Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Canada slashes 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs to 6%

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 640 posts

Re: Canada slashes 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs to 6%

#421

Post by toomuchtodo »

ericmay wrote: post #410
toomuchtodo wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meanwhile, the US can obviously produce good cars at a good enough price and with cheap oil for the foreseeable future it's hard to argue in favor of EVs as a national policy. What, we're going to switch to EVs? Who is going to build them? Tesla? We don't have access to the rare earth refining capabilities to meet demand. It's just physics. And if China is using less oil, that means more for the United States and o…

> This is false. It's not false. See Honda, Toyota, &c. many models are made in the US by Americans even if they're Japanese companies. > The US has chosen to produce expensive (average new vehicle price is $50k), fossil combustion vehicles to the detriment of its population. The US industry regardless of reason isn't going to be able to make a cheap, high-quality EV because it doesn't have access to affordable refin…

> On the other hand, as an American voter and even an EV driver, I disagree with these actions. EVs at all cost isn't a goal that makes sense or that I'm interested in. A better argument is to just do away with cars entirely. EVs still create c02, require toxic processing of materials and components, and while they're better for the environment, they're not as good as walking or transit.

Well, you're arguing this in the wrong country. You might check your priors. I regret to inform you that only about 5% of Americans use public transit [1] [2] [3], and that is unlikely to change unless there is a sea change of migration towards urban areas from the suburbs and rural areas.

A majority of US miles are driven in rural areas or areas without mass transit [4], and the sun belt, where there is limited to no public transit, holds roughly half of the US population. I certainly agree to destroy demand for light vehicle passenger miles in urban areas with robust public transit and other non vehicle options, but the rest of the US will require EVs of some sort. Most of the US does not have mass transit infrastructure, and won't for the remainder of most of our lives (as of this comment).

[1] https://vividmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/public-tran...

[2] https://vividmaps.com/public-transportation-in-the-united-st...

[3] https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2021/public-t...

[4] https://www.bts.gov/geography/geospatial-2/daily-vehicle-mil...

Re: Canada slashes 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs to 6%

#422

Post by maxglute »

daedrdev wrote: post #8

Its only the first 50K that get 6%, still pretty interesting as being physically so close to the US could cause people in the US to get their first look at Chinese cars. Chinese car companies face far more ruthless competition than western ones so could end up making better cars as a result, imo. There are over 100 brands in china selling electric cars

Until US bans PRC cars on US soil... pretty easy to make the case based on surveillance / NSL. Won't take much for BYD to become next DJI/Norinco.

Re: Canada slashes 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs to 6%

#423

Post by cmrdporcupine »

TheBlight wrote: post #95
czhu12 wrote: post #82

This new direction of "strategic autonomy", with Donald Trump in the white house just south of the border seems like a difficult hill to occupy. Unfortunately, this is probably what is necessary at this point.

Isn't it somewhat laughable when something like 3/4 of Canadian exports are to the US?

The laughing party is the person taking the tariffs and living large off them. The American consumer is suffering.

In reality, the vast majority of Canadian exports are energy and potash, neither of which have any kind of tariffs applied.

Because if they did, Trump's supporters would lose their shit completely. Gas prices would go through the roof and farmers would be in big big trouble.

Re: Canada slashes 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs to 6%

#424

Post by throw-the-towel »

faust201 wrote: post #281
anvuong wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lawfully? How many IPs have they stolen from universities and companies across the world?

Nice. IP is one thing that has ruined many things. Unless you are WIPO and Oracle Fan. All current AI companies are closed. What benefit? Most things from Uni are published openly. BTW, did people in US pay royalty to China for inventing paper?

Taking your China comment in good faith: the copyright term on paper has long elapsed anyway, even if there's Mickey Mouse drawn on the paper in question.

Re: Canada slashes 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs to 6%

#425

Post by prosody »

guywithahat wrote: post #387

This feels like a poor long-term play for a short term political win. Canada has a robust automotive supply industry to US auto manufacturers, and this industry could be in long-term risk in an attempt to hurt relations with freer, traditionally more conservative nations. It’s not a shock but it is always disappointing to see major political decisions made for the benefit of the next election cycle.

> in an attempt to hurt relations with freer, traditionally more conservative nations

I don’t think those are the salient characteristics of the US from Canada’s perspective in this development, and because of that I don’t think of your analysis of this as motivated by short term political considerations is correct. Instead, the current US government’s unexpected decisions to turn the thumbscrews on Canada exposed Canada’s economic dependence as a vulnerability, and the Canadian government is at least trying to signal a capability to become less dependent in the future in the hopes that reduces their vulnerability as perceived by the US government. That vulnerability existed before and will outlast the current US government.

Re: Canada slashes 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs to 6%

#426

Post by rjrjrjrj »

jbm wrote: post #414
rjrjrjrj wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

separation != joining the US There is small but loud group of chronic whiners who hate everything (often including each other) pushing the former. Almost nobody is pushing the latter.

That might be the rhetoric, but separation means joining the US. The experience of landlocked country would be one of getting taken advantage of by every country around it. There is a good 20% of people in Alberta who would vote for separation today. Take a close look, they aren't voting to be an independent country surrounded by a hostile country around it and a superpower that hijacks oil tankers to the south. http…

The stated objective of the Alberta Prosperity Project is for Alberta to be a sovereign nation. They're not looking to trade Ottawa for Washington.

Of course it is a loony idea, but that is what they're pushing.

Re: Canada slashes 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs to 6%

#427

Post by rjrjrjrj »

insane_dreamer wrote: post #315
mekdoonggi wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love to hear how you think Trump will manage to get Alberta and Saskatchewan to become US states within this century.

At that point you might have the West Coast states secede and join up with BC.

Cascadia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascadia_movement

Re: Canada slashes 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs to 6%

#428

Post by matthewdgreen »

kolbe wrote: post #308
ActorNightly wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The US has turned into something much more vindictive and unpredictable, including threatening to invade Canada. The thing about China is that they are basically hard on the up slope of their advancement as a society/economy/nation, just like US was post ww2. US on the other hand, has flatlined to the point where we think stuff like trans athletes in sports are a drastic enough reason to elect a president who is a c…

The US definitely peaked a long time ago, and we're in the slow demise phase of its empire, but I think China has already peaked as well. They have the same obesity and consumerism crises that have plagued the US. Add to that a demographic implosion, and I think the best they can do is hope for 20 more years.

What they don't have is rule by the extraordinarily wealthy. They have rule by the party. I guess we'll find out which one is worse.

Re: Canada slashes 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs to 6%

#429

Post by palmotea »

dh2022 wrote: post #314
palmotea wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Have you heard about ICE? That one's not a paranoid thought. It's a very real personal police designed for oppression. Oh, come on. ICE may be behaving badly right now, and you might be mad at them, but that's not an excuse for flights of fancy. Stay grounded in the truth. ICE is not "personal police designed for oppression," they're police designed to enforce immigration and customs laws (ICE literally stands for…

I got news for you: ICE is designed now to beat up anyone in the US. Here is one example: https://newrepublic.com/post/205280/fed-agent-permanently-bl...

> I got news for you: ICE is designed now to beat up anyone in the US. Here is one example: https://newrepublic.com/post/205280/fed-agent-permanently-bl...

Do you know what the word "designed" means? Because I don't think it means what you think it means.

I am in no way saying what that ICE agent did was right. I'm just saying being mad is not an excuse for being a sloppy thinker. What's happening here is the ICE agents' behavior is out of control and they're probably behaving illegally. That's not being anyone's "personal police" (whatever that means) or they are "designed to beat up anyone in the US," but believing such false things will probably lead to stupid slogans that end up doing more harm than good (e.g. "defund the police").

Re: Canada slashes 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs to 6%

#430

Post by zmmmmm »

The battle is already lost as far as China owning the future markets for EVs and probably energy in general. It doesn't seem conceivable anybody else could match their scale, efficiency and technology advantages.

If you're going to fight economically, might as well do it in areas that aren't (a) a lost cause (b) going to hurt you economically since you'll have to settle for worse and more expensive products and (c) the alternative supplier's country isn't threatening to literally invade you and surrounding nations.

Post reply on HN