That’s sort of the joke. We are living in the IRL equivalent of people complaining Communism is OP in Victoria 3.
“What do you mean you’re leveraging a highly efficient network of state owned enterprises to obtain materials and utilities nearly at-cost?! That’s cheating!!!”
China has ten highly productive and innovative EV companies in a bloody knuckled price war because it’s state government makes starting and growing auto plants artificially cheap and easy.
Personally I prefer Communism in Victoria 2 or Peasant republics in EU5. Let me flood the market with cheap cloth then shut it down and tank the entire worlds capacity to build units.
No, they shouldn’t, but it’ll be the same thing that US tech companies did, more or less.
I think the environment, in terms of IP and patents and running a company, should be made easier in the EU, otherwise there will be no domestic competition. Unfortunately those seem to only become stricter over time.
For China mercantilism works, because of enormous size of their own market, and pretty strong competition inside it with lax rules.
The funny thing is the “True” Americans think a capitalism free market is absolute peak. They say well if it was a TRUE capitalism free market it would be perfect. Its because of the state we have issues! No you idiot, its because of billionaires which capitalism by design creates.
They say this while using government to prevent import of superior vehicles, just like they did for Japan in the 90s (chicken tax anyone?)
Socialism for the rich. Rugged individual capitalism for the 99%.
They say this while using government to prevent import of superior vehicles, just like they did for Japan in the 90s (chicken tax anyone?)
In a thought experiment where they didn’t, the auto market would be healthier.
In another thought experiment where Japanese electronic and software industry didn’t become monopolized due to similar state involvement, it could have kept positions.
So yes, free market is good, except free market is a situation that can’t be created by free market alone. You can’t keep free market having only free market. It’s not a magic spell that makes any heap of stuff to suddenly reorganize into something working by itself. It’s a philosophy of protections, where competition should be maintained and all kinds of pressure and coercion should be minimized.
Those protections have to be made for free market to exist. And that’s the thing, they are very hard to make and require, quoting Harry Potter, constant vigilance.
One German politician warned car companies that they need to make affordable EV. They didn’t listen and still don’t.
Being an Asian having grown up in Europe, I can say that Westerners have a short term, profiteering mindset. We think too much if the earnings for the next quarter will keep the shareholders happy. There is no long term planning and vision. I find Western businesses afraid of leaving their initial core industry, even if that industry is going the way of the dodos like fossil fuel cars.
I can’t exactly assess Chinese industries much, but Japanese businesses are excellent and unafraid with diversifying away from their initial offerings, and reaching out to a completely separate field. Nintendo was a card manufacturing company but is now a videogame titan. Fujifilm went from photo and film to biotechnology. Sony just recently eked out to finance and investing. Western companies don’t really do this, but instead waste money by fighting tooth and nail to keep dying businesses alive. Western companies are obsessed with making money now, while East Asian companies prioritise existence.
Nintendo was a card manufacturing company but is now a videogame titan. Fujifilm went from photo and film to biotechnology. Sony just recently eked out to finance and investing
Hitachi makes consumer electronics and heavy industrial construction machinery.
But somehow Ford can only make F150s and Mustangs any more…
Ford Aerospace was a division of Ford in the 1950s-1970s that made missiles and satellites. Look at the backgrounds of the corporate leadership, the 4th generation Fords have most of the votes. The CEO’s background is in sales and marketing.
And they miss obvious things too. How did Sears, a company that became famous and hide by offering magazines to show the cost of their goods to everyone before that was a thing, lose to an online bookstore? How did a video rental place (Blockbuster) not see the obvious benefit of mailing DVDs and then later internet streaming and get beat by a no name company like netflix?
Probably exactly as you say. It would have cost a year or two of missed quarterly earnings as they entered new markets, so they missed the opportunities entirely.
Like most successful companies of the past, they were bought by a hedge fund or real estate fund and milked for any cash before assets were disposed. There are plenty more big name companies about to die because their business is no longer the product they made, it is only return for shareholder.
That one baffles me. They were doing catalog based mail order since the start of their business.
They should have been in the perfect position to compete with what Amazon has become. They already had all the infrastructure in place. All they needed was a decent website version of their existing catalog with a simple ordering method, and they utterly failed at that.
They had online ordering years before amazon was even a thought, but the high ups canned it saying that the internet was just a passing fad. They put themselfs out of business while saying they knew better then the customer the whole while.
The Zaibatsu model has different incentives, particularly when they’re jockeying for position with American internationals on their own turf.
They’re very good at undercutting American industry. But I’d consider the Japanese cartel model flawed in other ways - miserable places to actually work for, agonizingly patriarchal, debilitating drinking/drug culture, zero work life balance, and the pay is shit.
That is true. But I mean branching out is something that Western companies should not be afraid of. EV and renewables are no brainers; but legacy firms in the fossil fuel industries are spending millions to prevent change and would rather see the world burn.
Although, to several Western company’s credit, they do branch out. Many European energy utilities have mostly diversified away from fossil fuels. The centuries old state-backed Danish company, Orsted, completely got rid of their fossil fuel mix, and transitioned 100% to renewable. But Trump cancelling their projects in US East Coast ruined their short term profitability. In any case, Orsted is firm with their full transition to renewable energy.
EV and renewables are no brainers; but legacy firms in the fossil fuel industries are spending millions to prevent change and would rather see the world burn.
When you see reports come out from fossil fuel companies, they quite literally describe “$X trillion of hydrocarbons in the ground”.
Many European energy utilities have mostly diversified away from fossil fuels.
Europe only really has the Baltic as a reserve. They’ve been cut off from much of the Middle East by decades of war.
So, unlike the US, which has become an oil exporter for the last twenty years, Europeans either went woke or went broke.
Those fossil fuel companies are trying to invoke the greed in us, but for most people it’s not really working with respect to climate change. I won’t consider myself an optimist, bu the fact that renewable energy and EVs are growing says that people really do care.
In theory, the “invisible hand of free market” ought to pick out the most innovative and profitable companies, while those who refuse to keep up with the times vanish. But in practice, the legacy companies, despite their business model becoming obsolete, don’t want to go away quietly. They spend money to spread misinformation to put down cutting edge technologies and business models, despite growing market demand like green technology.
Even if fossil fuels still has some value, is it really worth it in the long run to extract them and cause mass extinction? Who will be the customers when society collapse? As someone asked before, “what if we improved society for nothing?”
It’s the result of their mythical beginnings. Creatures made out of mud, while you Asians are descendants of the dragon god. Or something. I dunno I am just a random person on the internet
The problem is China subsidizing their cars to suffocate the European manufacturers. When all the European manufactures are closed or sold to China, you’ll see the real prices.
The subsidies aren’t special at all compared to US and EU ones, and they’re apparently going to be phased out over the next 5 years. This supposed evil scheme just doesn’t seem to exist; the truth of the matter is that China just makes better and cheaper cars.
Why wouldn’t they?
After decades of being the west’s factory they’d be stupid not to learn.
And better is just upping the QA more than their western customers (who want the cheapest possible 'cos line must go up).
Yes. I’m aware that they subsidize the shit out of a lot of stuff. They saw the chance and took it. Of course, I’d like to see European cars, as that also means workplaces and plus for our economy.
For a greater time we already compete a lot with Japanese and Korean cars - I mean they build good cars. But in the end it seems more fair. And for what I know is that they also do very good options on the EV market - but will hardly compete with BYD or Xiaomi vehicles.
Well. In Germany we say “Der Markt regelt das”. Translated: economy speaks for itself. <- Ironically spoken
Like it or Not. China made it. They will also flood Europe/EU soon. I’m not mad, when they can, they should. This is our beloved capitalism.
One German politician warned car companies that they need to make affordable EV. They didn’t listen and still don’t.
Edit: Added “<- Ironically spoken” to first sentence to make clear how I was meaning it.
That’s sort of the joke. We are living in the IRL equivalent of people complaining Communism is OP in Victoria 3.
“What do you mean you’re leveraging a highly efficient network of state owned enterprises to obtain materials and utilities nearly at-cost?! That’s cheating!!!”
China has ten highly productive and innovative EV companies in a bloody knuckled price war because it’s state government makes starting and growing auto plants artificially cheap and easy.
Personally I prefer Communism in Victoria 2 or Peasant republics in EU5. Let me flood the market with cheap cloth then shut it down and tank the entire worlds capacity to build units.
That’s called mercantilism and not communism.
There’s another word - mercantilism.
No, they shouldn’t, but it’ll be the same thing that US tech companies did, more or less.
I think the environment, in terms of IP and patents and running a company, should be made easier in the EU, otherwise there will be no domestic competition. Unfortunately those seem to only become stricter over time.
For China mercantilism works, because of enormous size of their own market, and pretty strong competition inside it with lax rules.
The funny thing is the “True” Americans think a capitalism free market is absolute peak. They say well if it was a TRUE capitalism free market it would be perfect. Its because of the state we have issues! No you idiot, its because of billionaires which capitalism by design creates.
They say this while using government to prevent import of superior vehicles, just like they did for Japan in the 90s (chicken tax anyone?)
Socialism for the rich. Rugged individual capitalism for the 99%.
This is amazing
In a thought experiment where they didn’t, the auto market would be healthier.
In another thought experiment where Japanese electronic and software industry didn’t become monopolized due to similar state involvement, it could have kept positions.
So yes, free market is good, except free market is a situation that can’t be created by free market alone. You can’t keep free market having only free market. It’s not a magic spell that makes any heap of stuff to suddenly reorganize into something working by itself. It’s a philosophy of protections, where competition should be maintained and all kinds of pressure and coercion should be minimized.
Those protections have to be made for free market to exist. And that’s the thing, they are very hard to make and require, quoting Harry Potter, constant vigilance.
Being an Asian having grown up in Europe, I can say that Westerners have a short term, profiteering mindset. We think too much if the earnings for the next quarter will keep the shareholders happy. There is no long term planning and vision. I find Western businesses afraid of leaving their initial core industry, even if that industry is going the way of the dodos like fossil fuel cars.
I can’t exactly assess Chinese industries much, but Japanese businesses are excellent and unafraid with diversifying away from their initial offerings, and reaching out to a completely separate field. Nintendo was a card manufacturing company but is now a videogame titan. Fujifilm went from photo and film to biotechnology. Sony just recently eked out to finance and investing. Western companies don’t really do this, but instead waste money by fighting tooth and nail to keep dying businesses alive. Western companies are obsessed with making money now, while East Asian companies prioritise existence.
That We is pulling a lot of weight and i’d mostly translate it as C-suits and management.
Hitachi makes consumer electronics and heavy industrial construction machinery.
But somehow Ford can only make F150s and Mustangs any more…
Mitsubishi is another heavy weight.
Ford Aerospace was a division of Ford in the 1950s-1970s that made missiles and satellites. Look at the backgrounds of the corporate leadership, the 4th generation Fords have most of the votes. The CEO’s background is in sales and marketing.
And they miss obvious things too. How did Sears, a company that became famous and hide by offering magazines to show the cost of their goods to everyone before that was a thing, lose to an online bookstore? How did a video rental place (Blockbuster) not see the obvious benefit of mailing DVDs and then later internet streaming and get beat by a no name company like netflix?
Probably exactly as you say. It would have cost a year or two of missed quarterly earnings as they entered new markets, so they missed the opportunities entirely.
Like most successful companies of the past, they were bought by a hedge fund or real estate fund and milked for any cash before assets were disposed. There are plenty more big name companies about to die because their business is no longer the product they made, it is only return for shareholder.
That one baffles me. They were doing catalog based mail order since the start of their business.
They should have been in the perfect position to compete with what Amazon has become. They already had all the infrastructure in place. All they needed was a decent website version of their existing catalog with a simple ordering method, and they utterly failed at that.
They had online ordering years before amazon was even a thought, but the high ups canned it saying that the internet was just a passing fad. They put themselfs out of business while saying they knew better then the customer the whole while.
The Zaibatsu model has different incentives, particularly when they’re jockeying for position with American internationals on their own turf.
They’re very good at undercutting American industry. But I’d consider the Japanese cartel model flawed in other ways - miserable places to actually work for, agonizingly patriarchal, debilitating drinking/drug culture, zero work life balance, and the pay is shit.
That is true. But I mean branching out is something that Western companies should not be afraid of. EV and renewables are no brainers; but legacy firms in the fossil fuel industries are spending millions to prevent change and would rather see the world burn.
Although, to several Western company’s credit, they do branch out. Many European energy utilities have mostly diversified away from fossil fuels. The centuries old state-backed Danish company, Orsted, completely got rid of their fossil fuel mix, and transitioned 100% to renewable. But Trump cancelling their projects in US East Coast ruined their short term profitability. In any case, Orsted is firm with their full transition to renewable energy.
When you see reports come out from fossil fuel companies, they quite literally describe “$X trillion of hydrocarbons in the ground”.
Europe only really has the Baltic as a reserve. They’ve been cut off from much of the Middle East by decades of war.
So, unlike the US, which has become an oil exporter for the last twenty years, Europeans either went woke or went broke.
Those fossil fuel companies are trying to invoke the greed in us, but for most people it’s not really working with respect to climate change. I won’t consider myself an optimist, bu the fact that renewable energy and EVs are growing says that people really do care.
In theory, the “invisible hand of free market” ought to pick out the most innovative and profitable companies, while those who refuse to keep up with the times vanish. But in practice, the legacy companies, despite their business model becoming obsolete, don’t want to go away quietly. They spend money to spread misinformation to put down cutting edge technologies and business models, despite growing market demand like green technology.
Even if fossil fuels still has some value, is it really worth it in the long run to extract them and cause mass extinction? Who will be the customers when society collapse? As someone asked before, “what if we improved society for nothing?”
It’s the result of their mythical beginnings. Creatures made out of mud, while you Asians are descendants of the dragon god. Or something. I dunno I am just a random person on the internet
The problem is China subsidizing their cars to suffocate the European manufacturers. When all the European manufactures are closed or sold to China, you’ll see the real prices.
EDIT: Also, soon? They are already here.
The subsidies aren’t special at all compared to US and EU ones, and they’re apparently going to be phased out over the next 5 years. This supposed evil scheme just doesn’t seem to exist; the truth of the matter is that China just makes better and cheaper cars.
Why wouldn’t they?
After decades of being the west’s factory they’d be stupid not to learn.
And better is just upping the QA more than their western customers (who want the cheapest possible 'cos line must go up).
Yes. I’m aware that they subsidize the shit out of a lot of stuff. They saw the chance and took it. Of course, I’d like to see European cars, as that also means workplaces and plus for our economy.
For a greater time we already compete a lot with Japanese and Korean cars - I mean they build good cars. But in the end it seems more fair. And for what I know is that they also do very good options on the EV market - but will hardly compete with BYD or Xiaomi vehicles.
Not a fan of this sentence. Market doesn’t care about human sensitivities, not one bit.
Which one exactly?
Der Markt regelt das. No it doesn’t. Not without enforced regulation.
Absolutely. I’m sorry. I did not make clear that I meant it ironically.