The GM strike is really about the switch to electric cars • Hacker News Board

Re: The GM strike is really about the switch to electric cars

#231

Post by swagasaurus-rex » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 12:38 AM UTC

Consultant32452 wrote: post #152

chillacy wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People don't want "hand outs" or "charity", they want to do something to generate value Agreed that it will be a cultural shift: there is a divide between meaning and economics. People need meaning in life, but meaningful work and economic value aren't always the same. Raising children or providing caregiving to the elderly can be very meaningful and happens to pay poorly. Building community is incredibly meaningfu…

I think you'll have a much harder time convincing women to not base sexual selection, at least in part, on resource gathering. That's pretty ingrained, and not just culture.

Then men will continue trying, as they have since time immemorial.

Re: The GM strike is really about the switch to electric cars

#232

Post by mjevans » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 12:42 AM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #31

flatline wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think people have a right to a job. But I do think that we as a society have a responsibility for baseline care of everyone. When we can’t depend on the profits of individual’s labor to support them for life any more - which will increasingly be the case according to the current trajectory - something else must be done. This goes beyond the very real issues of wealth disparity and to a much more fundamental p…

We have a responsibility as a society to ensure that a framework exists (social safety nets, effective public policy) to allow someone to work towards finding purpose without starving or going homeless. If someone wants to cheat and call that a job guarantee, I’m fine with that. And in the long run, it’s cheaper than the alternative. It’s not just the moral thing to do, it’s compassionate and economically efficient.

I agree with everything except it being cheating.

That's the government providing baseline competition (and non broken-window public works) to serve as something for private entities to beat.

Re: The GM strike is really about the switch to electric cars

#233

Post by sheeshkebab » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 12:42 AM UTC

zizee wrote: post #216

TomMckenny wrote: post #122

No it's about money and who gets it. Unless electric cars are going to generate less revenue than petroleum based, which they won't, the pie is the same size. That manufacturing becomes more efficient is no surprise: it always has. The question is whether they have fewer workers at the same compensation level, fewer workers at a higher compensation level or the same number of workers with fewer hours. Owners are push…

> No it's about money and who gets it. > Owners are pushing for the first, labor wants anything except the first. There are two important actors left out of this analysis: consumers and parts suppliers. It doesn't fit the evil owner narrative, but often these efficiency gains translate largely to reduced prices for consumers. Consumers vote with their wallets, so it is often the case that unless the evil owners consp…

Nonsense. Did you ever see an i-device get cheaper? Or a cheap car get even cheaper? There is a reason why wealth inequality has grown in recent decades, while manufacturing efficiencies increased.

Re: The GM strike is really about the switch to electric cars

#234

Post by cglace » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 12:45 AM UTC

sheeshkebab wrote: post #233

zizee wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No it's about money and who gets it. > Owners are pushing for the first, labor wants anything except the first. There are two important actors left out of this analysis: consumers and parts suppliers. It doesn't fit the evil owner narrative, but often these efficiency gains translate largely to reduced prices for consumers. Consumers vote with their wallets, so it is often the case that unless the evil owners consp…

Nonsense. Did you ever see an i-device get cheaper? Or a cheap car get even cheaper? There is a reason why wealth inequality has grown in recent decades, while manufacturing efficiencies increased.

Strange you chose something that is essentially a luxury item instead of commodity electronics that are cheaper than ever.

Re: The GM strike is really about the switch to electric cars

#235

Post by imglorp » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 12:51 AM UTC

brownbat wrote: post #107

China has over ten different companies making EVs under $14,000. If EVs were more like commodity electronics products and less niche, if there were broad competition, things could change faster than anyone expects. There are a lot of entrenched stakeholders in the US though. UAW, dealerships, policy will control the outcome more than technology for a while. https://wattev2buy.com/china-ev-price-list-rank-chinese-elec…

Dealerships may have some pull for now, but they're part of the problem: artificial, parasitic friction. In a free market you could buy a car at Costco or the Internet instead of paying those clowns to haggle and cheat you. Part of Tesla's success is disrupting that mess.

Re: The GM strike is really about the switch to electric cars

#236

Post by danmg » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 12:59 AM UTC

magicalhippo wrote: post #229

danmg wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being optimistic, EVs will never have more than a 30% market share because they're incompatible with a large portion of people's lifestyles. They will find an audience with people exclusively commute and have the facilities to charge at home. At the moment, there's some cachet to having a Tesla but the reality of owning one is represented in the deprecation rate. The energy density of battery technology will never re…

> The energy density of battery technology will never reach that of petroleum. Not anytime soon at least. But that's besides the point. They don't have to do that, they just have to be good enough.

For people who can use an EV, and for people who are willing to accept that a single vehicle can't do everything.

Most people don't want to keep multiple vehicles to cover all their bases. Just look at the number of pickup trucks sold in the US. How many of those people are hauling stuff or using it for work? While there are landscapers, tradesmen and laborers who do that, the vast majority of them are essentially commuter cars. People often get them, among other reasons, because they might come in handy if they need to move stuff. These are the same people who will never accept an EV because it doesn't have the overall utility of their other vehicle.

Re: The GM strike is really about the switch to electric cars

#237

Post by swashbuck1r » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 1:01 AM UTC

sheeshkebab wrote: post #233

zizee wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No it's about money and who gets it. > Owners are pushing for the first, labor wants anything except the first. There are two important actors left out of this analysis: consumers and parts suppliers. It doesn't fit the evil owner narrative, but often these efficiency gains translate largely to reduced prices for consumers. Consumers vote with their wallets, so it is often the case that unless the evil owners consp…

Nonsense. Did you ever see an i-device get cheaper? Or a cheap car get even cheaper? There is a reason why wealth inequality has grown in recent decades, while manufacturing efficiencies increased.

It’s also interesting you chose a segment that is already at the slower end of reaping benefits of improved productivity. Reminded me of a NPR segment this week contrasting items that have room to become cheaper vs those that don’t. https://www.npr.org/2019/10/04/767095401/the-baumol-effect-a...

Re: The GM strike is really about the switch to electric cars

#238

Post by okcando » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 1:05 AM UTC

sheeshkebab wrote: post #233

zizee wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No it's about money and who gets it. > Owners are pushing for the first, labor wants anything except the first. There are two important actors left out of this analysis: consumers and parts suppliers. It doesn't fit the evil owner narrative, but often these efficiency gains translate largely to reduced prices for consumers. Consumers vote with their wallets, so it is often the case that unless the evil owners consp…

Nonsense. Did you ever see an i-device get cheaper? Or a cheap car get even cheaper? There is a reason why wealth inequality has grown in recent decades, while manufacturing efficiencies increased.

By analogy, you might as well be asking if I've ever seen Rolexes get cheaper. Why are you talking about Rolexes and not watches?

Re: The GM strike is really about the switch to electric cars

#239

Post by CDSlice » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 1:07 AM UTC

sheeshkebab wrote: post #233

zizee wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No it's about money and who gets it. > Owners are pushing for the first, labor wants anything except the first. There are two important actors left out of this analysis: consumers and parts suppliers. It doesn't fit the evil owner narrative, but often these efficiency gains translate largely to reduced prices for consumers. Consumers vote with their wallets, so it is often the case that unless the evil owners consp…

Nonsense. Did you ever see an i-device get cheaper? Or a cheap car get even cheaper? There is a reason why wealth inequality has grown in recent decades, while manufacturing efficiencies increased.

Apple actually has made new iPhone 11 $50 cheaper than the phone it replaced.

Furthermore smartphones in general _have_ been getting cheaper. It's only top of the line flagships that are getting more expensive while also being much more powerful and with better (AKA more expensive) tech inside them.

Re: The GM strike is really about the switch to electric cars

#240

Post by wigsby806 » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 1:08 AM UTC

sheeshkebab wrote: post #233

zizee wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No it's about money and who gets it. > Owners are pushing for the first, labor wants anything except the first. There are two important actors left out of this analysis: consumers and parts suppliers. It doesn't fit the evil owner narrative, but often these efficiency gains translate largely to reduced prices for consumers. Consumers vote with their wallets, so it is often the case that unless the evil owners consp…

Nonsense. Did you ever see an i-device get cheaper? Or a cheap car get even cheaper? There is a reason why wealth inequality has grown in recent decades, while manufacturing efficiencies increased.

The cheap car isn't the same cheap car though. Try finding a 2-door sedan with manual controls and an AM/FM radio. Even the cheapest new car has bluetooth entertainment controls and backup cameras. It also has airbags in every zone and a decent crash rating.

Nobody produces the cheap base-model car of yore, if they did they could easily do so for well under 10k. But that doesn't support the bottom line especially when you have to cut in the dealership.