Franken drinks the kool-aid, gets called out by Maher

[DKW 86 7,899]

22 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Here's what it would take for us to "compete" with China on EVs:

1. Provide all the capital required for EV manufacturing from the U.S. Treasury (communism).
2. Pay the workers less than a living wage.
3. Ignore all environmental and other regulations which might affect the bottom line.

TT is correct. Electric vehicles are a prime example of instituting tariffs for the sake of fairness to our EV industry as well as for our national security.

So you are against DNC and VPKH on tariffs??????

[wdefromtx 3,607]

1 minute ago, DKW 86 said:

So, how long do 5 American Companies get to overcharge? 5 Years? 10 Years? 20 Years? Who makes the decision? Who is doing the reviewing? How do we know that the American Companies arent just buying these people off to keep their profits higher? Who insured the American Consumer isn't getting screwed over an over for years? 

Are you referring to just the EV cars or vehicles in general? 

[TexasTiger 14,284]

6 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

So, how long do 5 American Companies get to overcharge? 5 Years? 10 Years? 20 Years? Who makes the decision? Who is doing the reviewing? How do we know that the American Companies arent just buying these people off to keep their profits higher? Who insured the American Consumer isn't getting screwed over an over for years? 

If Chinese companies are funded by the Chinese government, staffed by low wage workers and polluting to do it, what’s fair about this competition? And how does any of that change the national security issue? And if American's wages keep falling due to lack of what used to be middle class jobs, what do they buy vehicles with?

[wdefromtx 3,607]

I think certain items are more a national security issue than others. 
 

For example microchips and processors are very important. 
 

EV’s aren’t near as important, however the batteries and battery technology is more important since that technology is used in a variety of things ranging from planes, drones, communication devices, etc. 

[TexasTiger 14,284]

27 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

I think certain items are more a national security issue than others. 
 

For example microchips and processors are very important. 
 

EV’s aren’t near as important, however the batteries and battery technology is more important since that technology is used in a variety of things ranging from planes, drones, communication devices, etc. 

Presumably, in the not so distant future, most new cars will be EVs. If the USA shutters its industrial capacity to make vehicles (which will happen if they have to compete with subsidized products) it loses it’s ability to transform those plants if needed as we did in WW2. Also, would you want us driving cars that rely on software updates from the Chinese government?

[wdefromtx 3,607]

10 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Presumably, in the not so distant future, most new cars will be EVs. If the USA shutters its industrial capacity to make vehicles (which will happen if they have to compete with subsidized products) it loses it’s ability to transform those plants if needed as we did in WW2. Also, would you want us driving cars that rely on software updates from the Chinese government?

If the US follows the stupid ICE bans that the EU and California enacted without heavily investing in carbon capture and synthetic fuels we are screwed regardless. That is what would cause us to really have to compete with subsidized products.

Regardless, if the tariffs work, I don't see why you are arguing that the US will shutter auto making capacity. That's the whole point of it to raise their price to what it costs to buy a US built EV. 

But you have to put tariffs on any EV's and ICEV's from China to prevent the shuttering of US auto plants. Given the choice of an expensive EV from China, an equally expensive US made EV or a more affordable ICEV people are choosing the ICEV. 

Can't think of any situation where we would be relying on Chinese updates if we buy American built vehicles. Especially if we bring back chip manufacturing here. 

[TexasTiger 14,284]

7 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

If the US follows the stupid ICE bans that the EU and California enacted without heavily investing in carbon capture and synthetic fuels we are screwed regardless. That is what would cause us to really have to compete with subsidized products.

Regardless, if the tariffs work, I don't see why you are arguing that the US will shutter auto making capacity. That's the whole point of it to raise their price to what it costs to buy a US built EV. 

But you have to put tariffs on any EV's and ICEV's from China to prevent the shuttering of US auto plants. Given the choice of an expensive EV from China, an equally expensive US made EV or a more affordable ICEV people are choosing the ICEV. 

Can't think of any situation where we would be relying on Chinese updates if we buy American built vehicles. Especially if we bring back chip manufacturing here. 

I was responding to this:

 

1 hour ago, wdefromtx said:

I think certain items are more a national security issue than others. 
 

For example microchips and processors are very important. 
 

EV’s aren’t near as important

If we don’t have tariffs or outright bans, china’s EVs do pose a national security threat.

We’re a long way from being able to thrive with EVs. Toyota has been smart to focus on hybrids. Reducing emissions while not tying operation to a large new infrastructure.

[wdefromtx 3,607]

3 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

I was responding to this:

 

If we don’t have tariffs or outright bans, china’s EVs do pose a national security threat.

We’re a long way from being able to thrive with EVs. Toyota has been smart to focus on hybrids. Reducing emissions while not tying operation to a large new infrastructure.

Gotcha, we are on the same page with that, I was coming from the standpoint of we don't need EV's. I agree that cheap Chinese EV's could undercut even our ICEV production. 

Toyota is one of the smart manufacturers that have realized the future is not entirely EV and has remained committed to ICEV and Hybrids. They know carbon neutral fuels is where we will eventually head. But they often get criticized and people say they are falling behind. It's actually the opposite. 

[wdefromtx 3,607]

An increase in costs to Americans is a separate issue. 

I don't think most people will feel a financial strain from putting a steep tariff on or banning Chinese EV's. 

We should be more concerned with the companies in the US that the Chinese own and how they have what amounts to near monopolies. 

[auburnatl1 6,145]

I think it’s interesting that the same people screaming about inflation are now embracing tariffs. Tariffs are pro local industry /jobs but are 100% inflationary. Pick your poison.

[wdefromtx 3,607]

31 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

I think it’s interesting that the same people screaming about inflation are now embracing tariffs. Tariffs are pro local industry /jobs but are 100% inflationary. Pick your poison.

Depends on what the tariff is on. I doubt the everyday consumer is going to feel the strain of inflation on a Chinese made EV. Perhaps general electronics, which putting a blanket tariff on everything does more harm than good usually.

[TexasTiger 14,284]

47 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

I think it’s interesting that the same people screaming about inflation are now embracing tariffs. Tariffs are pro local industry /jobs but are 100% inflationary. Pick your poison.

The folks screaming the loudest on inflation are tribalist Trumpists. There’s no logic or principle to be found. 

[auburnatl1 6,145]

48 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

Depends on what the tariff is on. I doubt the everyday consumer is going to feel the strain of inflation on a Chinese made EV. Perhaps general electronics, which putting a blanket tariff on everything does more harm than good usually.

It’s not really a debate. It’s an absolute. Econ 101.

[homersapien 12,227]

On 9/15/2024 at 1:35 PM, wdefromtx said:

They know carbon neutral fuels is where we will eventually head. But they often get criticized and people say they are falling behind. It's actually the opposite. 

What technology do you think will have the largest market share of the "carbon neutral" market in say, 30 years?

[wdefromtx 3,607]

22 minutes ago, homersapien said:

What technology do you think will have the largest market share of the "carbon neutral" market in say, 30 years?

Synthetic fuels from carbon capturing, for both aviation and vehicles. 

[wdefromtx 3,607]

43 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

It’s not really a debate. It’s an absolute. Econ 101.

Sorry, but a tariff on a Chinese EV isn't going to cause any significant inflation on groceries, clothing, etc. unless China decides to try to retaliate. 

 

[TexasTiger 14,284]

56 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

It’s not really a debate. It’s an absolute. Econ 101.

If they aren’t on the market now, how will tariffs solely on Chinese EVs cause inflation for everyday consumers?

[homersapien 12,227]

15 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

Synthetic fuels from carbon capturing, for both aviation and vehicles. 

I agree they will naturally dominate aviation and long haul cargo transport, but I think EVs will have a significant market share in personal transport.

[wdefromtx 3,607]

39 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I agree they will naturally dominate aviation and long haul cargo transport, but I think EVs will have a significant market share in personal transport.

I think up to 25% share or a little more than that will happen. But, ICEV running on different fuels will still be dominant. 

That is one reason many manufacturers are starting to change their all-electric plans and go the hybrid route or smaller forced induction engines instead of abandoning them altogether like some said they were going to do. 

[homersapien 12,227]

1 hour ago, wdefromtx said:

I think up to 25% share or a little more than that will happen. But, ICEV running on different fuels will still be dominant. 

That is one reason many manufacturers are starting to change their all-electric plans and go the hybrid route or smaller forced induction engines instead of abandoning them altogether like some said they were going to do.

I doubt that fuel and maintenance costs will be lower than for EVs

Hybrids are a natural due to the lack of infrastructure.  On the other hand, the average of (all) car trips is a little over 12 miles.

 

Edited Monday at 09:46 PM by homersapien

[wdefromtx 3,607]

41 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I doubt that fuel and maintenance costs will be lower than for EVs

Hybrids are a natural due to the lack of infrastructure.  On the other hand, the average of (all) car trips is a little over 12 miles.

 

Maybe for you. LOL 

Try living in Houston or DFW. 

Houston is an hour away from Houston. 

[TexasTiger 14,284]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

On the other hand, the average of (all) car trips is a little over 12 miles.

That may be the average. And if you can afford multiple vehicles and have a place to put them, you could have an EV for local trips. Most folks need one car they also feel comfortable taking the occasional longer trip.

[auburnatl1 6,145]

7 hours ago, wdefromtx said:

Sorry, but a tariff on a Chinese EV isn't going to cause any significant inflation on groceries, clothing, etc. unless China decides to try to retaliate. 

 

So the Chinese wouldn’t  retaliate (better known as a trade war) with further escalations. Never stops at one product. This is kinda a waters wet thing.

[auburnatl1 6,145]

7 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

If they aren’t on the market now, how will tariffs solely on Chinese EVs cause inflation for everyday consumers?

Again, because they’ll retaliate. 

[TexasTiger 14,284]

8 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

Again, because they’ll retaliate. 

Please elaborate on how they’ll cause inflation for Americans beyond the tariffs on EVs.