Live data from Hacker News

The size of BYD's factory

twitter.com

631–640 of 651 posts

Re: The size of BYD's factory

#631
post #162
post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

World's response to the climate crisis is already dangerously delayed, and we're at a point where we need anything ASAP. We've ran out of time to massively overhaul infrastructure everywhere. The US and UK apparently can't even build a single high speed rail line any more. Car dependency sucks, but we won't be able to fix that in the short term, but at least we can fix its oil dependence. Cleaner grid will also need…

I don't think it's a particularly different timescale to swap from ICE to EV than to drastically reduce car dependence. What makes you think there's a big difference to where swapping to electric cars is easier than avoiding cars?

Credible reduction in car dependence needs well connected fast passenger rail networks, and changing urban sprawl to something denser with more local amenities.

The first one is a major infrastructure project, the latter is largely unpopular with the people already living there (and Republicans react to the concept of 15-minute cities like it was a gulag).

Infrastructure is still built as if it was business as usual, so can easily get blocked and delayed by decades on budgeting, bidding, consultations, NIMBYs, environmental surveys, etc.

OTOH we've already got EVs, we have already been building infrastructure for them, and it's a smaller change more acceptable to people.

Re: The size of BYD's factory

#632

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The doubts about the size of the investment in that Wikipedia article are funny. It's a bit like "We cannot afford to invest in education", but the Chinese are saying "We cannot afford not to invest in education" (Famous quotes, it's more about R&D here). China's leadership is probably terrified of falling into the middle-income trap. It might be the biggest issue on their minds right now. At least I am watching from…

> terrified of falling into the middle-income trap Not really, there's 2 middle income traps: 1) the ACTUAL trap / thesis - countries fail to educate / upgrade workforce enough to move up supply chains to generate high income employment to bring up income, the TRAP is lack of advancement, to which PRC is basically the LEAST trapped country in the world, pursuing industrial development in all high end sectors. Issues…

600m generating 5% of GDP sounds crazy. Any source to back that up? What % of people are doing manufacturing? The American bull case is that China collapses because these 600m people die off and take their lead in manufacturing with them meanwhile the US is already at the top and continues to absorb the best people in the world hopefully sustaining their growth.

Re: The size of BYD's factory

#633
post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, pretty common for different zoom levels to be different time points. ACME is using plane photography for its high zoom images. You could try zoom.earth for hourly/12hourly satellite imagery.

Although it is generally true that aerial photography is used to supplant satellite imagery in these sorts of public map services, I'm pretty confident that the image of BYD factory here is actual satellite imagery.

Ohh I didn’t think you could get satellite images at this kind of resolution!

Re: The size of BYD's factory

#634
post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China scaling and efficiency is really something else. it seems they've latched on to something that works better than even democracy and capitalism

Efficient yes, generates good quality of life for the average citizen? Not as much. Plenty the west can learn from China on how to do large public works though.

Quality of life for average citizen improved must faster in China that in the US during the last 40 years.

Re: The size of BYD's factory

#635

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> terrified of falling into the middle-income trap Not really, there's 2 middle income traps: 1) the ACTUAL trap / thesis - countries fail to educate / upgrade workforce enough to move up supply chains to generate high income employment to bring up income, the TRAP is lack of advancement, to which PRC is basically the LEAST trapped country in the world, pursuing industrial development in all high end sectors. Issues…

600m generating 5% of GDP sounds crazy. Any source to back that up? What % of people are doing manufacturing? The American bull case is that China collapses because these 600m people die off and take their lead in manufacturing with them meanwhile the US is already at the top and continues to absorb the best people in the world hopefully sustaining their growth.

During covid, premier LKQ revealed ~40% of PRC lives on 1000 rmb per month, 12000 rmb per year / 1600 USD per year. Do the napakin math that means 600m people contribute to about 7 trillion (rmb) of 126 trillion gdp or ~5%.

>people die off and take their lead in manufacturing

Unlikely, those 600m are subsistent farmers (something like 200m households), informal workers etc... they are not in manufacturing or anything advanced, where advanced is literally ability to do basic arithmatic, aka this cohort was never in a position to be retrained for manufacturing. To put PRC manufacturing in perspective, I think at height, PRC manufacturing employed "only" 300m. Now they're acquiring RoW combined in automation (industrial robots) and uptraining skilled workforce to hold onto manufacturing / dominate in high end, i.e. that lead is likely set to grow. The bodies problem is basically most new gen wants to degrees and air conditioned office jobs instead of blue collar work. There's plenty of bodies to fill factories (see youth unemployment stats) but incentives/culture not aligned for vocational work.

Those 600m bluntly are just... excess people who don't meaningfully contribute to modern economy i.e. 200m farming households can be replaced by 20m advanced farmers with automation, but PRC agriculture not broadly automated specifically because farming is massive jobs program. Well except construction, hence PRC building spree now, where labour is plentiful and cheap. IMO this is basically PRC's happy accident - many wanted hukou reforms to increase equality, but really what CCP did was create a massive structural class disparity that enables 1) arbituaging very cheap labour for low end work 2) have that low end workforce be easily supported because it doesn't cost very much to provide for them. Also why PRC focuses on production side (industrial capacity)... need to build so much shit to economies of scale than make goods cheap enough for bottom quantiles. Which also happens to translate into global competitiveness for all markets, including emerging / low income ones like bottom PRC 40%.

>US is already at the top and continues to absorb the best people

Remains to be seen, huge % of US S&T talent came (past tense) from PRC, and now education exchanges are being cut off. Which is secondary to the fact that @60% and increasing tertiary that bias STEM, with like 200m new borns in the past 25 years in the pipeline, PRC simply has too much talent for US to meaningfully brain drain. US projected to increase population by 40m in next 30 years. US would have to train every new born, and every immigrant to be STEM to match PRC output, that's not counting the other 80m where percentage will go into some other high skilled field, just not explicitly STEM. Hence the talent generation gap is projected to be absurd in PRC's favour.

That an PRC academic institutions have caught up and increasingly, PRC's cream of the crop stay in PRC. This isn't the 90s where many PRC diasphora were top of their class from a small academic system that trained only a few, where every brain drained hurt. Increasingly, west is a dumping ground for PRC kids who couldn't hack it in tier1 PRC institutions (didn't score enough on Gaokao) but with parents that have enough resources to send them abroad... meanwhile the Chinese B & C teams are still crowding a lot of western labs to drive US/western innovation. The TLDR is PRC's high skilled demographic divident is projected to be so large that it unlikely to be meaningfully constrained. And for strategic competition, that's the demographic trend that's important to consider especially in next 60-70 year time frame, i.e. almost 2100s, since that's how long those new brains will be in the workforce.

The constrain / challenge is on PRCs end to generate enough skilled jobs, which will be difficult. But the side effect of surplus skilled labour is cheap labour, and IMO it's better to have too much talent than not enough for strategic goals, i.e. PRC is only actor projected to not have semi conductor talent shortage in next 10 years.

Re: The size of BYD's factory

#636
post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Support for North Korea's invasion of South Korea 1950-1953. China did not support North Korea's invasion. North Korea did not seek China's support initially and only asked for Stalin's permission. China would not have entered the Korea war at all if MacArthur did not disobey Truman and marched all the way to the Chinese border. He also publicly stated that he planned to bomb China. It was one of the reasons for wh…

China did not support North Korea's invasion. I don't see how to read China's dispatch of 1.5M combat troops, taking on some 110,000 battle deaths (thus saving the invasion from imminent collapse) other than as "support" for the invasion.

By the time China entered the war, the invasion was already over. China entered the war for two reasons: 1) to make sure China was not invaded as MacArthur intended 2) to keep North Korea alive as a buffer, not to help invade South Korea. There was nothing to gain for China if the North unified Korea. Their relationship wasn't that good in the first place.

Re: The size of BYD's factory

#637
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very questionable if America will play a role there. It's 50/50 that Xi will be able to do a personal favour to Trump or Musk that will keep America out of it.

When the times comes to defend Taiwan (or Japan/Korea) it will be life or death for the US to react and win. If they fail, the whole house of cards will collapse for the US. Trump as stupid as he is had gotten the ball rolling in the correct direction in his first term and I don't see how he will deviate this term.

Keep in mind that he is now surrounded by a completely different people than during his first term.

Re: The size of BYD's factory

#638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Air travel is taxed not subsidized. As far as I know there are no subsidies to the airline industry, unless you get into very ideological arguments by claiming the US military is a form of subsidy to anything that depends on fossil fuels. Double checking Wikipedia confirms this. After a huge page listing all the taxes, there's one unsourced paragraph claiming that "some" governments subsidise air travel with a "who?"…

There's not really a way to have this discussion without being ideological but military contracts, fossil fuel production subsidies (yes there is a tax on the fuel, but also a subsidy to the people pumping and refining it), and municipally-financed airports (including the tax subsidy on muni bonds) all seem to be pretty direct subsidies that the air travel industry would not exist without. Air traffic control is also…

I don't get much joy from long distance travel in any form tbh ;) I keep posting in this thread because people keep making untrue claims about transport economics, and it's important to be realistic here.

So we go unto the breach once more: in the USA the government run parts of the air system are funded by taxes on fliers, not direct subsidies. ATS is a part of the FAA which is funded by such taxes:

https://usafacts.org/articles/who-funds-the-faa-you-whenever...

Airports usually fund themselves via fees charged to airlines, which are then ultimately charged to the flier. You can see them in the fare breakdowns sometimes. I'm sure there are tiny airports in the US that are subsidized because governments love subsidizing uneconomic things for prestige reasons, but it isn't structurally needed.

Re: The size of BYD's factory

#639

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Air travel is taxed not subsidized. As far as I know there are no subsidies to the airline industry, unless you get into very ideological arguments by claiming the US military is a form of subsidy to anything that depends on fossil fuels. Double checking Wikipedia confirms this. After a huge page listing all the taxes, there's one unsourced paragraph claiming that "some" governments subsidise air travel with a "who?"…

In the US, fuel taxes and tolls combined only cover about 35% of the cost of building and maintaining roads. The rest of the cost is covered by the federal, state and local governments.

That's because gas taxes are an unusually live wire in US politics, not because roads are fundamentally uneconomic. Until 2008 gas taxes did cover highway spending, and they now require general transfers because gas taxes weren't indexed to inflation. According to this website the taxes weren't increased since 1993, so in practice the US system has been deliberately starved of sustainable revenue.

https://taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-highway-trust...

"Congress could pay for projected highway and mass transit spending by simply raising the federal tax rate on gasoline and diesel fuel. Increasing those rates by 15 cents per gallon along with indexing the rates for inflation would increase federal revenues by $240 billion over ten years (CBO 2022)."

Balancing the highway books in the USA would be easy, and it's done already in most other parts of the world.

Re: The size of BYD's factory

#640

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, fuel taxes and tolls combined only cover about 35% of the cost of building and maintaining roads. The rest of the cost is covered by the federal, state and local governments.

That's because gas taxes are an unusually live wire in US politics, not because roads are fundamentally uneconomic. Until 2008 gas taxes did cover highway spending, and they now require general transfers because gas taxes weren't indexed to inflation. According to this website the taxes weren't increased since 1993, so in practice the US system has been deliberately starved of sustainable revenue. https://taxpolicyce…

You've now admitted that most of the cost of maintaining and building roads in the US is borne by government subsidies.

I just looked up how Germany funds its road network. It turns out that 2/3rds of the funding comes from taxes (subsidies, in other words).[0]

0. https://bmdv.bund.de/DE/Themen/Mobilitaet/Infrastrukturplanu...

Post reply on HN