• gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’m frankly getting pretty goddamn annoyed at all the people who relentlessly fail to understand that the PRC is heavily subsidizing production of basically all of their EVs in the interest of undercutting literally all other countries that are (or are trying to) produce EVs.

    By all means, research what I’m saying here to confirm its veracity - in fact I encourage you to. This is economic warfare, plain and simple.

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        …it is bad. It’s particularly bad because the PRC is running the show, and they very certainly do not have the best interest of any group but themselves (as in, the Party, and particularly, the Party Committee) in mind.

        • cum@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Having a cheap supply chain that incentives and heavily costs cut for EVs is bad? I can’t follow this

          • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            The PRC is trying to crush any and all competition. This isn’t them being ecologically friendly or magnanimous in any way. The entire point of this is so they can do the best they can to corner the market, which is easier when the government you operate under just hands you money so you can immediately recoup substantial fraction of your balance sheet liabilities. They are doing this because they want to control the EV market, which will give the PRC a substantial amount of geopolitical power (case in point: look at Taiwan with their chip foundries). And, of course, Party officials and the corporate leadership of their car companies stand to make a fair bit of dosh too.

            More broadly, I don’t like when any country does this, including the US. The primary reason I’m singling the PRC out here is because that’s the topic of the post.

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

      EVE Online taught me this lesson. Those with the resources to do so will take a loss to price you out of the market, because they know you can’t take the losses nearly as long as they can.

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        And that’s precisely what’s happening here. A car manufacturer with a whole-ass government subsidizing it is going to be able to operate just fine at a loss pretty much indefinitely, whereas a normal car manufacturer would sooner or later simply go bankrupt (pointedly ignoring the whole “too big to fail” idiocy, which to be honest, while similar, isn’t quite the same thing).

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

      Its not just the EV, its every layer of the supply chain. From the lithium they mine, the batteries they make out of it, the circuits and metal fabricating. Their government subsidies the electricity, tools, facilities, labor, etc. I work in the engineering field and I see bits and pieces of this everyday and have seen it for decades because I’m forced to source parts from China.

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I know. I’m trying to dumb it down a bit because the dipshits who argue about this stuff don’t seem to understand the incredible level of complexity of modern-day high tech consumer product manufacturing logistics.