GM signs deal to move electric car development to China

[werepossum]

Don't kid yourself. Having to deal with pollution and other negative environmental consequences of manufacturing is a cost--it does not make us richer. The human effort that's spent dealing with that does not directly produce consumable goods or services.

What you're saying is akin to saying, "We could have a great economy and we could become wealthy if only we would blow up perfectly useful houses and buildings so that Americans can be employed to rebuild them." Or, "We need to start a big war to fix our economy."

Tearing down Building X for the purpose of reconstructing Building X in the same condition it was in previously is not the creation of wealth--it's just a waste of human effort. It might keep the masses busy, but it won't increase the nation's wealth nor improve the populace's net standard of living.

Environmental and safety regulations do reduce our collective wealth, but by requiring additional labor, whether to manufacture additional equipment or to install and maintain that equipment or to manually mitigate environmental damage with a shovel, it increases the value of labor by increasing the demand. This drives innovation (looking for ways to use less scarce and therefore expensive labor) and fights wealth stratification without empowering government, both of which are good things in and of themselves, in addition to the benefits of having a clean environment and safe work places. I think these things (within reasonable limits) are worth the associated loss of collective wealth. Make work also drives innovation and fights wealth stratification while reducing our collective wealth, but without the benefits of a clean environment and safe work places. I think make work is not worth the associated loss of collective wealth, although it may be temporarily during a steep recession, to stop the bleeding while business recovers its nerve.

 

[woolfe9999]

The Volt isn't that popular for it to need 2 different factories running simultaneously.
The Volt certainly isn't selling like hot cakes.

Volt sales have trended upward in almost every month since it was released. Also, there has been more demand for it than supply. Granted, at this stage you're correct. 2 years from now, not so sure.

 

[Triumph]

Don't kid yourself. Having to deal with pollution and other negative environmental consequences of manufacturing is a cost--it does not make us richer. The human effort that's spent dealing with that does not directly produce consumable goods or services.

You're right it is a cost, but it is one that industry has neglected to include in their calculations for far too long. Government regulation is inefficient, but with no regulation at all, our cities would still look like Pittsburgh did in 1920.

 

[werepossum]

You're right it is a cost, but it is one that industry has neglected to include in their calculations for far too long. Government regulation is inefficient, but with no regulation at all, our cities would still look like Pittsburgh did in 1920.

Agreed. Environmental is a cost to society either way, whether in direct damage to the environment or in the costs of prevention and mitigation. I think most people today would agree that prevention and mitigation, with its higher product and energy costs and created non-wealth producing jobs, is a better way of paying that cost that to have polluted air and poisoned water.

Anyone doubting that should take a drive to Copper Hill, Tennessee, where over half a century of damage mitigation has only been partially successful in returning what was a hellish landscape better suited to Mars to a state suitable for life beyond extreme microbes.

 

[Fern]

Are you serious? It's ridiculously obvious. They are industrializing at the expense of the west. Industrialization is wealth and power. The west will be lucky if we still have some Hollywood brands that aren't totally pirated by the Chinese.

Are you kidding? What part of gaining more power and control do you not understand?

I don't care if China had 100 people, their policies aren't base on making our economy good.

They have some short term interests in our economy doing better while there's a huge transfer of wealth their direction, but that only lasts so long.

Whatever our economy is losing to them, they're gaining. They have over 1 billion people.

I believe the Chinese are seriously long-term strategic planners.

That's why I said "end-game".

You guys are talking about the short/mid-term, otherwise known as the "obvious".

Follow it out to the end, where does it lead? They're rich and we're poor and can longer buy their products? It that where they see it ending? Personally, I doubt it.

I see the 'they're rich and we're poor' situation as a strategic platform of strength for launching the next step. What would they want? What would they do?

I believe they've thought that through and have some plan, some objective in mind.

Fern

 

[Triumph]

What plan would that be, Fern? I'm curious.

 

[woodie1]

Volt sales have trended upward in almost every month since it was released. Also, there has been more demand for it than supply. Granted, at this stage you're correct. 2 years from now, not so sure.

Huh?
GM sold 7,671 Volts last year, falling short of its goal of 10,000.
And then .... another 4,400 are still for sale.

 

[Infohawk]

I believe the Chinese are seriously long-term strategic planners.

That's why I said "end-game".

You guys are talking about the short/mid-term, otherwise known as the "obvious".

Follow it out to the end, where does it lead? They're rich and we're poor and can longer buy their products? It that where they see it ending? Personally, I doubt it.

I see the 'they're rich and we're poor' situation as a strategic platform of strength for launching the next step. What would they want? What would they do?

I believe they've thought that through and have some plan, some objective in mind.

Fern

What is so hard to understand? If they're rich and we're poor that's the end game. Do you think they won't have a large domestic market? Of course they will. The platform is to be powerful. You're like someone in 1900 asking what the US would do if it became a superpower. The answer is: act like a superpower.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Huh?
GM sold 7,671 Volts last year, falling short of its goal of 10,000.
And then .... another 4,400 are still for sale.

and 8000 are now being recalled due to battery problems

 

[Ausm]

Because subsidizing them as they willingly go down the tubes is better . . . somehow.

Nice play on words, How is giving a core American manufacturing industry a loan which they paid back to get back on their feet considered subsidizing? It amazing how you brush it off as not that big of a deal. Do you realize how many smaller companies support the auto industry in this country?

We aren't talking about Gubermint kickbacks to the oil companies or ethanol industries here.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Nice play on words, How is giving a core American manufacturing industry a loan which they paid back to get back on their feet considered subsidizing? It amazing how you brush it off as not that big of a deal. Do you realize how many smaller companies support the auto industry in this country?

We aren't talking about Gubermint kickbacks to the oil companies or ethanol industries here.

The repayment with all the publicity ignored the fact that they borrowed the money to pay it back.

 

[Capt Caveman]

From what I get from the article is that GM is going to co-develop an EV platform with China FOR China. They are not going to start building US Volts or EVs in China and ship them back to us and they aren't moving all EV development to China. Whatever they're going to develop is for Chinese consumption.

Correct. To survive in this global economy, you need access to the largest market in the world, China. To do business in China, you have to partner with a company there, that's what my previous company had to do.

Based on the horrific air quality - http://news.yahoo.com/smoggy-beijing-reveal-more-pollution-data-083344671.html, China is pushing for electric cars, GM wants part of that action.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Surrender IP to a state-controlled "joint-venture," worked well for the German / Japanese high-speed rail companies!

 

[brencat]

I'm 2 days late to this thread, but this is a fvcking outrage!

 

[werepossum]

The repayment with all the publicity ignored the fact that they borrowed the money to pay it back.

Exactly, plus the tax money put into the Volt's development is now going to be given to China.

Correct. To survive in this global economy, you need access to the largest market in the world, China. To do business in China, you have to partner with a company there, that's what my previous company had to do.

Based on the horrific air quality - http://news.yahoo.com/smoggy-beijing-reveal-more-pollution-data-083344671.html, China is pushing for electric cars, GM wants part of that action.

Then we need to act equally. If a nation like China requires 50%+ Chinese ownership to build a plant, we need to require 60%. If China has 10% import tariffs, we need 25% import tariffs. The United States is still the most profitable market in the world, if perhaps not the largest (25% of worldwide auto sales, but 50% of worldwide auto sales profit) yet we not only aren't leveraging that, we're continually accepting treaties on disadvantageous terms. We aren't going to be the most profitable market for much longer - we're only keeping the title now by borrowing money hand over fist - and by the time our politicians wake up (if ever) we are going to be a beggar society with no leverage and little technology.

 

[woolfe9999]

Huh?
GM sold 7,671 Volts last year, falling short of its goal of 10,000.
And then .... another 4,400 are still for sale.

What in your post contradicted what I said in mine? Namely, that Volt says have trended upward month by month. Go look again at the wiki entry for the volt. It shows month by month sales in the US. If it continues following that trend line, in a couple years it will be a strong seller. Also, much of the low initial sales were due to a lack of supply rather than a lack of demand.

 

[werepossum]

What in your post contradicted what I said in mine? Namely, that Volt says have trended upward month by month. Go look again at the wiki entry for the volt. It shows month by month sales in the US. If it continues following that trend line, in a couple years it will be a strong seller. Also, much of the low initial sales were due to a lack of supply rather than a lack of demand.

And in three years it'll be replaced by its Chinese-built successor. 😀

 

[Fern]

What is so hard to understand? If they're rich and we're poor that's the end game. Do you think they won't have a large domestic market? Of course they will. The platform is to be powerful. You're like someone in 1900 asking what the US would do if it became a superpower. The answer is: act like a superpower.

If I asked that question back in 1900 it would have been a valid question and I seriously doubt anyone could have answered it correctly.

We're largely using our super power status to promote democratic ideals around the world and intervene or influence events in foreign countries. E.g., in the 1st Gulf War we attacked Iraq because it invaded Kuwait and we just help overthrow Ghaddafi.

Given our staunch isolationism back in 1900 I don't think anyone would have envisioned us running around all over the world acting as policeman and blowing $'s etc.

Maybe China has no objective beyond enhancing their economy at our expense. OTOH, maybe they, I'm just raising the question. I suppose this is in some part a reflection of my belief that were are locked in an economic war with China, and that we don't realize it (but of course they do).

Fern

 

[Darwin333]

Gotta wonder what China's end-game is besides stealing our economy out from under us.

Eventually, we won't be able to buy their products.

Fern

To develop their country to have a strong middle class, much like we do (used to?) with much more people than we have to support their economy.

Seems to me that they are doing a pretty good job so far. Remember, the Chinese have very long term goals while we tend to have very short term goals.

 

[Infohawk]

We're largely using our super power status to promote democratic ideals around the world and intervene or influence events in foreign countries. E.g., in the 1st Gulf War we attacked Iraq because it invaded Kuwait and we just help overthrow Ghaddafi.

A lot of people would consider that incredibly naive although I'll go with it for the purposes of this argument. So if the US, a democracy, used its superpower status to promote democracy, what do you think totalitarian China is going to use its power for?

Anyway, you act like China would never want to be in a position where it's richer than the US. It's just silly. If they could flip a switch and be more rich and powerful than the US they would do it.

 

[Fern]

To develop their country to have a strong middle class, much like we do (used to?) with much more people than we have to support their economy.

Seems to me that they are doing a pretty good job so far. Remember, the Chinese have very long term goals while we tend to have very short term goals.

I find it odd to contemplate a strong middle class in a communist/dictator type country. Educated people with resources and dictatorships don't seem to get along very well.

Fern

 

[Fern]

-snip-
Anyway, you act like China would never want to be in a position where it's richer than the US. It's just silly. If they could flip a switch and be more rich and powerful than the US they would do it.

If that's what you think I've been saying you have completely misunderstood me.

Fern

 

[Darwin333]

From what I get from the article is that GM is going to co-develop an EV platform with China FOR China. They are not going to start building US Volts or EVs in China and ship them back to us and they aren't moving all EV development to China. Whatever they're going to develop is for Chinese consumption.

LMAO!

Just like everything else thats made in China.....

 

[Infohawk]

Gotta wonder what China's end-game is besides stealing our economy out from under us.

Eventually, we won't be able to buy their products.

Fern

How did I misunderstand you? Sounds like you think their only way to survive is to be poorer than us. I still haven't heard you give a response to the fact that they can (and are doing it) build up a middle-class economy. For most of its history the US has had an extremely powerful largely domestic economy.

 

[Darwin333]

I find it odd to contemplate a strong middle class in a communist/dictator type country. Educated people with resources and dictatorships don't seem to get along very well.

Fern

They have moving much closer to a quasi-hybrid capitalist society for a while now. Like I (and I believe you) said, long term versus short term. Long term they know they have the ability to be an economic powerhouse that is mostly self sufficient and if they have to pretend to give up a little bit of their power to achieve it they will.

Their end goal is, imo, the same as just about every other country/group/person and that is power. How did the US become the worlds super power? Our economy, a large portion of which was internal during our rise to power. They have the potential (due to sheer population) to far exceed that, so why would they try and reinvent the wheel?

They grow their economy at the expense of ours while slowly replacing our reduced demand with their own increased demand due to said economic expansion.

Edit:
You said "eventually we won't be able to buy their products", I think their "end game" is for their own people to be able to buy their products by the time that happens.