• 7 Posts
  • 94 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 23rd, 2023

help-circle




  • Finland was invaded by Russia before WWII, then participated in a campaign against Russia with the Axis powers and finally signed the Moscow Treaty with Russia and the UK and joined them against Germany… I fear history is more complex than what may serve your simplistic view (I’d go to far as to say that, most probably, reality is too).

    Also, if I may, that happened some 80 years ago… do you think current Finns should be ashamed of that when they were not even alive back then? Can you name a nation that didn’t do anything shameful in the last century?
















  • If the US or EU want to keep up, they can sunbsidize EV manufacturing to the same degree

    You can’t allow dumping-inducing subsidies without also allowing defensive tariffs, otherwise the richer and more authoritarian countries, which have greater capacity for subsidies and greater ability to concentrate them in specific sectors, will easily kill foreign competition and establish monopolies.

    The marketplace brah is a place where, without regulations that maintain a degree of fairness, the rich kills the poor, competition dies off, and consumers are drained to their last cent.

    Just think of it: competition is when different actors fight it off and it ends the moment one of the contenders wins.
    If you want the fight to go on forever, you don’t want an unregulated market.



  • Subsidizing sales of EVs (ie. I pay for my neighbor’s new EV because I want cleaner air) does make environmental sense.

    Subsidizing production does not have the same positive environmental impact, mainly because factories in China pollute more than factories, say, in the EU (due to different environmental laws), but also because moving finished products from China to the “west” obviously pollutes more than moving just those components that would need to be sourced from China anyways (eg. batteries).

    As for the “makes economic sense” part… IDK: I guess that mainly depend on your political stance.
    Personally, I don’t like that both sales and production subsidies have the effect of moving money from the poor to the rich, but other people may focus on different effects (eg. more production = more jobs) and support subsides.
    In case you wonder: my take is that, instead of incentivizing adoption and production of EVs, one should disincentivize internal combustion vehicles by adding taxes to them (which, in a sense, aren’t really taxes but just charging for the very real environmental costs society as a whole will have to pay for your shiny SUV).

    Anyone not doing this is an idiot and a climate terrorist.

    You should really think twice before spewing judgements… and also avoid misusing words like “terrorist” because, when misused this way, it only conveys that you don’t like someone, dulling your message instead of strengthening it.


  • That’s catchy, but not entirely true.

    China heavily subsidizes EV manufacturers (and production in general), plus they have cheaper environmental and labour standards… it’s not like there’s a fair market EU companies can compete in without some sort of handicap.

    PS: Yes, “western” countries have been playing along with China’s deliberate long term strategy with full awareness of where it would lead, but that’s another story that is both much older and has a much broader scope than the EV industry.