping. Those prices are not sustainable. Doesn’t make it right if others are doing it.

        • schizoidman@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Well at least whatever profit Kia can’t make in China due to the low price. They can hopefully gain back from markets outside China thanks to the lack of competition driving prices down.

    • GingaNinga@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Ya if they want to survive its time to adapt and compete. This is what complacency sets up and I don’t feel bad for them at all. They saw this coming and probably just sat there expecting a bailout.

      • girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        This is what happens when the one ring of profits rules them all. US automakers don’t give a shit about anything other than their bottom line.

      • girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I remember that time, when American car makers screamed bloody murder because Honda was killing them. Good times.

  • AA5B@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    They should be very concerned. However they have the advantage of time, place, protectionism. They already have factories and employees. The technology is known. They’re admitting they are aware of the market. The only way they can lose is if they don’t even try ….

    We’ve spent years saying how short sighted they are to not be able to look ahead of the immediate term, now they’re admitting they can’t even look ahead 2-3 years