←back to thread

The $25k car is going extinct?

(media.hubspot.com)
319 points pseudolus | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
1970-01-01 ◴[] No.44422276[source]
Completely unmentioned: Chinese EVs are $10k worldwide except USA.

https://gmauthority.com/blog/2024/08/2025-byd-seagull-ev-sta...

replies(9): >>44422303 #>>44422331 #>>44422343 #>>44422395 #>>44422414 #>>44422459 #>>44422681 #>>44422696 #>>44423463 #
infecto ◴[] No.44422395[source]
Completely untrue. Maybe in China or SEA but not for the rest of the world.

Chinese manufacturers have come a long way and I wish I could buy one in the US but they are also pricing at razor thin margins to starve out competition.

Even in Vietnam the Dolphin is $25k

replies(1): >>44422417 #
immibis ◴[] No.44422417[source]
That's just competition doing its job. The rate of profit, just like every other price, is supposed to fall to the minimum sustsinable level in capitalism.
replies(2): >>44422484 #>>44423057 #
mattmaroon ◴[] No.44422484[source]
But it’s well below the minimum sustainable level due to Chinese government subsidies.
replies(2): >>44422642 #>>44422737 #
NickC25 ◴[] No.44422737[source]
And that's a bad thing?

A country's government sees an opportunity to invest into a promising new technology that could reap tremendous economic benefits. Such benefits include new jobs, new income, the ability to increase social/political capital worldwide, and help usher in a world that is that much less reliant on oil.

That's what countries in the first world are supposed to do.

replies(3): >>44423066 #>>44423137 #>>44423872 #
infecto ◴[] No.44423066{5}[source]
China historically does it in a way where they orchestrate cartel like behavior and will dump inventory on the market at low prices to kill off international competition. Some of it is altruistic but not all of it.
replies(1): >>44424524 #
NickC25 ◴[] No.44424524{6}[source]
That's the geopolitical advantage of being the world's manufacturing hub.

Foresight is required when dealing with such entities, not hindsight.

If my electric car comes in at 1/4th the price of an American built one, so be it. The tradeoff here is that in countries that aren't engulfed by rent-seeking capitalists who only answer to themselves, countries like China have a policy goal and will make sure the state utilizes the private sector to meet the goal.

For example, Mr. Musk could easily take some of that $450 billion net worth of his and make his cars considerably cheaper. He has taken enormous subsidies and kept his cars expensive. In China, the state would not let someone with that amount of capital take subsidies, and most certainly wouldn't allow them to bribe the government with the government's money.

replies(1): >>44424865 #
infecto ◴[] No.44424865{7}[source]
Kind of a strange take. I think your thoughts derailed after the first sentence. Advantage? I guess but it’s also cartel like behavior that the rest of the world mostly avoids hence when selective tariffs are often put on China in those areas.
replies(1): >>44425404 #
NickC25 ◴[] No.44425404{8}[source]
Hardly a strange take IMO.

We've (the west) effectively encouraged this sort of behavior. OUTSOURCE IT ALL TO CHINA! Our corporations and shareholders have most certainly reaped the benefits from this. Our politicians have made a lot of money this way, too. Lots of people have deliberately turned a blind eye to this sort of behavior and didn't think about the long term ramifications of pushing everything to be built in China.

Call it cartel like behavior, fine.

China is merely playing the hand it has been dealt and looking out for itself and the survival of its economy and political apparatus. Trade is one way to do so, another is technological progress.

We've subsidized capitalists taking the risk to develop this tech. China has bypassed the ownership class and gone straight to the manufacturers. Some of those capitalists have enriched themselves when they should have passed those costs off to make their products cheaper to stay competitive - that's the whole point of subsidies. Instead, one of those capitalists chose to instead take the subsidies, keep his cars expensive, and make himself the wealthiest person on earth.

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

replies(1): >>44425769 #
infecto ◴[] No.44425769{9}[source]
You’re not wrong about Western complicity, but let’s not pretend that “playing the hand you’re dealt” means “forming state-guided monopolies and dumping at a loss to wipe out global competitors.” That’s not just survival, that’s industrial warfare with Chinese characteristics.

And yeah, we subsidized Musk, dumb move but the answer isn’t to copy a system where the state decides who wins, loses, and what the price tag is. That’s not market efficiency, it’s command capitalism with a smile.

Don’t hate the game? Buddy, the game is rigged. China just rigged it better.

replies(1): >>44431629 #
1. immibis ◴[] No.44431629{10}[source]
America has been doing the same thing, but in the Internet tech sector rather than physical manufacturing. Is that bad too?