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

#241

Post by nazgulnarsil » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 1:09 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.

This is incorrect. The inflation adjusted price of the first smart phone is ~$600. I can get a vastly more capable device shipped to my house for $129 unlocked for any carrier. The most barebones available car has steadily dropped in price relative to average income while becoming drastically safer, more reliable, and lasting longer.

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

#242

Post by Shivetya » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 1:11 AM UTC

bluedino wrote: post #29

There are so many parts involved with a traditional engine and transmission. Living in Michigan, there are lots of companies building these individual parts. I know a guy who works at a place that builds springs for transmissions ( https://www.pjws.com/our-products/ ) Valvetrain parts, pistons, rings, crankshafts, starters, heads, oil pumps, exhaust manifolds, mufflers, fuel injectors, sensors...none of this stuff is…

It isn't just happening in the US, manufacturing of cars is going to be hard hit in other countries. EU manufacturers aren't exactly tripping over themselves to go EV, VW claims it is but looking at its schedule and its still damn slow.

they have to answer to their unions who have board seats and the know that EVs will gut jobs. it will clobber more that just the manufacture of the cars and those jobs but also all the the third party parts suppliers will take a huge hit as the majority of their stocked parts are related to petrol engines and transmissions which have quite a few wear parts.

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

#243

Post by toomuchtodo » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 1:36 AM UTC

mjevans wrote: post #232

toomuchtodo wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I meant cheating in the sense of what you call it (which isn’t important).

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

#244

Post by bumby » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 1:41 AM UTC

wigsby806 wrote: post #240

sheeshkebab wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 whe…

The Nissan Versa is about as close as you can get and it comes in at about $10-11k.

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

#245

Post by TomMckenny » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 1:42 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…

>There are two important actors left out of this analysis: consumers and parts suppliers.

This is indeed plausible and has happened for other commodities but note: 1) since the model-T, inflation adjusted consumer prices for automobiles have never dropped and 2) car manufacturers have historically replicated or bought any serious profit centers in their supply chain.

>Evil

Shareholders act in their interest, employees act in theirs. Often everyone ends up fairly satisfied. Is that not how the system is supposed to work and is describing it plainly without effusive praise now automatically suspect?

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

#246

Post by windexh8er » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 1:44 AM UTC

Judgmentality wrote: post #138

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. Unless electric cars are going to generate less revenue than petroleum based, which they won't, the pie is the same size. Right now the margins on gasoline vehicles are much better than electric vehicles, partially due to the technology being relatively immature. The internal combustion engine has more than 100 years and hundreds of billions of dollars in R&D behind its infrastr…

> Apart from that, most dealerships (which is not the same as the automobile manufacturer, but they are closely related) make most of their money from maintenance and servicing vehicles. One of the big selling points of electric vehicles is that they're simpler and cost less money to maintain.

Good. Dealerships are generally horrible consumer experiences at the best of them. They prey on upselling cars off their lot with lock in maintenance these days. "Oil changes for life" - baked into the cost of the car using the cheapest materials they can source in bulk. And once they have you locked into this built in service plan they incentivize you to come back in the door by giving you an "all other maintenance under your plan is automatically 10% off". Except that 10% doesn't matter when you control the parts and labor chain on a cost that is unknown before the discount. Dealerships are leeches of businesses focusing on the maintenance and repair of overly complex ICE engine and drivetrain. We move from thousands of parts to 10s of parts comparatively by going to electric. Electric cars will have lifespans similar to that of long haul diesel trucks, and better when you consider batteries and electric motors are easy to swap. So the dealers will feel the squeeze in about 15-20 years when those old ICE vehicles are finally in the minority and/or have been banned (hopefully).

Good riddance to the dealerships we know of today. They're there to suck money out of a sold car, almost treating it as a "subscription" model these days.

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

#247

Post by Judgmentality » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 1:47 AM UTC

swagasaurus-rex wrote: post #218

Judgmentality wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Right now the margins on gasoline vehicles are much better than electric vehicles, partially due to the technology being relatively immature. The internal combustion engine has more than 100 years and hundreds of billions of dollars in R&D behind its infrastr…

You say that maintenance is a large part of the pie that will be lost to electric. Here's an unfounded but different perspective: Electric's reliability and return on investment will only make the transportation industry that much more profitable, and the amount of transportation will only increase as time goes on. The total size of the pie will increase. Maintenance will still be needed, especially on many generatio…

I am genuinely curious, when has a company deliberately making a stark pivot in offering better reliability for a product line led to better sustained profits? This is not a rhetorical question - I genuinely want people to provide me with examples. I suspect it is very rare that this happens, but hope I'm wrong.

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

#248

Post by ctdonath » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 1:50 AM UTC

Thriptic wrote: post #68

ericmay wrote: post #11

As a society we need to make sure we are taking care of people when their industry is destroyed. The whole “learn 2 code” thing that was directed toward coal workers was exactly the wrong thing to do. If we want those coal plants to shut down we should have offered to pay off the workers until they reached retirement age. If you “take away” someone’s job for the sake of progress, then you’ll make enemies of progress…

As I have said in a number of these types of threads, saying we will pay people off / implement UBI as a solution to reduced participation in the labor force dramatically underestimates the complexity of the problems of automation / globalization / de-industrialization. Most people want to work; they derive self-esteem from their labor and for being a provider; and status is awarded by society depending on the type o…

Most people want to work

You grossly underestimate how many people would be content watching cheap entertainment, copulating without concern for consequences, and otherwise enjoying a life of mundane leisure.

The US poverty line is 80th percentile of world income. That’s pretty comfortable for most.

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

#249

Post by roenxi » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 1:59 AM UTC

TomMckenny wrote: post #245

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…

>There are two important actors left out of this analysis: consumers and parts suppliers. This is indeed plausible and has happened for other commodities but note: 1) since the model-T, inflation adjusted consumer prices for automobiles have never dropped and 2) car manufacturers have historically replicated or bought any serious profit centers in their supply chain. >Evil Shareholders act in their interest, employee…

Would it still be legal to produce a model-T? I imagine it would run afoul of all sorts of quality and safety regulations.

That might be linked to the lack of price reductions. I selling a model-T were still legal it would be likely be laughably cheap.

A lot of technology improvements that would have reduced prices are eaten by increased government regulation. The consensus position is that that is a good outcome.

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

#250

Post by kennywinker » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 2:02 AM UTC

refurb wrote: post #195

kennywinker wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even coming from a place of no empathy for displaced workers lives, if we hang these people out to dry we will pay the price down the line. If america had invested in a social safety net for the past 30-40 years, we might be in a different place. People would be ok with change because they'd know that society was going to have their back while they find a new career.

I don’t understand the comment “if American had invested in a social safety net”. Half of govt expenditures are for the social safety net. Would be more accurate to say “if America had expanded the social safety net”.

I suppose so. I don't know how much the US spends, or how that compares to other countries, but I do know that from where I'm standing (Canada) it sure does not look like much of a safety net. e.g. gap in employment + health crisis = homeless? yikes!