US Jobs Too Important To Risk Chinese Car Imports, Says Ford CEO (arstechnica.com) 177
In an interview with Fox News, Ford CEO Jim Farley warned that allowing Chinese vehicle imports could put nearly a million U.S. jobs at risk. He said China's heavily subsidized auto industry has enough excess capacity to supply the entire U.S. market, while also raising serious cybersecurity concerns given how much data modern connected cars collect. Ars Technica reports: "First of all, the Chinese have huge direct support for their auto companies," Farley said, while noting that China has the ability to build an additional 21 million vehicles a year on top of the 29 million that are expected to roll off Chinese production lines in 2026. "They have enough capacity in China to cover all the manufacturing, all the vehicle sales in the United States," Farley said.
"Manufacturing is the heart and soul of our country, and for us to lose those exports would be devastating for our country," he continued, before pointing out the cybersecurity worries about Chinese cars. "All the vehicles have 10 cameras. They can collect a lot of data," he said.
Farley has praised Chinese EVs like the Xiaomi SU7, even going on podcasts to sing its praises. But he believes Ford's forthcoming affordable Kentucky-built EVs, due to start hitting dealerships next year, have what it takes to be competitive. When asked about new car prices rising an average of 2 percent last year, Farley repeatedly said that Ford had "worked with the administration" so that there's "essentially no big impact" of the Trump tariffs. The CEO justified the rising costs by pointing to the F-150's sales as proof of its value.
"Manufacturing is the heart and soul of our country, and for us to lose those exports would be devastating for our country," he continued, before pointing out the cybersecurity worries about Chinese cars. "All the vehicles have 10 cameras. They can collect a lot of data," he said.
Farley has praised Chinese EVs like the Xiaomi SU7, even going on podcasts to sing its praises. But he believes Ford's forthcoming affordable Kentucky-built EVs, due to start hitting dealerships next year, have what it takes to be competitive. When asked about new car prices rising an average of 2 percent last year, Farley repeatedly said that Ford had "worked with the administration" so that there's "essentially no big impact" of the Trump tariffs. The CEO justified the rising costs by pointing to the F-150's sales as proof of its value.
He's Not Wrong. (Score:5, Interesting)
Cheap Chinese cars would be devastating to the America auto industry and to Trump's re-homing of manufacturing goals.
Re: He's Not Wrong. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: He's Not Wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: He's Not Wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
Or the lowest bidder. I would rather have one of those bitchen Chinese EVs than his shitty Mustang E for the money anyway. Protectionism is wrong.
Until the rug-pull happens and China stops selling us those cheap cars... and we have no ability to make our own. That is what we need to protect against: not Ford's profit margin, but the ability to manufacture our own when our adversaries cut us off.
Re: He's Not Wrong. (Score:4)
What possible economic sense would it make for China to do that?
Re: (Score:3)
They did it with rare-earths... it is not about economic sense it is about power.
Re: He's Not Wrong. (Score:5, Informative)
They did it with rare-earths...
Did this occur before or after Trump announced crippling tariffs on Chinese goods? (hint - the answer isn't "before")
Re: He's Not Wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
Funnily enough, pissing off the entire world and trashing the economy doesnt help selling your products to them.
Re: He's Not Wrong. (Score:2)
Poor excuse.
One secret of democracy is that you're stuck with whomever gets voted, even if you personally didn't vote then. Whether you like it or not, you're responsible, too -- the same way a dog owner ia responaible for damage caused by their pet.
You should've gotten political, convinced your neigjbours, gone to protests, used the 2nd... whatever. You didn't. Now you're in it just the same.
Re: He's Not Wrong. (Score:4, Insightful)
You didn't stop him then. You're not stopping him now. You don't count.
The problem with at least half of Americans today is they *still* think that fixing their own country is somebody else's problem, and it will just happen magically one day, why make a fuss?
Re: He's Not Wrong. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
IIRC, Some GM models like the Buick Envision are Chinese imports anyway. Chinese cars are on our soil. The fight is if the Big 3 can exclusively profit from Chinese cars or not.
Re: (Score:2)
thank you for having such an accurate name
Re: (Score:2)
Well bad news Trump wants to tap American auto makers to make military vehicles as well. They will need to cut something which is probably going to negatively impact their consumer business even more. Not sure what we are gearing up for but hey why not have a few million extra vehicles laying around.
Re: He's Not Wrong. (Score:4, Informative)
The world can not allow the USA to dominate our markets in manufacturing and digital technologies.
So the USA looses access to 96% of the worlds population.
Re: (Score:3)
Europe has lots of Chinese cars, both cheap and luxury types.
Our domestic manufacturers were in trouble long before China came along, thanks to Japanese quality. Some didn't survive, some upped their games. Now the same thing is happening again with EVs.
Some people will lose out. Some people will benefit. This time around, the environment and climate change will definitely benefit greatly. I'm okay with that.
Re: (Score:3)
This time around, the environment and climate change will definitely benefit greatly. I'm okay with that.
It did last time around, too! The Japanese didn't just make cars which were better for cheaper, they were cleaner too because they were more efficient. e.g. the Honda hatchback with the original CVCC engine was able to meet California's emissions standards without a catalyst (At the time, when they were world-leading) because it was so very good at burning fuel.
Re: (Score:3)
That is what we need to protect against: not Ford's profit margin, but the ability to manufacture our own when our adversaries cut us off.
Sure, but the way to solve that is not to protect Ford from competition, but instead allow it so that they have to produce competitive vehicles to exist, so that they have the ability to manufacture those vehicles. Instead we have protectionism at every level of the auto industry, bought by the big consolidated automakers, so that you need many many billions to bring a new car to market even in very low volumes.
Re: (Score:3)
the competition is cheating
By having health care, food, and housing supported by public, government money? For about 33% of the employees in that industry? That's cheating?
Oh, wait, that's in the U.S. (https://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/12/one-in-three-us-manufacturing-workers-are-on-welfare-study.html).
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the Norwegians are not so many, not too corrupt and can live comfortably off the income from oil and gas, which are about a quarter of their GDP (most of their public sector expenditure) and half of their exports.
So enforce the same working standards (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh and give China their own version of the EPA minus Trump fucking with it so the cancer villages go away. Or what we used to call super fund sites
Everybody always leaves out all that stuff. It is really hard to compete with a Chinese company that has slave labor all throughout its supply chains, can dump poison into local groundwater, and has a population of workers that make barely enough to eat and whose organs get harvested if they get a little too uppity.
As bad as America is we are not china. I mean not yet anyway. There is a multibillion dollar effort underway to change that but it's not a done deal.
Re:So enforce the same working standards (Score:5, Insightful)
It is unfair the USA does not have to do this.
Re: So enforce the same working standards (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: So enforce the same working standards (Score:3)
Make China enforce the same level of civil rights
...but their police are already shooting unarmed civilians in the street, like ICE! What exactly do you expect them to do more over there? Wave MAGA flags?
and the same safety regulations for workers
As in, require them to leave dead warehouse workers on the floor for a week, like.this Amazon guy? Or cook people alive in unaecured ovens, like this other US producer few minths ago? Or spill some molten metal on their wokers, like another factory in the US about two years ago?
As to unions... no need to move a finger. The US apparently already is moving
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
You might want to think twice about that, because there are areas where China has better protections than the US for ordinary citizens. What if they start demanding that the US protect people from predatory social media and addictive pay-to-win games aimed at children? Or even just enforce existing anti child labour laws for stuff like Roblox?
Some Chinese environmental standards are higher than current US ones, and of course China's per capita emissions are well below American levels. Chinese enforcement is
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So enforce the same working standards (Score:4, Informative)
You're right of course. But rsilvergun is not wrong too. Slavery is definitely part of the equation.
But at a higher level, China has beaten the rest of the world because they've got a complete, integrated supply chain. Literally every part of a modern EV is made somewhere nearby, by more than one company. Whereas in the US, companies largely abandoned that model in favor of just in time suppliers. In other words, Harvard Business School that placed short-term quarterly gains above everything else. Labor is a liability. having parts on hand is a liability. Making those parts locally is a liability. I'm a little surprised Trump hasn't targetted this aspect of American business ethos and executive ordered the Harvard Business School to disband after the damage they've caused and influenced industry wreckers like Neutron Jack.
Re: (Score:3)
Its in for profit prisons who make equipment for the military in forced work conditions
The US health system also allows employers to hold healthcare over the heads of employees as a threat. Fire at will.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
JIT is absolutely at the heart of China’s integrated supply chain for manufacturing EVs. These ideas are not competitive, they are complementary. But they use geographical clustering, JIC for key components, and information from that tight integration to ensure parts are readily at hand when needed.
The slave labour issue is an upstream issue affecting things like aluminium and polysilicate, obviously much broader than just EV supply.
You still don't have civil rights in China (Score:5, Informative)
And that's before we talk about Trump using immigration enforcement to gank citizens off the streets and disappear them. So far all them have popped back up after a few weeks but it's only a matter of time before one of them just goes missing or dies in custody.
But none of that makes China's civil rights situation any better. You go to China and you live there and you criticize the government and ask me how that goes for you. Or try to unionize. Which is hilarious because they pretend to be communist. Never mind the fact that they have an American style Private healthcare system.
It's not 1987 but that doesn't mean China has gotten any better. Becoming the world's factory has improved some of the people's economic situation but that doesn't make the slave labor or the cancer villages okay.
Re: (Score:3)
Having had experience with Chinese cars here in Australia I would definitely pick the models from some (but not all) Chinese brands ahead of what Detroit is selling in Australia these days. (I can think of several Chinese pickup trucks I would pick ahead of the Ford, Chevy and RAM pickups you can get here for example)
Australian experience (Score:3)
Be careful what you wish for. When the Australian car industry shut down the suppliers shut down. The toolmakers shut down. The heavy aircraft maintenance industry shut down (they relied on those toolmakers, but didn't have enough volume to make them viable). Every developing country that doesn't have an auto industry wants one, and every country that has one defends it legally or illegally. But yeah, roll that free market die and see how it goes. FAFO for real.
Re: He's Not Wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
China has been able to handle those regulations, just as they are able to handle the European and other EMEA ones. For example, BYD's Shark is taking off in Mexico because it has what the Big 3 brands have... but a lot lighter on the wallet.
I don't like advocating for China, on the other end, I would assert the US has the most miserable and overpriced vehicle selection anywhere in the civilized world.
Re: (Score:2)
"I would assert the US has the most miserable and overpriced vehicle selection anywhere in the civilized world."
This right here.
Re: (Score:2)
This is painfully obvious to anyone who’s been able to travel and see cars in different regions. American cars just are awful by international standards, by and large
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How is it cheating?
The US government could do the same thing if they wanted.
They do it all the time for other industries (i.e. farmers - especially the corn/ethanol producers, energy producers, housing, etc.). They'd just need to change their priorities and reallocate budget money.
For example, it's estimated that the US war in Iran cost ~$1.5b/day. There were ~16.4m cars sold by the four main domestic US automakers last year.
If we assume that war lasts 100 days at that average spend rate, instead of parti
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if your increasingly rare job is on the line, the American way is to adapt and learn do something new fast, no?
We know from history that a slave labor economy is the most inefficient socio-economic organization possible, so inefficient that even the Egyptians, a fundamentally slavery-based society, didn't use slave labor in their important economic undertakings.
Any "free society" and you as its free cog should be able to easily run circles around "slave labor China" on efficiency and innovation.
What's
Re: He's Not Wrong. (Score:2)
This comment grossly ignores the systemic distribution failures in capitalist regimes world over. workers are prevented from adapting by being provided no social support. Profit for the largest players is made from public expenditure, which is a cost to the public, and the non-elite individual is expected to take full responsibility for both themself and the elite capital pools. Non-elite humans have been commoditized. While somewhat better than chattel slavery, it is a reversal from better times. Many maga
Re: He's Not Wrong. (Score:2)
That's what car manufacturers should have done decades ago.
Today the big three are creating dinosaurs that few actually want and can afford as well as being hard to repair. Protectionism is a time bomb waiting to blow up and devastate the economy.
Most people want reasonably priced vehicles with decent comfort that don't annoy and distract them just because the car thinks that something needs attention that's irrelevant.
Re: He's Not Wrong. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That is not the reason the US car industry cannot compete. That is a deflection and it does nothing to help with the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I mean... kind of.
I am not concerned about the random surveillance tech built in to my car. To me that is a red herring: it sounds plausible, but does it matter whether it is Chinese or American spyware in my car?
He is right that China subsidizes entire industries to become rapidly and wildly successful. China does this in ways that we cannot compete with: not by cutting a fat check to a single manufacturer, but by providing a favorable environment for the entire industry to succeed -no matter the human o
Re:He's Not Wrong. (Score:5, Interesting)
Americans aren't paid enough to be able to afford American-made products. Simultaneously, American workers cost so much that it is way more profitable to do the manufacturing in foreign countries.
This isn't going to be fixed by encouragement, nor by tariffs or import bans. This will just recreate the conditions of the late 1920s when warehouses were awash with consumer products that nobody could afford to buy. It was one of the factors that plunged us into a depression, and it absolutely can happen again.
We are going to need another decade-long depression to fix this.
I mean, maybe in theory it would be possible to fix this through the right balance of regulation that blocks cheap imports AND pulls wages up AND stimulates more factory construction in America so the products we need will be available in sufficient amounts, AND keeps the prices down through competition. It may be slightly more possible for simians to aviate from my posterior, however. The people who must sacrifice the most for that to happen are the very people who hold all the political power (since the USA functions as an oligarchy, and only appears to function as a democracy).
So, a good old-fashioned depression will hit the holdings of the super-rich hard enough that actual meaningful regulation can come out of it. Though it will be all the rest of us who suffer from it the most.
I would really like to be proven wrong about this. I only know what I have learned about economics from a few elective courses in college. Maybe someone who knows more about this than I do can provide a more realistic narrative and prediction.
Re: (Score:3)
Americans aren't paid enough to be able to afford American-made products. Simultaneously, American workers cost so much that it is way more profitable to do the manufacturing in foreign countries.
Yep. The whole system has become dysfunctional.
Not quite true... (Score:2)
He's Not Wrong... Cheap Chinese cars would be devastating to the America auto industry and to Trump's re-homing of manufacturing goals.
Not true at all. Or, rather, it depends on some time scales and definitions.
The same way that there is no such thing as a "selfless" act - no one acts selflessly. They just value different goals in their assessment of selfishness. Selflessness is simply selfishness on a longer time scale or with a wider scope.
Chinese cars will be disruptive to the US auto industry, but devastating... that depends on what you mean. One could argue, and I would tend to agree, that the continuing artificial protections are
Re: (Score:2)
This is if an
Re: (Score:2)
Not too sure where you are getting your costs from, car companies don't pay the retail price for parts. Typically a basic car sells for about twice its part cost, but all those boxes you tick have a 400% markup.
Re:He's Not Wrong. (Score:5, Interesting)
> The camera adds thousands to the car price,
No it doesn't, and you're in the wrong forum if you think you can get away with such obvious bollocks as that.
Even your thesis is true, then it's not even internally consistent. If you can import a car that's street legal (ie has the back-up camera et al) for less, then how does that prove its regulation that's causing the higher prices?
The reason car prices are high in the US are:
1. In most parts of the country, car usage is mandatory. Zoning regulations have made walking and mass transit impractical, as a result there's high demand.
2. The same zoning has lead to people wanting bigger and bigger vehicles, to defend themselves against equally large vehicles. In most countries cars are cheaper because they're smaller, not less safe or less regulated.
3. The profit has never been in the low end, and car companies are going where the money is. Low end cars aren't impossible, they're just not where the money is.
It isn't cameras that mysteriously cost more than 5X the cost of an entire Motorola Android phone for no reason.
Re: (Score:3)
1. In most parts of the country, car usage is mandatory. Zoning regulations have made walking and mass transit impractical, as a result there's high demand.
It's hard to overstate this. All the usual excuses (America is too Big! I saw a poor person on the bus once!) are just excuses. The reason transit is bad in America is that there are a lot of actually properly enforced laws that more or less prevent it working, to the detriment of almost everyone.
Can't drive? Car dependence really sucks.
Shouldn't drive?
Re: (Score:2)
Your thesis would hold more weight if it weren’t for the fact that essentially every car from every OEM around the world comes with a backup camera. Quick estimate of costs for a UK OEM:
Camera module itself: roughly £5–£15
Wiring, connectors and mounting hardware: perhaps £3–£10
ECU/integration electronics: £2–£10
Extra infotainment processing and software integration: a few pounds spread across the vehicle
Assembly labour, testing and calibration: may
Re: (Score:2)
You can get a camera kit that meets the minimum requirements for new vehicles on AliExpress for 10 bucks.
Re: (Score:2)
My bank account is more important than yours (Score:2)
Re:My bank account is more important than yours (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Capitalism giveth and capitalism taketh. Such as life.
Re: (Score:2)
"Blank? BLANK?! You're not looking at the big picture!!" - That Guy
Re: (Score:2)
"Manufacturing is the heart and soul of our (Score:2)
country"? Since when, that was outsourced to China.
They took our jerbs! (Score:4, Insightful)
It's the auto industry's version of "think of the children". They don't actually give a rat's ass about the workers and would happily replace them with Tesla bots as soon as the math works on a balance sheet. What they're really worried about is their continued ability to sell those big high profit margin gas guzzlin' pickup trucks and SUVs.
Re: (Score:3)
Obviously. They also messed up keeping current because just raking in money was more important. And now they try to blame somebody else for their screw-up.
Protectionism is the road to hell (Score:5, Insightful)
If you realize you cannot compete, about the most stupid thing to do is to try to prolong that state.
Retirement's not that far off for CEOs (Score:2)
If he can the keep the show on the road till then, he'll be fine...
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed. Time for real CEO liability with no temporal limitations. Too many of these people do far, far too much damage to get away with it.
Re: (Score:2)
In the game of Executive Musical Chairs, where C-suite residents change companies and industries as often as they change underwear, the goal is to just not be sitting in the corner office when the music stops and let the results of your shitty short-term decisions be someone else's problem. He doesn't actually care about the long-term, only that his employer doesn't crater until after he's cashed out and gone off to loot some other company.
Re: (Score:2)
Farley must be getting a bit niffy by now, he's had that job for nearly 6 years
Re: (Score:2)
I was a little surprised when I just looked at his Wikipedia entry, he's actually worked in the same industry for quite some time. That's rather rare in the modern C-suites, I remember other car company execs who came from airlines, financial corporations, I think there was a lawyer in there somewhere, pretty much anywhere since the supposed role of CEO now is to provide "leadership" (you should read their own publications, it's appalling). Still, he is definitely a modern executive, since he never seems
Why don't you say the real problem (Score:2)
So the real problem here is locally produced cars can't compete with China because China has slave labor all throughout its supply chain up to and including final assembly and manufacture. Do a bit of googling and you will find that byd got caught using slave labor to build cars.
I don't care how good your process is or how good your cars are or how great your engineers are they can't compete when you're competition uses slave labor.
Of course every CEO on t
Re: (Score:3)
The thing is, I like slave labor, when the slaves are machines. I want to work Bender 24 hours a day, and if he complains about it, I'll deny him his alcohol ration! Fuckin' clankers and skinjobs don't have any rights to infringe.
The catch to that, is that over here on my side of the ocean, I don't see and can't inspect Bender working way over in China, so I can't be sure the drudgery is experienced by the 6502 in Bender's head. How do I know he isn't just relaying commands to his servos and motors, which w
Re:Why don't you say the real problem (Score:4, Informative)
But I don't think any of that applies to a CEO that makes millions.
And comparatively, their U.S. workers *are* slave labor and the rich and Republicans seem okay with that -- pushing for fewer/lower worker safety regulations, less affordable / available healthcare and more expensive insurance, cutting and/or further restricting social safety nets. etc... They're okay with poorer people simply working themselves to death. /cynical
Re: (Score:2)
Among progressives there's a phrase. Do you want you can, when you can, for as long as you can.
Depends where they fall on the political spectrum. Go too far to the left and you get folks who hate EVs because in their mind everyone should just be living in a walkable city and riding a bicycle. *wink*
Being pragmatic involves realizing that socioeconomic issues are often complex, and if the "solution" fits in a tweet, it's probably not going to work out as you'd imagined it.
Not slavery - more complex (Score:2)
China doesn't have enough prison / slave labor to scapegoat for everything they win at (which is nearing everything.) metaphorical slaves-- we have those too. Oh no, they have some tiny portion done by prison labor... the USA has prison labor too; actually slavery is still legal in the USA (just not private slavery, go read the amendment.) What is worse than slavery is desperate serfs - prison slaves are more like serfs but slightly better. A slave has ownership responsibility costs. prisoners are slight
Re: (Score:2)
So the real problem here is locally produced cars can't compete with China because China has slave labor all throughout its supply chain up to and including final assembly and manufacture. Do a bit of googling and you will find that byd got caught using slave labor to build cars.
This is oversimplifying the situation. It's not wrong, but it's also not the only reason. There are quite a mix.
The other reason is for a variety of deeply broken reasons, it's vastly more profitable to sell massive, oversized light
Re: (Score:2)
Most US brands get their stuff made in China and other 3rd world countries using the same slave labor and sell their products in the US. Think of Nike, GAP, HP, Apple, Google, Fossil et. al. The list is endless.
sure whatever (Score:2)
Good luck (Score:3)
US economic policy is destroying American advantages in global trade at an unbelievable pace, while simultaneously undermining the domestic economy.
Even if Ford managed to build an 'affordable' EV, I suspect the percentage of the population able to afford it will be vastly reduced by the time it gets to market.
Subsidies (Score:4, Informative)
Ford gets subsidies and so do the oil companies.
Re: (Score:2)
Ford doesn't get nearly what the CCP gives their manufacturers.
The CCP wants China to own/control certain industries. The auto industry is one of them. They MASSIVLEY subsidize to get this advantage. This is the result.
https://www.reuters.com/invest... [reuters.com]
The consequence is a severely unlevel playing field that drives other car companies out of business.
Re:Subsidies (Score:5, Insightful)
Ford literally only exists because of the largesse of the US government, bailing it out. Not TARP, but everything else, billions and billions, including wars for oil to keep it cheap so that ever bigger high margin gas guzzlers could be sold
TL;DR (Score:5, Insightful)
"We can't compete, so you need to keep cheaper and superior products out so we can continue selling our more expensive, inferior products."
Re: (Score:2)
The sad thing is that with stupid voters, this works for a while. Obviously all you get at the end is a far bigger problem than what you had before.
Re: (Score:2)
What device did you use to make that post? Say goodbye to it. Modern electronics is impossible without automation.
Cybersecurity risk for whom? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why should I care if it's China or some US-Based global company that is violating my privacy?
I'd be all aboard this argument if it meant that US companies were not just as scummy with my personal info. Spoiler alert, if it is profitable, then they are.
Ford doesn't care about me being exploited. They just care that they're not the ones getting rich doing it.
Sure, but ... (Score:3)
"First of all, the Chinese have huge direct support for their auto companies," [Ford CEO] Farley said, ...
Not allowing consumers to buy those Chinese vehicles kinda props up Ford, and other companies. Some people may buy vehicles solely based on price, but most consider other factors too. If Ford can't compete on those other factors, it doesn't really matter what the prices are. For example, my 2001 Honda Civic Ex and 2002 Honda CR-V Ex (both manuals btw) weren't the least expensive vehicles I could have purchased, but they're (still) reliable and have long maintenance intervals.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Right, not everyone wants a large vehicle. Not everyone is an automotive enthusiast. Seems that's what the big three don't understand.
They do (cynically) understand profit margins though and trucks, SUVs, and muscle cars are more profitable than smaller, economic cars - not only in sales, but maintenance too.
"Connected"? (Score:2)
Does BYD make dumb cars or is that mandatory control-grid over there?
Also, how dare they not comply with a US control grid!
Excuse me while I go find a '77 Lincoln Town Car. But do make a dumb electric with a good cold-weather battery and let me know.
I've seen too much sausage being made to bet on cell service always existing .
Re: (Score:2)
You’re going to buy a car that measures mileage in telephone poles per gallon? This startup is going to be good test if the market really wants a barebones EV truck https://www.slate.auto/ [slate.auto]
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly no they don't. BYD cars are just like Tesla and anything sold on the market today. Big screens, always-on connectivity.
The EV perveyors say the screens and always-on internet connection are important so you can make sure to get maximum efficiency and make sure you can find a charging station. Some EVs even require you to use GPS navigation in order to properly prepare the battery for a fast charge! Apparently tactile controls and small screens just don't work on cars these days.
I love the idea of E
Re: (Score:3)
Again, this only seems true to you because of US protectionism limiting what cars you know about. The Dacia Spring isn’t sold with a screen, you use your phone for connectivity. Cheap simple EVs exist
The problem is Ford, not letting americans buy. (Score:4, Interesting)
America makes gigantic, overpriced cars. If you want to save American jobs, you need to make cars that are better than Chinese ones. They do so because of poorly worded environmental laws that rewarded larger cars.
The reason Ford cars cannot compete is because instead of making better cars they would rather stop the Chinese from competing. Capitalism rewards the better manufacturer. If you hate capitalism and prevent the superior products from being sold in your country, then every year your own company will become worse and worse.
That is why Ford is losing jobs, not because Americans would rather buy Chinese cars. If Ford cannot convince Americans to buy Ford cars, then how can they convince Europeans, Chinese, and Japanese people to buy them.
Saying you suck so badly that you cannot compete is a reason to put you out of business, not save the company.
So following his logic... (Score:3)
We should bring back telephone operators and elevator operators
We should abandon excavators and dig with shovels
We should abandon or destroy any technology that threatens old jobs
Of course he'll say that. (Score:2)
Then U.S. needs to build cheaper cars/trucks (Score:2)
Fuck this guy (Score:3)
Seriously fuck this guy. People are struggling because Ford wonâ(TM)t sell actual competitive vehicles like those overseas.
Where is the American version of the Ford Troller T4 with a manual 6 speed transmission and diesel engine that can actually get decent fuel economy?
Most hilarious is the small truck we wanted simply being the same F150 size as years ago and only available with thirsty turbo 2.3 that is a detuned 350hp race engine.
Where the hell is the 1.0 manual transmission 1900lb car that gets 60mpg on gasoline? Same car with a 1.5 turbo diesel would get 70mpg+.
People are hurting and want cheap fuel costs. You deny them that with jokes of small vehicles. Your same platform in the VW Amarok is so much more attractive with a manual and tdi engine compared to the automatic gas ranger.
Seriously not a single thing you make is cool anymore.
Re:Junk (Score:4, Interesting)
Chinese cars sold in the UK and Europe have to pass EU safety standards, which are significantly more stringent than US standards. I can drive for 30 mins and I'll see loads of Jaecoo, BYD and MG cars on the road here in Scotland. Jaecoo, for example, offers a 7 years/100k miles warranty and 8 years/100,000 miles on the batteries. MG offer 7 years/80,000 miles and BYD offer 6 years/100k miles with options to extend. So, yes, they do safety tests and, yes, they support their cars.
There were problems with local availability of parts initially, which led to sky-high insurance premiums with Chinese models, but those issues seem to have largely been resolved - or at least are no longer regularly reported in the media - so the issues you raise don't appear to be valid in 2026, at least not here in the UK.
You may be (read: are definitely) being flooded with FUD propaganda by the US automotive industry.