World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
then start investing in tech, jobs, and education so the us can compete with inexpensive cars....
*editors note; i'm not a tankie, i just know that china has invested in technology while the us has been bogged down in partisanship (look at solar)
We would also need the government to pay for half of the cost to build the cars. That's what China is doing and why the cars are so cheap.
Sounds good to me. When are we starting?
Sounds good.
Finally my tax dollars would be going to something positive!
FTFY. While the Chinese government has made major investments in technology, the problem is their excessive subsidies which are allowing Chinese manufacturers to artificially out-compete their competitors. As others have pointed out, it's the same as "Big-Tech Disruptors" who begin with unsustainable prices, and once all their competitors leave the market they raise their prices.
Are Chinese subsidies really excessive compared to American subsidies? Tesla owes its entire existence to the government giving it carbon tax credits among other subsidies. Every single qualifying electric vehicle has been getting thousands of dollars in the form of tax credits all the way up to $7500 and it's only been more generous now since it can be used as a rebate right at the dealership. American car companies have taken that to mean they can jack up prices by those thousands of dollars and even more, because they still treat EVs as mainly premium products.
If you want to talk about artificially out-competing competitors, the 100% tariff is a prime example. The US has dragged its feet on technologies like EVs so they can juice profits and now it's crying and shrieking about competition being "unfair" for providing customers with a desirable product in a desirable price range. This protectionist policy not only sets back the fight against climate change, but also tightens the screws on customers who are already feeling the weight of inflation, just to continue the record profits by the auto companies.
They're not, American cars are not competitive because US auto makers have relied on financialization and oligopolistic tactics.
America COULD build good affordable cars but that's way harder than just doing another stock buyback.
Sorta like how the US runs the petroleum markets? You should go look at how they deal with softwood lumber too. Multiple WTO complaints for unfair trade practices. The US chose where they want to pour their subsidies and so has China.
I'm Canadian, so I'm well versed in softwood lumber dispute. However, we're talking about EVs.
We're talking about EVs and not comprehending my post, apparently.
I'm just not sure what your argument is. Since the US practices unfair trade in one industry, China should be allowed to in other industries? I don't know if you missed this lesson in second grade, but, "Two wrongs don't make a right."
It's not a matter of "allow", it's a matter of what governments choose to subsidize. There's no point in getting pissy at China for subsidizing an industry to the detriment of other countries when the US actively does it in other industries. The US could do the same with batteries and EVs, but there's no political will.
They're not excessive subsidies. It's USA and Europe that are not subsidising EVs enough.
Any country or car maker that does not get on board with decarbonisation of the transport sector needs to be shut down asap.
You might be somewhat right, however I would prefer that money going towards public transport and whatnot.
Alltough my guess is it will just be burnes in some shit like drone taxis.
America is the largest oil producer in the world. It should not be a surprise the incentives to move to EV is not big. The longer we are all addicted to oil, the more money America and fossil fuel giants make.
China does not have much oil in the ground. They are investing in EV and renewables because it allows them independence from the oil lobby. Which is a very welcome coincidence to fight global warming.