87
submitted 2 weeks ago by schizoidman@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
all 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FMT99@lemmy.world 48 points 2 weeks ago

It might not work eh? Might it though? I hate this kind of weasel headline almost as much as the constant "slamming". Just say what you're going to say.

[-] Stern@lemmy.world 32 points 2 weeks ago

It'll work just like adding another lane will solve traffic.

"We're pushing the can down the road. Problem is, we're running out of road."

[-] Beaver@lemmy.ca 28 points 2 weeks ago

The Biden Administration wants to hurt Mexico in order to protect American Automotive interests.

[-] nekandro@lemmy.ml 22 points 2 weeks ago

The US has done a great job of fucking Canada, now they're turning their attention to fucking Mexico, too.

It's giving Sino-Soviet split.

[-] Beaver@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah I hate American pharmaceutical companies so much trying to pry Pharmacare from the hands of everyday people.

[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 9 points 2 weeks ago

Not that I doubt it, but what did the US do to Canada?

[-] Pirky@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago

We've had logging tariffs on them for a bit, especially at the start of the pandemic when lumber prices were insane and getting rid of them would've helped lower prices a bit.

[-] OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 weeks ago

Illegal tariffs. The Canadian lumber industry has taken them to court several times and win the cases. And nothing was changed. The US loves NAFTA when it benefits them. Not so much otherwise.

[-] intelshill@lemmy.ca 14 points 2 weeks ago

Exactly. The US decides when it wants to follow the rules it created.

[-] mister_monster@monero.town 4 points 2 weeks ago

NAFTA no longer exists, the trade relationships are governed by USMCA now.

[-] mctoasterson@reddthat.com 16 points 2 weeks ago

"Joe Biden wants to stop the bleeding in his poll numbers in Michigan" would be a better headline.

[-] mlg@lemmy.world 22 points 2 weeks ago

Big 3 had a decade to compete with Tesla whose cars are already considered lower grade by today's EV standards because of quality issues.

Instead they spammed anti direct sell litigation while R&D twiddled their thumbs.

They'll do the exact same thing again and eat some more bailouts after they inevitably fail again.

[-] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 18 points 2 weeks ago

Trying to buy uncompetitive US companies a bigger market share more like

[-] mister_monster@monero.town 18 points 2 weeks ago

It's not going to work. It's like when they tried to protect the US market from Japanese cars in the 70s and 80s. Look at the roads now, two of the big three (well, now four) american car manufacturers have gone bankrupt more than once. The one that hasn't only makes trucks and one flagship sportscar now. US EVs can't compete with Chinese made ones, it's just that simple.

[-] CowsLookLikeMaps@sh.itjust.works 17 points 2 weeks ago

Buy EVs time or protect american oil?

[-] dessalines@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 weeks ago

You must buy iphone, borger, and ford f-150 or the american economy will collapse. /s

[-] Num10ck@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

protect the us militarys ability to force car manufacturers to make tanks/drones during wartime.

[-] Ohi@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago

For an administration so desperate to cut back on global emissions, keeping cheap and apparently reliable foreign electric vehicles out of US market seems so backwards.

[-] bquintb@midwest.social 10 points 2 weeks ago

Also, it might work. No one knows, this is news.

[-] PanArab@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 weeks ago

US companies internationally will still struggle though. Might even make the US car market even more of a galapagos.

[-] Psiczar@aussie.zone 2 points 2 weeks ago

While I’m sure there are financial motives behind this that are backed by the US car industry, it also makes sense if you anticipate a war with China sometime in the future. You don’t really want a large proportion of your population driving cars manufactured by the enemy that can be switched off remotely.

[-] Crikeste@lemm.ee 6 points 2 weeks ago

We shouldn’t be preparing for war with a rising world power, we should be trying to achieve partnership.

But as Americans say: China bad, the slavery in MY prison system is justified.

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

We shouldn’t be preparing for war with a rising world power, we should be trying to achieve partnership.

Historically that has been a very grave error.

[-] nekandro@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 weeks ago

That's not the worry. The worry is that China is accumulating all of this industrial capacity (like the US pre-WW2) and that car factories really aren't that different from APC/tank factories.

[-] Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago

car factories really aren’t that different from APC/tank factories.

What is this bs?

[-] Num10ck@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago

switched off? how about flooring it into valuable targets? seizing up the freeways? locking up certain passengers?

[-] B0rax@feddit.de 2 points 2 weeks ago

These vehicles can do much more. They usually have cameras (some are even required by law). Most of them are always connected to the internet, they could intercept and disturb communications.

This is true for most modern cars.

[-] Psiczar@aussie.zone 1 points 2 weeks ago

Sure, I went for the economic impact option, but causing chaos is certainly another way they could go.

this post was submitted on 15 May 2024
87 points (93.9% liked)

World News

31292 readers
518 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS