Rendered at 04:07:07 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
ericmay 1 days ago [-]
I don't think it's fair to only point at alleged Republican roadblocks, though those can certainly be important, you also have to point out that European, Japanese, and American automakers (to a lesser extent) who simply failed to create and market affordable electric vehicles with a good design. Tesla was the only one that really did it and you can see a number on the road. Though Elon screwed up the brand. We've had a few other startups (Rivian, Lucid, &c.) and that's great but it's a bit of a chicken-egg problem.
Unfortunately because of China's economic policy we can't allow the import of their cars because what's more important than electrification is defending a manufacturing base and jobs.
juiceland 1 days ago [-]
>Unfortunately because of China's economic policy we can't allow the import of their cars because what's more important than electrification is defending a manufacturing base and job
What’s so frustrating about this situation is that the US has been here before, and we solved it with joint ventures with Toyota in the early 1980s.
It wasn’t tariffs though, it was quotas, which seems smarter. Let the brand get established (taste of the market) and then get them to build here.
ericmay 1 days ago [-]
Apologies for responding to you so quickly I just happened to hop on here shortly after your post.
I think what might be materially different was that while Japan was considered an economic threat, in some ways, similar to China, Japan was also an American ally. It's just a different fundamental level of trust and so things like joint partnerships are more possible. China, unfortunately under the yoke of the CCP, did not liberalize to an extent that was hoped for after the US advocated for them to join the World Trade Organization.
We really did them a huge favor there and it's so unfortunate that they used that against us when nobody in America has any issues or qualms with China besides their actions that they've taken largely on their own and without any prodding from the West.
Even in the case of Hong Kong and Taiwan, there is an easy to see world where China had democratized and nobody in the west would have given a damn about reunification, nor would we really need to have our military built up in the region.
North Korea was another problem there, which we can owe the existence of that pariah state and the wonton destruction it has imposed upon the people held hostage there, at the feet of the Chinese Communist Party and of course the Soviet Union too. Communists and other authoritarian ideological adherents did a loooooooooot of damage to the world and are still wreaking havoc.
juiceland 10 hours ago [-]
I mean sure, but China still has factories in the US. There’s even a movie about it: American Factory (2019). These are the factories I know about: Fuyao Glass (Moraine, OH; IL), Gotion (Manteno, IL), Trina Solar (Wilmer, TX), GE Appliances/Haier (Louisville, KY; also SC, AL, GA, TN, CT), Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube (Wilcox County, AL), Keer Group (Lancaster County, SC), Nanshan America (Lafayette, IN), Smithfield Foods/WH Group, Nexteer, Jinko Solar, JA Solar, Longi, Hounen, Runergy, Boviet….
ericmay 9 hours ago [-]
Sure but that doesn't detract from my point. The US also operates businesses in China.
juiceland 9 hours ago [-]
Right, so there's no reason why we can't do with China what we did with Japan. It's different, but not materially so.
ericmay 8 hours ago [-]
But I explained why we can’t already in my previous posts. It is materially different.
melling 1 days ago [-]
The US won’t let China build cars in the US.
I wouldn’t worry. The US is only 17% of the global car market. In a few years, it’ll be obvious that protectionism didn’t work.
ericmay 1 days ago [-]
The EU will take action too. Germany isn't going to allow its automobile industry to be hollowed out. [1]
The American car market 17% of the market with ~4% of global population seems very easily sustainable. A country like Japan who operates and is expanding in the United States [2] runs strongly counter to your point of view here.
>Unfortunately because of China's economic policy we can't allow the import of their cars because what's more important than electrification is defending a manufacturing base and jobs.
Cool, when do we do this in something other than a foot gun approach. Let me know and we'll think about caring. Until this, this line of argument is a facade.
ericmay 1 days ago [-]
Well it's not a facade. It's just the factual reason. I don't even think that's a controversial point.
cyanydeez 17 hours ago [-]
yes, you are saying:
1. The bee hive is full of wasps, and we must be careful.
I'm saying.
2. Yes, but why are you using a crowbar to hit the beehive.
See how you can have completely factual statements and still be a bizarrely stupid idiot when it comes to responding to a factual problem?
ericmay 17 hours ago [-]
The only thing I’m seeing are made up analogies.
Your framing is wrong, for example. You’re implying we are doing something wrong or provocative or that we are stirring up trouble, but the opposite is true. We are responding to provocations. If anything the what you wrote here would apply to China. Why is China hitting us with a crowbar (industrial overcapacity)? Now they’ve stirred the hornets nest.
cyanydeez 16 hours ago [-]
Of course. Real people who understand policy and implementation know that you cant just take a fact and use that to implement policy.
Its like saying all you need is good intent and good things will happen.
See, a real policy frames the actions that will implement the policy.
At best, you present a soundbite. A meaningless positive intent thats all slogan and zero value.
ericmay 16 hours ago [-]
I really have no idea what you are talking about. It seems like you are just stringing together a few incoherent sentences and then drawing a faulty conclusion.
If you have a specific question I can answer for you or something you actually want to talk about, let me know.
Unfortunately because of China's economic policy we can't allow the import of their cars because what's more important than electrification is defending a manufacturing base and jobs.
What’s so frustrating about this situation is that the US has been here before, and we solved it with joint ventures with Toyota in the early 1980s.
It wasn’t tariffs though, it was quotas, which seems smarter. Let the brand get established (taste of the market) and then get them to build here.
I think what might be materially different was that while Japan was considered an economic threat, in some ways, similar to China, Japan was also an American ally. It's just a different fundamental level of trust and so things like joint partnerships are more possible. China, unfortunately under the yoke of the CCP, did not liberalize to an extent that was hoped for after the US advocated for them to join the World Trade Organization.
We really did them a huge favor there and it's so unfortunate that they used that against us when nobody in America has any issues or qualms with China besides their actions that they've taken largely on their own and without any prodding from the West.
Even in the case of Hong Kong and Taiwan, there is an easy to see world where China had democratized and nobody in the west would have given a damn about reunification, nor would we really need to have our military built up in the region.
North Korea was another problem there, which we can owe the existence of that pariah state and the wonton destruction it has imposed upon the people held hostage there, at the feet of the Chinese Communist Party and of course the Soviet Union too. Communists and other authoritarian ideological adherents did a loooooooooot of damage to the world and are still wreaking havoc.
I wouldn’t worry. The US is only 17% of the global car market. In a few years, it’ll be obvious that protectionism didn’t work.
The American car market 17% of the market with ~4% of global population seems very easily sustainable. A country like Japan who operates and is expanding in the United States [2] runs strongly counter to your point of view here.
[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/30/china-warns-europe-increases... (just a recent article, you get the picture - Europe will protect its markets too)
[2] Just an example: https://www.dispatch.com/story/business/manufacturing/2026/0...
Cool, when do we do this in something other than a foot gun approach. Let me know and we'll think about caring. Until this, this line of argument is a facade.
1. The bee hive is full of wasps, and we must be careful.
I'm saying.
2. Yes, but why are you using a crowbar to hit the beehive.
See how you can have completely factual statements and still be a bizarrely stupid idiot when it comes to responding to a factual problem?
Your framing is wrong, for example. You’re implying we are doing something wrong or provocative or that we are stirring up trouble, but the opposite is true. We are responding to provocations. If anything the what you wrote here would apply to China. Why is China hitting us with a crowbar (industrial overcapacity)? Now they’ve stirred the hornets nest.
Its like saying all you need is good intent and good things will happen.
See, a real policy frames the actions that will implement the policy.
At best, you present a soundbite. A meaningless positive intent thats all slogan and zero value.
If you have a specific question I can answer for you or something you actually want to talk about, let me know.