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

481–490 of 640 posts

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

#481

Post by teemur »

mindslight wrote: post #342
teemur wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. I don't know if anyone is interested in anecdotes, but looking from Europe, I will do my best to avoid any kind of US dependency until US has a) overhauled the legal system starting from the Supreme Court and b) gotten rid of the de facto two-party system. (No, one-party system does not count.)

Is that the extent of your requirements (for now, at least) ? As an American I keep trying to surmise what we're going to need to do to start repairing the damage from this massive self-own. It's kind of hard because we don't know where the bottom will be, but we at least need to start having these discussions on what constructive approaches might even look like - we can't have our milquetoast opposition party phonin…

> Is that the extent of your requirements (for now, at least) ?

Well, if you ask my other wishes, once Europe has gotten its act straight and decides to tax/tariff/regulate/whatever (american) big tech to hell and back, I kind of would expect that any decent person on that side of the pond would just humbly nod their head and note that, yes, we/they deserved it.

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

#482

Post by overfeed »

FuriouslyAdrift wrote: post #290
insane_dreamer wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they don’t. Source: me, lived/worked in China for 6 years. There are two rules: 1) to the strongest (doesn’t matter how you get there, 2) make/keep the right connections (guanxi) that will “apply” regulations to your benefit. Most cut-throat place I’ve ever worked.

Same experience... I was told I was not Han and not family so f-you

For how long have WASPs been telling outgroups to go kick rocks (or much worse) in the US?

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

#483

Post by palmotea »

dh2022 wrote: post #480
palmotea wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 age…

Designed means exactly that I meant: today ICE is designed (meant to) beat up anyone in the US. When ICE agents kill people, they get immunity from the feds (that guy who shot Renee Good will not see a day in prison). If my comment led you to a conclusion that I support "Defund ICE" you would be correct. All of this to show you that my understanding of the work designed is correct.

> Designed means exactly that I meant ... designed (meant to) ...

> All of this to show you that my understanding of the work [sic] designed is correct.

All right, I see what's going on here. You just don't know what the word designed means.

To illustrate: if went to the hardware store to buy a claw hammer and meant to use it to murder someone, which you then did, does that mean the claw hammer was "designed" to murder people? No, of course not. The hammer was designed to install and remove nails. It can also be used for other purposes for which it was not meant for, such as murder (as hypothetical you showed), but it was not designed for those purposes.

You're not Humpty Dumpty, words don't mean whatever you choose them to mean. The "defund the police" people thought they could do that, and look where that got us.

If you disagree, find me the design documents for ICE (they're surely public), and show me where it says it's "designed to beat up anyone in the US." Remember that's not going to be a Trump executive order, because time machines aren't real.

> If my comment led you to a conclusion that I support "Defund ICE" you would be correct.

And I guarantee you that even if you do that, some other agency will be tasked with what ICE was designed to do.

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

#484

Post by footy »

bluGill wrote: post #367
footy wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, trucks with empty beds are clearly being used for construction. Not like pavement princesses are a thing.

So get those people on transit and leave trucks to people who use them as trucks.

I don't understand why you think I disagree with that.

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

#485

Post by teemur »

mywittyname wrote: post #344
teemur wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. I don't know if anyone is interested in anecdotes, but looking from Europe, I will do my best to avoid any kind of US dependency until US has a) overhauled the legal system starting from the Supreme Court and b) gotten rid of the de facto two-party system. (No, one-party system does not count.)

The two-party system is fine. We have to be honest about the fact that parliamentary systems can give massive power to a tiny fraction of the population when that small party becomes the deciding vote. The problems with the USA political system are: electoral college, senate being 2 votes per state, and the supreme court being 7 people for life. But nothing can be done about the last two now. Especially now that the…

> The two-party system is fine.

Is it? Many western countries are having more or less prominent populist right wing movements, and the two countries I can think of where that movement has gotten its hand in power on really significant issues during the last decade or so are UK and US. Both strongly two party systems at the time of the "interesting" developments. And I do not think a two party system is typical, I am sure there are some countries happily trodding along with their two political parties, but they are not the rule.

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

#486

Post by JauntTrooper »

mywittyname wrote: post #344
teemur wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. I don't know if anyone is interested in anecdotes, but looking from Europe, I will do my best to avoid any kind of US dependency until US has a) overhauled the legal system starting from the Supreme Court and b) gotten rid of the de facto two-party system. (No, one-party system does not count.)

The two-party system is fine. We have to be honest about the fact that parliamentary systems can give massive power to a tiny fraction of the population when that small party becomes the deciding vote. The problems with the USA political system are: electoral college, senate being 2 votes per state, and the supreme court being 7 people for life. But nothing can be done about the last two now. Especially now that the…

The efficacy of US democracy has eroded over time, and it's clear we're going to need reforms to preserve democratic governance for future generations.

Every branch of the federal government has experienced a decline in democratic accountability.

The House is so gerrymandered that only 10% of seats are remotely competitive each year, and it hasn't kept up with population growth.

The Senate is permanently gerrymandered, with state population differences that are far more disproportionate than what was originally designed for and intended when the Constitution was written.

This combined with hyper-partisanship prevents the US from accepting new states like Washington DC (population 700,000+) and Puerto Rico (population 3.2 million), depriving millions of US citizens from Congressional representation (no, non-voting representatives don't count).

The Supreme Court has become hyperpartisan, and appointments are a high stake circus that rely on arbitrary retirements and deaths. They need to be elected at this point to preserve democratic legitimacy.

As for the Presidency... the Electoral College has resulted in the election of the loser of a popular vote twice in 25 years.

I don't know how reform will happen, or if we'll ever see it in my lifetime but we desperately need it. The US government needs to be accountable to the people again.

Democracy is precious, and it's so tragic to see how much it's declined.

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

#488

Post by hellgas00 »

rjrjrjrj wrote: post #253
vdupras wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it's a modest step, but my guess is that those BYD cars will sell like hot cakes and demand will go through the roof. By popular demand, the government will have to lift that limit. That's all China needs to destroy american car manufacturing.

The announced limit doesn't seem like enough volume for BYD to roll out a dealership network, but maybe they do it in anticipation of higher limits in the future. Volvo could be an immediate beneficiary. The Canadian EX30 was going to be cheaper because they could make them in China, but after the 100% US/Canada tariff was announced they had to switch to ones produced in Belgium iirc. edit: Something I just read that…

Ironically one of the biggest beneficiary will likely be Tesla. Before the 100% tarriffs were instated Tesla-Canada imported most of their vehicles from China's Shanghai gigafactory. After the Chinese EV tarriffs they began importing from Germany and some from the US.

They already have the footprint and sales depth to take advantage of the low tarriffs rate quickly.

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

#489

Post by knuppar »

palmotea wrote: post #483
dh2022 wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Designed means exactly that I meant: today ICE is designed (meant to) beat up anyone in the US. When ICE agents kill people, they get immunity from the feds (that guy who shot Renee Good will not see a day in prison). If my comment led you to a conclusion that I support "Defund ICE" you would be correct. All of this to show you that my understanding of the work designed is correct.

> Designed means exactly that I meant ... designed (meant to) ... > All of this to show you that my understanding of the work [sic] designed is correct. All right, I see what's going on here. You just don't know what the word designed means. To illustrate: if went to the hardware store to buy a claw hammer and meant to use it to murder someone, which you then did, does that mean the claw hammer was "designed" to murd…

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

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

#490

Post by nullocator »

like_any_other wrote: post #468
Herring wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China hasn't dropped bombs on foreign soil in over 40 years. The US killed a million Iraqis not that long ago. I think this "China evil" framing is a smear, like how Republican conspiracy theories used to say Democrats are pedophiles. Guess where the real pedophiles were hanging out the whole time.

> The US killed a million Iraqis not that long ago. There are an estimated 1 million Uyghurs in concentration camps currently [1], but you are correct - neither that, nor the invasion of Tibet, nor whatever process they used to turn a diverse part of a continent into a Han ethnostate [2], or block the NYTimes app from their phones, involved dropping bombs on foreign soil. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution…

There are ~ 2 million black men incarcerated in the united states, many engaging in what is effectively modern slavery. I don't think we can effectively weigh human rights atrocities between nations, but the U.S. is certainly not "better" than China in many respects.
Post reply on HN