• Habahnow@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      6 months ago

      It does sadly. On the flip side, China seems to be trying to capture car manufacturing markets by subsidizing their producers. This would probably be a bad thing in the future if allowed. Hopefully the US government does more work on making it easier to purchase electric cars in the US(specifically the price) while also reducing the need for driving.

      • Dessalines@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        52
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        What exactly is wrong with a country subsidizing green energy products? Not only that, but making them available cheaply to other countries?

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          6 months ago

          The US Government doesn’t want US automakers to lose market share so that they have plenty of manufacturing capacity that could be retooled to make weapons in case of war.

        • nahuse@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          I’m not precisely sure where I stand on this, but I understand the primary policy arguments for this decision would be something like this:

          The problem comes later, when a specific actor has an outsized market share and then exploits their trade advantage for other concessions.

          It also prohibits domestic competition for those products, especially in countries with high standards of living and wages. This negates competition and innovation, since most corporations don’t have the ability to compete with an entity with the capacity to eat cost like the Chinese government.

          • Dessalines@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            24
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            The point of trade decisions, is to import products you don’t have enough domestic production to cover the demand for.

            We know that the US auto and oil industries have no sincere desire to build EVs anyway (or any green industry whatsoever), because they did their best to kill their domestic production of EVs in the 90s, and there’s no US industry for solar panels.

            This is all just part of the US’s trade war with China, that is prioritizing the profits of its auto and oil industries over the wellbeing of the environment, and the desires of its citizens for electric vehicles.

            • nahuse@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              I can’t say I disagree with anything you’ve said. It really is silly, given the US auto manufacturer industry’s continuous fuck ups, and pulling out of EVs. But hopefully this makes risk taking more likely in other countries’ car industries to move into the US market. Tesla seemed close to really catching on, but then again EVs have always been seen as “elite” here.

              But I suppose the question is whether there is that much demand for EVs? This could protect what demand there is, to at least make an even playing field for US or US ally made EVs.

              Speaking to your first point: users of Lemmy aside, I don’t think there’s that much demand for pure electric vehicle yet across the US. We so routinely travel such long distances here, and charging infrastructure just isn’t quite there outside of urban corridors to facilitate the easy usage of fully electric vehicles.

              So hopefully this can protect domestic or other countries’ industries until the idiots that comprise the US consumer market catch up to global realities.

              • o_d [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                But I suppose the question is whether there is that much demand for EVs?

                Remove the tariffs / open up the market and you’ll find out. I suspect that there wouldn’t be a need for these tariffs if the demand wasn’t there.

        • Fedizen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          it undermines any less subsidized green energy industry which can lead to monopolies in the long run.

        • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          25
          ·
          6 months ago

          They’re oversaturating the market with low-quality products. This can be a significant problem when there are safety implications.

          • joneskind@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            22
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I’m sorry but this argument doesn’t make sense. Don’t you have safety rules in the US? If the Chinese cars aren’t safe to drive nobody should be authorized to drive them in the first place. If they are safe, no need for tariffs then.

            This decision has absolutely nothing to do with alleged poor manufacturing quality. It’s protectionism, pure and simple.

          • prashanthvsdvn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            Why can’t they just certify cars based on safety and ban unsafe ones instead of blanket ban the entire segment of them. It certainly helps the adoption of EV among masses.

          • BastingChemina@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            The Chinese cars are probably much safer on the road then the huge pedestrian killing machines built by US manufacturers.

        • Ledivin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Also no US auto-manufacturer is going all in on EVs

          Tesla? Rivian? Lucid? Faraday? Fisker?

          To be clear, yes, of course I understand that those are all luxury brands, but that doesn’t make your statement any less false.

          No, the major auto manufacturers aren’t going all-in on EVs, but that are all getting deeper every year. There’s no reason to expect that progress to slow down, as they’re all quite entrenched in the technology at this point.

    • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’d rather we ensure higher standards of safety and quality for our vehicles, which are already terrifying death machines, but the hit to solar is a real step backwards.

      • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        That’s a cop out. Cars aren’t getting registered without meeting safety requirements.

  • 3volver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    102
    ·
    6 months ago

    That’s not how you ensure America leads the world in them. That’s how you ensure corps feel safe not doing shit to innovate anymore. This is just another form of a bailout.

    • whereisk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      6 months ago

      Didn’t they do the same for Japanese goods back in the day? Not sure it helped the American automotive industry.

    • LittleBorat2@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      Doesn’t China subsidize what they export on top of having cheap labor? In that case a free market argument cannot really be made. The innovation in the US or elsewhere would have to be extreme shifts to compete.

      • Aria@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Idea of free market is that it’s better than a manage market. If there’s room for innovation, the free market will find it. Central planning leads to being risk adverse and exploiting inefficiencies to soak up government money. So if free market is your religion, you shouldn’t be bothered that China tries to plan their production instead. Cheap labour also doesn’t hold since the USA has historically been happy to have their companies contract labour from cheaper countries. So if you’re losing due to Chinese salaries, just hire Chinese people.

        Also, China doesn’t subsidise any of these exports. Then they’d lose money, and they’re exporting to earn money. They subsidise R&D and domestic sales of things that’ll make domestic companies more productive and competitive.

      • LeLachs@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        6 months ago

        Technically. However, the end product is sold by a US company, so from the gov. POV it is fine.

        Banning chinese manufactured products would mean banning a huge portion of the domestic market.

        • Patapon Enjoyer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          So US companies will buy things those from China, slap a logo on it and sell American Made goods at a h huge markup

          • LeLachs@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            Technically yes. However, most of the time, they just outsource manufacturing. Research and developement is still usually done in house. Apple for example, wrote the software and designed the hardware for the iPhone but assembles it in China because of cost.

  • monobot@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    The rest of the world will get cheaper solar panels and EVs, that’s quite nice.

  • Nora@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    You want Amerikkka to lead maybe subsidize EVs as well?

    Why can’t we all win? (Ide rather bus/rail and walkable cities)

    • papertowels@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      The government does subsidize EVs.

      Additionally even used EVs are subsidized.

      Between federal and state tax credits, as well as utility company rebates, my folks just got over 5k back for a used Nissan leaf. They were able to trade in their old clunker, netting a profit of a few hundred dollars to upgrade to a practical used EV.

  • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Also medical supplies, including masks, because COVID is Joever.

    Edit to add: There is necessarily a lag between tariff imposition and indigenous production, and we’re left to fill that gap with our own wallets individually. Worse, the prices will almost definitely never come back down as they might in theory, because this is late-stage capitalism.

      • Caveman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        In all honesty they could use this tax and an extra oil tax to subsidise the shit out of solar and EVs

        • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yeah, except everyone has had it beaten into them - nobody fucks with gas prices.

          Every news outlet in the country runs the same news segment practically daily - “Let’s complain about gas prices”. We’ve somehow made it the subject of basically nonstop discussion.

          • Tak@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            6 months ago

            If people can afford to commute to office jobs in 5,000lb trucks the gas prices aren’t high enough.

          • Liz@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            Every time someone brings up gas prices I’mma just be like: “you know where the cheapest gas prices are? Electricity.”

          • Caveman@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            I mean, there is a case for discussing gas prices since it’s the price of mobile energy for everything from tractors to trucking to electricity. The gas price, specifically crude oil price, used to be synonymous with energy prices so any increase in oil price would mean a major hit to cost-of-living increases.

            It’s outdated as hell.

  • Jimmycakes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    6 months ago

    We should just be buying solar panels as cheap as we can, as fast we can who gives a fuck if they “dominate” the net positive is worth it

  • NovaPrime@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    What a bell-end. Maybe instead of tariffs the US should begin vesting in education, job training, and research into these sectors so it can compete instead of trying to hobble the competition in the domestic market. This is just protectionism by a different name