The US would rather pay off to tarriffs the competition than properly compete. Even the Ford CEO drove A Chinese EV for 6 months and he didn't want to give it up. Also indirectly he didn't think Ford could compete, calling it an "existential threat"

https://www.businessinsider.com/ford-ceo-driving-xiaomi-su7-...

It's really stupid because Xiaomi isn't making anything truly revolutionary. It's just a lot of consumer thoughtful ideas, not ones that try to shove ads and subscriptions in your dang car. And this is our "existential threat" to a century of manufacturing. Wonder how Henry would feel.

(and the tarriffs stuff isn't just 2025. That's been there through all of Biden's admin. Good idea... If they used those 5 years to actually ramp up production).

▲

imglorp 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

Full agree on these auto maker comments. The US makers for decades have dug in their heels on any new features: look how long it took to get basic safety features like seatbelts, airbags, and crumple zones. Then delay wipers. Then it took decades to add a $1 part like an aux input for the stereo. And of course all the super poor EV gestures.

But I was talking about motorcycles. There are some new brands like Zero and some old ones like Harley (the "live wire" disaster). They need a fire lit to make real bikes at real prices.

	▲	mmooss 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		It's not a characteristic of US automakers but of the status quo in any competition. The status quo power wants to keep things the same - that's how they got there, that's how they are making money, and any change destabilizes things and 'wastes' money: you're already (selling cars), what will you gain by innovating? The revisionist power wants to become status quo. They need to beat the status quo power and they won't do it following the status quo's rulebook. They look for anything that might differentiate them, make them appealing to even narrow groups - they are trying to get a foothold and grow from there. They are cool, innovative, and disruptive, people think. As soon as the revisionist becomes status quo, they adopt the status quo behaviors. Look at formerly revisionist SV.

▲

Sevii 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There is no way we can compete in a global free market while paying 4x as much for labor. At a comparable level of technology and organizational skill the Chinese will win every competition, labor costs are that important. They have already caught up.

	▲	germinalphrase 3 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		“ The first archetype, Euro premiums, has an average labor cost of $2,232 per vehicle and includes premium brands such as Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Jaguar Land Rover, and Audi. This group is characterized by high production costs, complex design and advanced manufacturing processes, and strong labor unions. Within the category, German manufacturers face among the highest labor costs of $3,307 due to stringent regulations and high wage rates. The second archetype, electric vehicle-only manufacturers, includes startups as well as more established players like Tesla, which do not operate under organized labor contracts. Their average labor costs range from $1,502 to $13,291, and they face high per vehicle production costs due to low manufacturing volumes. EV-only manufacturers also have been heavily reliant on government subsidies, which are now being cut back by the new administration. The third archetype, mainstream model manufacturers, has an average labor cost of $880 per vehicle and includes traditional high-volume automakers from various countries. Japanese manufacturers enjoy lower labor costs per vehicle, with an average of $769, compared with manufacturers in the United States, where the average is $1,341 — a labor cost per vehicle that reflects recent historic union gains. The fourth archetype, Chinese car manufacturers, has an average labor cost of $585 per vehicle, characterized by low wages and high efficiency. The group maintains the lowest overall conversion costs in the industry by leveraging its newer factories, efficient supply chains, and high production volumes” - https://www.oliverwyman.com/our-expertise/insights/2025/apr/...
	▲	mmooss 3 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		The idea that hourly labor cost is the overriding issue or cost is generally false, a story told by companies to get corporate welfare (including protectionism) and play the victim. They aren't sewing t-shirts; there is far more to the balance sheet than hourly cost; even focusing only on labor, there is productivity.

▲

7952 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Surely the most important area of innovation is not the end product itself but how it is manufactured at scale. That is what made Henry and what will make Chinese manufacturers win.