alt.hn

4/19/2026 at 10:15:41 AM

In the UK, EVs are cheaper than petrol cars, thanks to Chinese competition

 https://electrek.co/2026/04/18/in-the-uk-evs-are-cheaper-than-petrol-cars-thanks-to-chinese-competition/

by breve

4/21/2026 at 9:07:19 PM

Not quite. The UK govt has a rolling target of how many EVs are sold as a proportion of all vehicles. The manufacturers get "fined" £15k per ICE car sold over the target. The targets are ramping up rapidly - 22% in 2024, 28% in 2025, 33% in 2026, etc, reaching 80% (AFIAK, keeps changing) in 2030. There's various trading mechanisms in place and what not so it's a bit more complicated than this.

So it's far better to sell EV below cost (Chinese or not) to get more sold than have to a pay £15k for an ICE car.

The Chinese manufacturers are arguably at double advantage here as they have more BEV to sell so it's far easier for them meet the targets, and they can 'sell' the excess to the Western manufacturers (and further subsidise their EVs!).

I'm not personally against it, I got a brand new EV on a lease recently for close to free after all the tax advantages, and it's not like the Western manufacturers didn't have time to prepare...?

by martinald

4/21/2026 at 9:10:51 PM

The goal is to migrate everyone to EVs, and it sounds like the government incentive mechanism is working, albeit in a roundabout way.

by eterm

4/21/2026 at 9:22:57 PM

The problem is that there is not enough infrastructure for EVs. If you can't charge at home (e.g. you live in a flat), it is hard to live with an EV and it's much more expensive than the ICE.

by sega_sai

4/21/2026 at 10:12:02 PM

I had a rental EV while I was there for 6 weeks last summer, it was a pretty low spec jeep model and I stayed at mates places all over England none of which had parking or charging, to tell the truth charging was a bit spotty in town, but if I was just going around the local area the battery was good for a week or more. My take away was I would definitely rent an EV again, but a lot of the older charging infrastructure still sucks, under-provisioned at peak times, and cost 2-3 times what a similar charge would cost here in NZ. I ended up doing most of my charging at the Tesla superchargers on the motorways and at supermarkets in town. I did 2900 miles total and it was about the same cost as petrol in the end, but worth it as the EV was cheaper to rent and was automatic (which renters charge a premium in UK)

Not sure fast charging all the time is good for battery life though. 99% of my driving in NZ is on a normal 10A overnight charge

by boznz

4/21/2026 at 9:31:49 PM

Local government can quickly change that, if they get their act together. Here in the Hague, there's literally thousands of public chargers available on the city's residential streets. Coupled with the fact that the charging-price is city-mandated at a fixed rate (currently around 35ct/kwh), this gives a perfectly fine solution for most people. (I can charge at home, for 20ct/kwh currently, so that's even nicer)

by sigio

4/22/2026 at 12:13:34 AM

Not in the UK. Local governments (councils) are going bankrupt and are saddled with an overwhelming burden to pay for adult and child social care. There's no money for much else

by gib444

4/22/2026 at 12:09:23 AM

35ct/kwh is highway robbery.

by throwaway85825

4/22/2026 at 1:00:50 AM

Not sure what country you're from but in France it's not rare to see 0.30-0.60€ per kWh and even requiring a subscription on top of that.

by Sayrus

4/22/2026 at 6:59:22 AM

What is actually the realistic cost. Covering infra, the charger and the maintenance of everything involved. Power and transfer included, with transfer including any standing charges. And after that you probably want decent margin to well run the business.

by Ekaros

4/22/2026 at 10:52:21 AM

If you're referring to DC charging it's going to be pretty expensive. The construction and power electronics for a DC station is going to be in the millions.

For AC the rectifier is inside the car and the L2 chargers is just a fancy plug. Price should just be the base electricity cost.

by throwaway85825

4/22/2026 at 12:43:33 AM

would be nice if california had such discounted prices... :)

by m463

4/22/2026 at 1:00:46 AM

Jesus, I had no idea California was that bad. How is that even possible? Our rate is 15c/kwh.

by throwaway85825

4/22/2026 at 1:12:22 AM

> How is that even possible?

It's PG&E for the most part, and their huge liability payout for burning a city to the ground due to skipping maintenance on their distribution lines.

Some places in California have prices closer to the US average.

by rootusrootus

4/22/2026 at 2:46:14 AM

And not enough share on the people who built on a tinderbox which historically regularly (every few years) had fires go through.

by coryrc

4/22/2026 at 3:13:57 AM

I'm in CA and only charge at home, and pay 14c/kwh.

by bittercynic

4/22/2026 at 12:08:19 AM

Governments would do better to try to fix the bureaucracy around installing L2 chargers in shared living spaces. It's a problem they created and it should be on them to fix. But it guess that's harder than impossible mandates and high EV taxes.

by throwaway85825

4/21/2026 at 10:37:53 PM

You can't fill up your gas tank at home or at work, which is presumably where a significant portion of EV drivers charge their cars.

by tshaddox

4/21/2026 at 11:15:31 PM

There are many, many homes in the UK with no garaging, where cars are parked in non-reserved spaces on the street overnight.

by znkynz

4/21/2026 at 11:59:25 PM

If a significant percentage of cars start to become EVs then spaces where people regularly park overnight will get chargers because it will allow whoever is operating them to make a bit of money selling electricity. You don't have to be making a huge profit margin to make it worth your while to have people passively buying ~200kWh/month of electricity from you.

The same applies to workplaces, especially if solar causes electricity to cost less during daylight hours, and then it becomes convenient to get an EV if there is a charger where you park at night or where you park during the day.

by AnthonyMouse

4/22/2026 at 12:20:40 AM

that would depend on the infrastucture cost to install such charging and to maintain it? This is kerbside slow charging presumably overnight. Note that spaces in these residental areas are typically not even marked spaces; the worst outcome might be losing more footpath space to charging infra for road users.

by znkynz

4/22/2026 at 12:22:03 AM

> would depend on the infrastucture cost to install such charging and to maintain it?

The UK runs on 240V. A regular outlet would probably be fine.

by JumpCrisscross

4/21/2026 at 10:32:01 PM

In the UK? Nah.

Electricity is expensive in the UK (~25p/kWh) But not gas car expensive. It is £1.57/L (£5.94/gallon).

The EV infrastructure is also pretty dang far along, especially compared to the US. Remember that everything in the UK is a lot smaller and closer together than it is in the US. Further, the UK has a functional train system for long distance travel. You can go from the top of Dunnet Head to Lizard Point in a 15 hour drive.

People downvoting me, Look up chargers in plugshare to see just how many there are in the UK, it's a lot. And also correct my math if it's wrong. An 80kWh car costs £20 to fill up. A 55L car, which has about the same range, costs £85 to fill up.

by cogman10

4/21/2026 at 10:52:00 PM

Also if you are able to charge at home you can subscribe to a smart tariff that gives you electricity for 4p/kWh overnight. That’s £3.20 to fill an 80kWh battery that on a modern car will take you up to 320 miles.

by teamonkey

4/22/2026 at 12:14:33 AM

"Functional train system" is not how anyone would describe the UK. It's cheaper to fly than take the train.

Cost to fill up doesnt matter, only the cost per mile.

by throwaway85825

4/22/2026 at 12:39:09 AM

~1.5 billion train journeys a year is “functional”.

by btbuilder

4/22/2026 at 6:59:15 AM

That is because of the cost structure of trains vs planes. Trains require a huge amount of infrastructure, and have higher labour costs because they are slower (so the same journey means people work for longer).

by graemep

4/22/2026 at 11:11:01 AM

Trains are barely staffed, I can't believe it's a significant cost.

Staff per passenger hour has got to be far higher in the airline industry.

by eterm

4/22/2026 at 1:03:45 AM

£3.20/320 miles = 1p/mile

by Jblx2

4/21/2026 at 11:07:08 PM

The problem isn't infrastructure. Its the amount of Li in reserve.

by hunterpayne

4/22/2026 at 3:40:11 AM

that is absolutely not the problem. We have more than enough li, subject to cost of extraction. New chemistries dont even need it. you need to update your talking points.

by dalyons

4/22/2026 at 12:30:09 AM

There already are in production cars with Na-ion batteries.

by adrian_b

4/21/2026 at 11:22:10 PM

Another problem is that fuel taxes are a reasonably equitable means of paying for the roads, and EVs don't have that -- the closest would be vehicle miles * weight or some such.

by pstuart

4/22/2026 at 8:08:36 AM

Equivalents of fuel taxes for EVs have been announced recently - charging directly on a per mile basis.

> The rate of tax will be 3 pence per mile for fully electric cars; this is around half of the 6 pence per mile the average petrol or diesel driver pays in fuel duty.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/consultation-on-...

by blitzar

4/22/2026 at 12:59:12 AM

Fuel taxes don't seem to take into account the quartic scaling of damage by vehicle weight on pavement.

by DangitBobby

4/22/2026 at 1:26:02 AM

Well, if they did then EVs would pay more, since they are much heavier., because of, you know, the batteries.

by Detrytus

4/22/2026 at 2:02:25 AM

At least in the US, EVs are not heavier than the average driver's vehicle, though they are heavier than other vehicles in their class. And practically all consumer vehicles are nothing compared to semi trucks.

by DangitBobby

4/22/2026 at 5:18:36 AM

Bollocks - all generalizations are false.

My Model 3 (RWD SR+ 2023) is 1847kg unloaded weight, including driver.

by moepstar

4/22/2026 at 2:53:35 AM

Like for like, about 10% heavier. For now, at least. Few more years and they will be lighter on average.

by rootusrootus

4/21/2026 at 9:24:05 PM

And that will never change?

by dalyons

4/21/2026 at 9:13:38 PM

> The goal is to migrate everyone to EVs

This won't happen unless they outright ban non-EV vehicles which is unlikely considering how many people are still using old cars and cannot afford new cars, how many car enthusiasts are there, and not to mention potential lobbying from big oil.

by diath

4/21/2026 at 9:16:48 PM

So 20 years from now, all the old gas regular people cars have aged out. You’re left with what, 1 or 2% of enthusiasts cars? Seems like success to me, and fairly inevitable

by dalyons

4/21/2026 at 9:22:00 PM

There will undoubtedly be a death spiral of sorts when it comes to gas stations, refineries, etc. where they become fewer and farther between as less people buy fuel. And that makes it more expensive and inconvenient, so more people buy EVs, which in turn...

by Jblx2

4/21/2026 at 10:07:03 PM

Death spiral to gas stations? why? EV cars need to charge somewhere (and on long trip it can’t be at home) and people need to take a break and grab a coffee sometime too. They will change, sure, but certainly not die. Refineries will be fewer but we do need another products from them also.

by rebolek

4/21/2026 at 10:54:40 PM

Presumably a lot of people will charge at home which significantly cuts down the number of stations needed or the traffic to those stations.

For example, I have 2 gas stations within a mile of my home. They stay pretty busy because people around me constantly need to fill up. I, on the other hand, basically never visit either of those stations since I switched to an EV. I charge at home.

If everyone around me switched to EVs, those stations could not stay in business. There's a grocery store in the same area which makes anything those stations offer obsolete.

Those are the majority of gas stations that die with a mass switch over to EVs. There's a gas station for my hometown without an attached convenience store with 300 people there. There's no way that station stays in service if a significant portion of the community switches to EVs. It already struggles to be profitable as is (I know the owner).

by cogman10

4/22/2026 at 7:35:23 AM

That might be the case in places where most people live in single-family homes with dedicated garage.

Where I live (Spain) that's not the case at all - our towns are very dense. People in big cities tend to live mostly in flats (Europe's highest elevators-per-capita). Even people in the countryside, where it's more common to have a 1-family homes, often don't have a dedicated garage.

by otikik

4/21/2026 at 10:20:40 PM

Chargers can be anywhere. They are at grocery stores, parking lots, restaurants, I can see the need for a dedicated re fuel station to disappear when charging is ubiquitous.

by barbazoo

4/22/2026 at 6:52:08 AM

I've seen this on the Autobahns: what were just parking spots with unattended bathrooms are becoming little charging stations. Since I don't have an EV yet, I've not stopped at one to see how high-speed the chargers are, but at the very least, I assume that 10-15 minutes would be enough to get you somewhere more efficient/pleasant to wait for a full charge.

by MandieD

4/22/2026 at 2:29:27 AM

This is what people don’t get. Charging just means parking. The idea of dedicated charging stations where you stand around doing nothing, maybe buying a candy bar, really only make sense in the context of a fuel which is not literally already everywhere.

by WD-42

4/22/2026 at 2:32:16 AM

A place where you can take a break and grab a coffee is called a cafe, not a gas station.

Also, with Chinese manufacturers increasingly pushing out batteries capable of 1000+ km, you'll be able to charge fully at home for increasingly long road trips.

by decimalenough

4/21/2026 at 11:52:44 PM

I'm using the definitions:

- Gas Station = retail outlet that sells and dispenses gasoline and other petroleum-based fuel products

- Charging station = place to charge your EV

Could be an interesting long bet. Will the number of retail locations selling gasoline in the UK in the year 2045 be higher or lower than in 2026?

by Jblx2

4/22/2026 at 4:07:33 AM

In 2045 petrol stations will be well on the way the being about as rare as places selling paraffin or special racing car fuel today.

I don't see how this is an interesting bet. No new petrol car will have been sold for 10 years. Places selling fuel for large lorries etc will last a bit longer, but these are already a fraction of the total.

by Symbiote

4/21/2026 at 10:23:53 PM

Charging stations will only need to be on highways if cities are sensible and build slow charging infrastructure (aka normal wall sockets) in parking spaces. Urban gas stations will be a thing of the past.

by idontwantthis

4/22/2026 at 12:16:56 AM

Is AVgas in a death spiral? It's survived as a niche product for a long time.

by throwaway85825

4/22/2026 at 12:56:10 AM

Does anyone have reliable data on the number locations selling avgas in say, the U.S. compared to the number of locations selling automobile grade gasoline?

by Jblx2

4/22/2026 at 12:34:31 AM

To what extent is avgas effectively subsidized by the existence of gas cars?

by rootusrootus

4/21/2026 at 9:30:36 PM

This has already happened in Norway, where 96% of new cars sold are EVs. They didn’t ban combustion but they did support adoption with subsidies and other incentives

by medler

4/21/2026 at 9:16:47 PM

New EVs become used EVs that poorer people can afford.

Poor people don't buy new cars. New EVs being expensive is not a poor person problem.

by triceratops

4/21/2026 at 10:22:00 PM

The problem is a 50kWh battery in a car is worth more as a battery than a typical £1500 car.

The lowest end of the market won’t have electric cars unless the batteries are shagged (early Leafs)

And given how insanely cheap petrol is (15p a mile, so £450 for a low mileage runaround) the savings even if electric was free and they weren’t introducing a 3p/mile charge isn’t there.

by hdgvhicv

4/21/2026 at 11:03:56 PM

A £1500 car is £1500 because it's expected you'll need to replace the engine or transmission pretty soon. That can be up to a £4000 job (£2500 on the low end).

And, as it turns out, a brand new 50kWh battery costs around £4000 to manufacture. Used will be cheaper.

by cogman10

4/21/2026 at 11:30:04 PM

With most modern ICE cars everything but the transmission and the engine will fail before those two go out. Also: I don't think that's the usual case. Plenty of sub 2k cars that will happily keep driving for years (I've had 3 such cars). ~700 mark is where you start seeing 300k mile "finish-them-off"-type cars.

by quibono

4/22/2026 at 12:12:27 AM

Plenty of EVs will drive for years as well (so long as they have a good thermal system for the battery). So I'm not sure what point is being made.

Saying "It costs a lot of money to replace the battery" doesn't mean much as the battery, even if it has 70% of it's original capacity, is still perfectly functional. Very much the same as the engine which also costs a lot of money to replace.

by cogman10

4/22/2026 at 8:16:54 AM

I just thought the parent comment was unfair to ICE cars to make the EV proposition sound better. I'm a fan of EVs but they are still more expensive to buy. That said, very cheap ICE cars have a sweet spot where any damage to engine / transmission / clutch+flywheel often means replacing the entire car since the repair cost exceeds the market value of the car.

by quibono

4/22/2026 at 1:40:47 AM

I heard plenty of horror stories involving modern cars and their transmissions and engines.

by g8oz

4/22/2026 at 5:33:39 AM

That, for one - also: people constantly are overconfident in their ability to judge the status of really anything in a ICE car.

Newsflash: you simply cannot "readout" the status of an engine, transmission, ...

But you can/could/should for a battery.

Now, someone hammer that into peoples brains...

by moepstar

4/22/2026 at 10:29:49 AM

>A £1500 car is £1500 because it's expected you'll need to replace the engine or transmission pretty soon.

Really not true at all. Care to share your sources for this claim? Anecdotally, I've (plus friend and family) owned plenty of beater cars in that ballpark price, and none had failures needing to replace engine or transmission. Most of their faults came in the electronics (sensors, actuators, fuse box, wire harness) plus suspension, body rust, etc basically the same parts EVs also have.

Meanwhile, if you look up 'EV clinic' postings online, you'll see they find plenty of design failures with European and Korean EVs that are basically ticking timebombs(sometimes literally, hello Stellantis) where electric motors, inverters or battery packs are guarantee to fail in a short timeframe due to various design faults that were entirely preventable. Most common faults with poor EV designs I saw, seem to be the seal of the electric motor stator cooling which fails quickly leading coolant to flood the motor rotor killing it, needing a rebuild.

From what I gather from their analysis', the crux of this issue seems to be that some modern EVs, especially those less premium ones, are cost cut to the extreme in a race to the bottom to maintain shareholder value, both at manufacturing but also at design phase, leading to cut corners everywhere and such issues being a common occurrence and manifesting en-masse after their warranty runs out. From their analysis, IIRC Tesla's powertrains seem to be some of the most reliable and well designed, with the likes of Audi, VW, BMW, Mercedes being less so and Stellantis being trash tier.

Meanwhile, plenty of older ICEs are largely immune form such massive reliability faults, because they benefited from decades of industrial design and development experience done in a past era where race to the bottom cost cutting and planned obsolescence weren't yet a thing. So I wouldn't be surprised when an older 1500$ ICE car will last longer than a 1500$ EV.

by joe_mamba

4/21/2026 at 11:10:19 PM

Battery prices are still falling though, it's just demand is enormous. But I works fully expect China to start having "compatible replacement packs" being built once the volume is there to support it.

A logical future market is battery-refurbished EVs, just a question of where the crossover point is.

by XorNot

4/21/2026 at 11:01:16 PM

"Gas" prices are hiking up here - its about £1.90 per litre of diesel at the moment and petrol isn't much less.

In contrast, my cheaper 'leccy rate is now about 25% less at 5.2p per kWh than it was. Electricity is weird in the UK - its pinned to the price of gas and is currently (lol) rather expensive "on peak" at 27.87p per kWh and there is a day standing charge of 47.71p. That's from Octopus.

We also have a petrol car - an elderly Renault Clio. It does just run and run and is pretty economic for a pretty shagged out ICE.

My EV is cheaper to run, by far. However, its unlikely the battery will last 20 odd years. I haven't yet sat down and done some whole life costs for ICE vs EV yet.

My Saic MG4 can do 300+ miles on a 100% charge of its 78kWh battery. After two years, it still manages to exceed its WLTP (with care, when required) and I quite like the ridiculous 0-30 acceleration etc.

by gerdesj

4/22/2026 at 1:43:54 AM

It sounds like ICE buyers are subsidizing EV buyers. The math starts to get ugly as EVs become a larger percentage of the mix. ICEs will be priced out of the market, but there won't be anyone left to subsidize the EVs. In short, it sounds like buying a car is about to get a lot more expensive in the UK.

by laughing_man

4/22/2026 at 1:47:36 AM

> It sounds like ICE buyers are subsidizing EV buyers.

Given how long we have all been subsidizing ICE buyers, I think it is fair to spread the love around a little.

by rootusrootus

4/22/2026 at 7:00:31 AM

How are ICE buyers subsidised?

by graemep

4/22/2026 at 9:30:59 AM

Some countries literally subsidize gasoline, but even if your country does not it probably supports oil companies with tax breaks ('creating jobs'). There also are lots of untaxed externalities like global warming and exhaust pollution.

by bzzzt

4/22/2026 at 10:18:37 AM

In Germany for example(and other EU countries) you get money back from the government on your tax return for your daily commutes to work, if you live far away enough from work to qualify for commuter subsidies. Those subsidies you get no matter which transportation you use, bicycle, train, car, etc. And plenty of people commute by car when their work/home is far away and remote enough for cycle/public transportation to not be very useful or convenient.

Funny how their solution was to subsidize burning fossil fuels for car commutes to the office instead of, oh I don't know, MANDATING WFH!, given Germans are such staunched green environmentalists. Sure, let's turn off nuclear and ban plastic straws, but let's also subsidize the generation of diesel, brake pad and tire fine dust particles we breathe in, for commuting by car to work. We can't forget our car industry lobbyists.

by joe_mamba

4/22/2026 at 8:50:43 AM

Just introduce a charge per mile for EVs as the current government have already done

ICE cars are already hugely subsidised by ignoring the health issues they cause e.g. air pollution

What we really need in the UK is better mass transit systems in cities and their commuter zones to remove cars from the roads

by youngtaff

4/22/2026 at 2:59:26 AM

Oh no will people who don't use EVs subsidize infrastructure that they don't use?!? This sounds so familiar ...

by idiotsecant

4/22/2026 at 12:14:24 AM

The goal is that if you’re poor you can’t own a car.

by nslsm

4/21/2026 at 9:14:17 PM

That's interesting!

Do happen to have a link for how the "brand new EV on a lease recently for close to free after all the tax advantages" works in the UK?

by polyphemus_rm

4/21/2026 at 10:44:54 PM

As sibling comment posted, if you run a company you can write off the cost of the lease against corporation tax (25% tax saving), VAT (a further 10% saving if you have personal use, otherwise the full 20% if it's purely business), and you don't have to pay income tax on the money (albeit with a small benefit in kind payment).

If you're in the higher tax brackets this means a £200/month lease (say) ends up more like £90/month.

And because of the "new" £3kish subsidy the govt put in, the car finance companies seem to basically apply that as a big discount to the lease value (or it seems that way?). So you could get a brand new ~£30k EV with no upfront payment and a 2-3 year term for <£100/month including maintenance. Mine even came with a free car charger install at home.

by martinald

4/21/2026 at 9:45:00 PM

This only works for business leases. The employee sacrifices part of their salary in return for being provided a lease car, and both the employee and employer save tax on that money (up to 45% employee, ~15% employer).

For an ICE car the government claws this money back through hefty "Benefit In Kind" taxes placed on employer-provided vehicles, but as an incentive to drive adoption the rates on EVs are only 3% of the car's nominal purchase price (and you only actually pay up to 45% of that 3%).

It doesn't work out "free," but it's typically as cheap to lease a new EV through this scheme as it is to pay the depreciation on a used ICE.

by gnfargbl

4/21/2026 at 9:56:10 PM

Not sure what schemes are that good (would be interested to see). My company has one, but I ended up buying a used ICE because it worked out to cost about the same as leasing the equivalent EV model of that car. But that might have been the case for the specific car I was looking at (small Volvo SUV).

by pkaodev

4/21/2026 at 10:48:11 PM

check out https://www.leaseloco.com/ (there's other sites - I am assuming you are in the UK), they have a lot of deals on. If you want a really good deal then I don't think you want to look for a specific car, you want instead to see what deals are going on and choose between them. It _seems_ that from time to time the manufacturers do a bit of a firesale via leases.

by martinald

4/21/2026 at 9:05:09 PM

> And the presence of lower-cost alternatives can force non-Chinese brands to have to compete, rather than sitting on their laurels and gathering profits from expensive land yachts as the competition’s prices are inflated by tariffs. This is why the UK is getting Honda’s super cool Super-N, and the US isn’t.

The Honda Super-N EV will also be released in Australia, New Zealand, and other countries in Southeast Asia that were also British colonies: this decision has nothing to do with tariffs and everything to do with left-hand-drive vs. right-hand-drive.

by cjs_ac

4/22/2026 at 5:27:01 AM

Is Honda even bothering with a LHD version of the Suoer-N? As far as I can tell, they never bother with left side versions for Kei cars, and just limit them to right side markets. It’s a pity because I always wanted a Daihatsu Copen.

Well, you also see them in the Russian far east which gets a lot of used cars from Japan.

by seanmcdirmid

4/21/2026 at 10:24:36 PM

Is it really that hard to produce an opposite-handed version? That sounds more like a convenient excuse.

by lmm

4/22/2026 at 1:42:15 AM

Surprisingly. A lot of eg: aircon ducting, placement of stuff in the bonnet, dash configuration, wiring looms, is all -handed. Certainly doable but it’s a significant burden in both design effort and handling of parts/supply chain/inventory which may or may not justify it.

I briefly worked on doing LHD-to-RHD car conversions and the devil was definitely in the detail.

by NamTaf

4/21/2026 at 9:40:16 PM

No no, that's obviously wrong. It's because the sun rises in the East much earlier than the west, it only seems like like they're getting it earlier but it's only because of the way the planet works. And the sun never sets on the British empire is why they'll be getting it.

by the_sleaze_

4/21/2026 at 9:21:44 PM

Unlike the EU and the US, the UK doesn't have any major car companies anymore, so there's less of an incentive for them to apply tariffs on Chinese imports.

by nickserv

4/22/2026 at 7:02:25 AM

Not UK headquartered car companies, but there is a lot of car manufacturing in the UK. There is still an industry and jobs to preserve.

Also, take a look at the reports on the knock on effects on suppliers of the JLR hack.

by graemep

4/21/2026 at 9:25:34 PM

Same as Australia! The rate of proliferation of Chinese EVs (and gas) there is crazy to see. Free market baby!

(And before the inevitable “but Chinese subsidies” comment - update your talking points, subsidies no longer happens to any meaningful degree)

by dalyons

4/21/2026 at 10:19:10 PM

Same in NZ. Most popular car is Tesla + 15 different Chinese brands: https://evdb.nz/sales

Actually somewhat surprised we still even have legacy auto in top 10.

by dzhiurgis

4/21/2026 at 9:51:02 PM

Coming to Canada soon, though in a limited way:

https://nationalpost.com/news/massive-risk-chinese-evs-are-t...

Hopefully this means competition with the other EV manufacturers in Canada too.

by mig39

4/21/2026 at 9:59:33 PM

Unfortunately, because the number of imports is restricted the cars will likely be about as expensive as the competition. Chinese car companies have no strong incentive to undercut the market when they can take a fat margin and still sell out anyway.

by jml7c5

4/21/2026 at 9:56:21 PM

Fantastic. More competition and choice is always, always better for the consumer.

by testing22321

4/22/2026 at 2:34:50 AM

For anyone who hasn't been in a BYD, maybe because their government protects them from the open market, I'm sorry. It's over. We lost.

by aunty_helen

4/22/2026 at 6:59:37 AM

I've been in one and it's kinda meh? Its fine for what it is, but it's also filled with buggy bizarre issues on a level of VW ID.3 and doesn't match up with even something basic like latest Peugeot models.

by izacus

4/21/2026 at 10:01:57 PM

Did anyone think of the national security implications?

by amelius

4/22/2026 at 5:31:11 AM

Google/Waymo is importing a Chinese EV van into the USA and putting in its own electronics (they would have done that anyways, even if it wasn’t banned).

by seanmcdirmid

4/21/2026 at 11:19:51 PM

Certainly typed out on a Chinese made phone...

by cpursley

4/21/2026 at 11:26:14 PM

Whataboutism is not helpful.

by rationalist

4/21/2026 at 11:29:24 PM

There's nothing lazier than a whataboutism claim. If we're okay with Chinese made phones and other electronics, then let's give their cheap EVs a chance instead of worrying about a plethora of other hallucinated *isms. Anyways, if the Chinese want to hurt "US" they have plenty of other ways to go about it.

by cpursley

4/22/2026 at 12:27:53 AM

China is still banning Teslas from driving near government buildings and leaders' motorcades.

by uni_baconcat

4/22/2026 at 12:57:06 AM

China is smart and recognizes known threats as threats. In the US we give them quasi government positions where they inflicted massive damage causing millions of senseless deaths.

by shimman

4/22/2026 at 5:48:27 AM

Then why China approved Tesla to be the one and only wholly foreign-owned enterprise in vehicle manufacturing?

by uni_baconcat

4/21/2026 at 11:32:19 PM

> There's nothing lazier than a whataboutism claim.

You're right, I guess it is only just slightly more lazy than writing the whataboutism.

> if the Chinese want to hurt "US" they have plenty of other ways to go about it.

Another what aboutism...

Why should those other national governments move away from Microsoft, the U.S. has other ways to hurt those countries.

by rationalist

4/21/2026 at 11:34:10 PM

Then drive some Schitty Chevy, what do I care. The rest of us need reliable affordable transportation that won't boil the oceans over. The Chinese are willing to make it, that is a good thing (+ they haven't bombed anyone for quite some time to boot).

by cpursley

4/22/2026 at 2:42:05 AM

First it was whataboutisms, now it's trying to disparage me.

You're incorrectly assuming I don't want something reliable that's safe for the environment in an attempt to make me look bad because you're defaulting to attacking the person instead of the message.

by rationalist

4/22/2026 at 3:43:22 AM

Whataboutism is helpful?

by rationalist

4/22/2026 at 8:14:08 AM

Right, brand new. But I think if the UK government want everyone to be using EVs they really need to help out the used market by incentivising it in some way. I can't get much other than a Nissan leaf or Renault Zoe under £10k second hand, or some massive SUV which I don't want. So then I'll buy an ICE powered car instead...

by canbus

4/22/2026 at 2:25:47 AM

Just to give you an idea of what it costs to lease an EV in the UK. I use lingcars often for pricing and it is peanuts compared to the US.

https://www.lingscars.com/car-lease-deals/?fuelTypes=electri...

by ab_testing

4/22/2026 at 6:13:56 AM

Did lingscars get rid of their crazy website?

by Arbortheus

4/22/2026 at 8:54:09 AM

Yes… but (from memory) someone recreated it but can remember who

by youngtaff

4/22/2026 at 6:54:44 AM

Meanwhile in the EU, Chinese EVs face crippling tariffs that make them totally unaffordable.

by schnitzelstoat

4/22/2026 at 6:57:46 AM

Which EU countries? I see LOADS of them as taxis in Spain, for example

by gib444

4/22/2026 at 9:09:52 AM

I live in Spain. I think the ones you see here are likely hybrids as there is little/no EV infrastructure here and the hybrids are exempt from the tariffs (for now).

I can't remember if plug-in hybrids are exempt as well or only conventional hybrids.

by schnitzelstoat

4/21/2026 at 9:46:19 PM

Meanwhile Ford’s CEO said that if Chinese EVs are allowed into USA it will destroy the US automakers.

He is not even hiding the fact US automakers make a more expensive inferior product, but that US consumers should not be allowed have the superior one.

by testing22321

4/22/2026 at 12:20:14 AM

> Ford’s CEO said that if Chinese EVs are allowed into USA it will destroy the US automakers

I'm a strong advocate for giving Chinese EVs an import quota per manufacturer (with a 1.5mm-unit annual cap on total Chinese EV imports, downgradable to 1mm in a recession, representing about 10% of demand).

This gives American consumers–and designers–access to and a taste for what the competition is doing. But it preserves a moat for our own producers.

by JumpCrisscross

4/22/2026 at 2:53:15 AM

So no free market. Consumers have to subsidise crap companies.

by century19

4/22/2026 at 4:43:31 AM

Closer to free than now…so I support. I would prefer us automakers to start competing, but at this point I’ve given up on Them.

by mchusma

4/21/2026 at 10:23:50 PM

Well, the UK no longer has a domestic auto industry

by Ifkaluva

4/22/2026 at 8:56:33 AM

For anybody wondering about this the UK was making two million cars a year prior to Brexit. Last year it was about seven hundred thousand.

This was widely predicted by economists at the time, even by the few Brexit supporting economists.

by tonyedgecombe

4/21/2026 at 10:22:53 PM

Or at least to have the inferior product at a lower price.

by barbazoo

4/21/2026 at 10:50:03 PM

From what I've seen, I have no reason to expect that a cheap new Chinese EV sold in the U.S. would be meaningfully lower quality than a cheap new American car.

by tshaddox

4/22/2026 at 12:53:36 AM

Conversely, I have no reason to expect that a new Chinese EV sold in the US would be meaningfully cheaper than a new American car. At least not to the extent that China fans are dreaming about. That just is not how markets work.

by rootusrootus

4/22/2026 at 2:45:19 AM

Well, I suspect it is how a relatively free market would work.

by tshaddox

4/22/2026 at 4:10:54 AM

only one way to find out!

by dalyons

4/22/2026 at 1:10:23 AM

Ford’s CEO just said exactly that. Chinese cars are superior.

by testing22321

4/21/2026 at 11:23:51 PM

The big 3 absolutely have an inferior product. Just rode in a new gas Cherry Tiggo, I'd compare it to a Hyundai in terms of value/features, but even a bit better. No American car in that class comes even close. And I rode in one 10 years ago (Tiggo), they have come a very very long way.

by cpursley

4/21/2026 at 10:22:14 PM

Meanwhile China does hide the fact that they block superior competition of various foreign services via the Great Firewall

by drstewart

4/21/2026 at 11:10:12 PM

No, its because the Chinese subsidize the costs of those cars. Say I live in a country that will pay me $50k to build a car. It costs me say, $55K to build the car which I now sell for $60K. How you do you, in a country that pays you nothing to build cars, compete? This is an extreme example but its what is happening here (just will different and smaller numbers).

by hunterpayne

4/22/2026 at 12:37:29 AM

Every time when any competitive Chinese product is discussed, there are claims that it is competitive because it is subsidized.

Perhaps many of these claims are true, but at least in USA I also see huge amounts of subsidies for a lot of products, which are never compared with the Chinese subsidies.

I have never heard about any significant investment in some factory in the USA, which was not conditioned by very large reductions in taxes for that company. I do not see any difference between this and any subsidies that China might have.

Even if there might exist some kind of subsidizing system for electric vehicles in China, there is no doubt that there exists healthy competition between many Chinese companies, so they continuously innovate in EVs, while much less efforts in this direction can be seen in countries like USA, who claim to be scared by the Chinese "unfair" competition, but they seem to do very little or nothing to reduce their technical inferiority.

by adrian_b

4/22/2026 at 1:14:17 AM

Then the US should have done like the EU and apply anti-subsidy countermeasures -- and show before impartial WTO arbitrators the adequacy of the mesures.

But of course the US (or Canada) can't justify their 100% duty in those terms, so they don't even try.

by cataphract

4/22/2026 at 1:09:24 AM

GM and Chrysler were given 85 BILLION dollars that has never been repaid (never will) despite them paying their CEOs tens of millions per year, doing stock buy backs.

At least the Chinese got good cars from subsidizing their auto makers. Americans just got ripped off.

by testing22321

4/22/2026 at 4:12:30 AM

you need to update your talking points. China no longer subsidizes their cars produced today to any meaningful level.

by dalyons

4/21/2026 at 11:14:19 PM

> Consumers accept that they can pay more for a better product, so when you compare a Model 3 to an ICE BMW 3 series, and they’re similar in price, but the Model 3 offers better technology and drive characteristics, then on balance you’re getting a better deal with the Model 3.

statements like these are what turn some people away. cz they're not sincere.

you can easily compare the costs between models within a manufacturer - BMW ICE version vs Electric version

& on a head to head basis the old guard of auto makers e.g BMW, Mercedes make better vehicles than Tesla.

by dzonga

4/22/2026 at 12:40:39 AM

Tesla has been cutting features, too. You can't even get lane keeping anymore unless you pay $99/mo for FSD. Lane keeping is a basic feature even available on the base model of some economy cars, so for the supposedly 'premium' Tesla to drop it is an interesting choice.

by rootusrootus

4/21/2026 at 10:11:16 PM

How does the service and support part of this work in countries that have opened the door to Chinese EVs?

Do they operate like Tesla, or can indie garages handle repairs? How long are warranties?

by ilamont

4/22/2026 at 2:56:09 AM

I think mostly like Tesla in the EU. And warranties are long, like 10 years.

by century19

4/21/2026 at 9:20:06 PM

It's a shame that the UK isn't making their own EVs. It's a nation with a long tradition of manufacturing and a working class hungry for opportunities.

Both Labour and the Conservative parties seem to have resigned the nation to only being a financial hub.

by JPKab

4/21/2026 at 9:25:33 PM

Yeah they sold off pretty much their entire motor industry to the Germans (Mini, Bentley, ..), Chinese (Lotus) and Indians (Jaguar, Land Rover).

Typical case of short sighted capitalism.

by nickserv

4/21/2026 at 9:36:19 PM

I don't know, Stephen King couldn't write anything that matches the horror that was the management of UK car companies in the second half of the 20th century. British Leyland was a disaster from start to finish.

by Devasta

4/21/2026 at 11:03:12 PM

British cars in the 70s and 80s were shockingly bad. The Austin Metro and Allegro spring to mind.

by hermitcrab

4/21/2026 at 11:22:09 PM

What's funny is the new owners of MG make a pretty nice car (reliable and good looking): https://www.mgcyberster.co.uk

by cpursley

4/22/2026 at 2:04:17 AM

Besides that flagship vehicle, their other more standard cars are also pretty good. We just returned from Hong Kong, and the cars there were the same brands we saw in South America: Maxus et al. with some MGs. To be honest, they seemed very good. Unless something is secretly wrong with them regarding safety or reliability, the American and European car industries are in huge trouble.

A friend's dad just restored his ancient MG up here in California and it was funny to me to see that car and then go up to Hong Kong and see the modern incarnation of the same marque.

by arjie

4/22/2026 at 10:21:26 AM

Regarding the MGs, I believe the design is still done in the UK, which explains the style. And from my understanding a lot of of the really good looking Chinese cars are actually designed by European design shops (Italian, Swedish etc). It seems like a pretty good strategy actually to let the Chinese handle the manufacturing while the Europeans handle the design and performance.

by cpursley

4/22/2026 at 7:42:09 AM

That is a good looking car.

I knew someone who owned one of the original MGs. They used to drive around with a boot (trunk) full of tools, for when it inevitably broke down.

by hermitcrab

4/21/2026 at 9:51:37 PM

The UK are making an incredible amount in tariffs though

by tremarley

4/21/2026 at 9:22:50 PM

Soon UK will start taxing EVs by distance driven which might offset many EV advantages and make their disadvantages more pronounced.

by storus

4/22/2026 at 12:40:43 AM

Vehicles incur costs on the infrastructure as a function of their weight and usage. Petrol engines pay taxes at the pump. There is no tax hypothication in this, it goes to general revenue, but as EV rise, general tax revenue falls. The government has an obligation of sorts, to try and normalise tax collection to the model, and the model is now breaking so they need to implement something, doing nothing is not an option.

It MAY make their disadvantages more pronounced, it MAY off set the specific EV advantage of operational cost compared to ICE. But, ICE are not some ground zero untaxed state, and other tax choices will alter the relative preferences and advantages AT THE TIME.

You can't compare tax now to tax "then" and argue "then" was fairer, if the tax then was on Horses.

by ggm

4/22/2026 at 1:42:54 AM

In other words, EVs are used in a bait-and-switch scheme. First promising lower operating costs and negative externalities, then moving to new taxes possibly progressively increasing over time past the ICE taxation, and mandatory built-in surveillance and remote control.

by storus

4/22/2026 at 3:14:11 AM

Tell me more about this scheme. If there's someone who imagines they can tax EV's more than ICE vehicles what exactly is keeping them from just making the same increase (now) on ICE vehicles? If their secret goal is to raise transportation taxes how does switching their target from ICE vehicles to EV's make that any easier? And who exactly is doing the scheming? Is it construction firms who build roads (which is my neck of the woods is where most of the gax tax ends up going). Are they the ones hatching this scheme? You'd think they'd be lobbying harder for more trucks (heavily vehicles -> more wear on the roads ->profit!). But the more big trucks people seem mostly to be the opposite of the EV people. How confusing.

by ordersofmag

4/22/2026 at 3:04:01 AM

Thats a very specific take on things. Nobody promised negative externalities as I understand it, I believe it was pretty clear the component of government taxation in fuel was going to have to exist somehow in this.

Your "possibly increasing over time past the ICE indexation" is very cynical but I would be in the worlds of ad hom if I carried on. I don't think you are here argung in good faith, if thats your basis of reasoning.

The surveillance and remote control is frankly unrelated to ICE/EV because pretty much all high end ICE cars have a SIM these days.

An 11 month out account with low karma posting inflammatory responses, I would be tempted to say you're karma farming for some other outcome.

by ggm

4/22/2026 at 5:10:47 AM

"promising lower ... negative externalities..."

I drop my HN accounts when they reach certain karma threshold so that I am not surfing on my past successes but keep relevant in the present. I think you have the collector approach instead and use it as a weapon.

by storus

4/22/2026 at 5:22:11 AM

"use it as a weapon" I do indeed filter inputs which behave like noise, on other attributes which can indicate noise. You took an adversarial and argumentative approach to an otherwise rational discussion. Asserting what I consider unfounded, and unrelated consequences in a thread. I don't expect you to consider this a negative in your own assessment of your own behaviour, I do, and I think an implied lack of introspection on your own behaviour is telling. I also take on board that my behaviour reflects on what I see and respond to, and I understand (perhaps wrongly) that you impute this to a negative outcome. We differ on that, but I admit the possibility I'm wrong and you're right. Do you do me the same charity?

by ggm

4/22/2026 at 5:42:47 AM

Obviously; the whole point of discussing on HN is to get exposed to variety of opinions and attitudes regardless of whether I mesh with them well or not; expressing IMO founded concerns about new tech is one of the reasons for commenting.

by storus

4/22/2026 at 6:50:14 AM

Founded, not well-founded I think. I can't see the evidence of intent for what you allege. I can see stupid policy. I can see failure to deploy. But to suggest the intent is remote control or track and trace, demands a basis. Whats your reasoning beyond supposition?

Why don't they e.g. do this with the BMW ICE cars which carry a SIM card?

Remember its the deploying state we're talking about, not the specific risk of BYD being under control of the CCP. Your response implied all EV in the UK, are part of a plan to supervise/monitor use of EV cars, not the foreign actor risk as I understand it.

by ggm

4/22/2026 at 2:51:52 AM

Vehicles have road taxes. It’s a very clumbsy and annoying way the UK have planned this new tax. I hope other countries do not copy it.

by century19

4/22/2026 at 3:25:56 AM

A similar debate is happening in Australia, with the added complexities of federal vs state taxation models, and a nationally collected GST tax (VAT like) which is distributed to the states. Petrol (gas) taxation to consumers is a confusing topic with many people believing in lots of economies its a hypothicated tax, dedicated to roads and related costs. Well, it's not. It's not defined in legislation in the two economies I know of, which do this stuff. It may or may not meet road costs, or exceed road costs, or be less than road costs. In australia the only hypothicated tax, and there are disagreements about if it meets the bar or not, is the medicare levy. Everything else is consolidated revenue, no matter what you think they do with it.

by ggm

4/22/2026 at 2:00:47 AM

UK stats are bogus because one in five new cars there are paid for by the government under the Motability scheme. What it actually costs is hard to say because we don't know where they're measuring the price at. Motability could have an agreement, or they might be not counting the motability money spent and so on.

by renewiltord

4/22/2026 at 8:56:30 AM

Nope…

People who receive PIP can choose to use to lease a car from Motability which is an independent scheme

Those people could equally choose to have an ICE car

by youngtaff

4/22/2026 at 6:55:45 AM

Of course EVs are perhaps a net benefit to society (noise, pollution etc) but at least be honest about the cost trajectory.

Any article that doesn't mention the cost of motorway/dual carriage way electric charging is being disingenuous. PAYG is 75-90p/kWh currently. Tesla superchargers with a subscription 57p/kWh (you'll pay with time, due to being busy)

And do you think when EV ownership becomes more popular, the 4p/kWh home charging rate is going to stick around? That is an insane discount compared to daytime electricity.

The UK does not have a good, cheap solution plentiful cheap electric in the next decade or two, so any major increase in demand will mean even higher costs.

by gib444

4/22/2026 at 9:01:16 AM

> The UK does not have a good, cheap solution plentiful cheap electric in the next decade or two, so any major increase in demand will mean even higher costs.

Of course it does… the UK has tariffs that change by electricity demand and supply capacity

As we build out more renewables there will be more times of excess supply and hence cheaper electricity during these times

The buildout of battery storage and north-south inter-connectors will reduce this fluctuation but it’ll still be there

Over time the UK is going to switch it’s pattern of electricity consumption

by youngtaff

4/22/2026 at 12:44:41 AM

“Thanks to CCP money printing”

FIFY.

by eucryphia

4/22/2026 at 1:44:13 AM

America has printed plenty of money and don't have much to show for it

by g8oz

4/22/2026 at 1:53:13 AM

[dead]

by CharlesLau

4/22/2026 at 2:36:43 AM

[dead]

by yanhangyhy

4/21/2026 at 10:29:07 PM

The treatment of our betters regarding "nudged" electrification is borderline misanthropic.

For people with a garage or a driveway who can charge at home, EVs are overwhelmingly a better option. The problem is that large swathes of the population are outside of that and you're making their lives miserable by punishing ICE car ownership.

Meanwhile, adoption numbers are thrown about ignoring that for those in optimal conditions, adoption is already very high and cannot grow much more. While for those particularly misaligned with the strengths of EVs, it will often be so painful to own one they will resist with everything they have, and in many cases they will have to admit defeat and stop driving altogether. Which I guess the government will also be content with. But it will take some time.

*typo

by muyuu

4/22/2026 at 12:20:50 AM

I have an ICE and don't feel like I'm being punished? It's exactly the same as it's always been. If anything, we're still benefitting from ridiculous subsidies and driving an ICE should be a lot more expensive than it is.

The reason for the EV nudging is it's a chicken and egg problem. The government doesn't want to run a national charging network themselves for obvious reasons, but private investors don't want to build it out either until it can make money.

So they've been trying to fix it from both sides, both by incentivising EV ownership and encouraging EV charging infrastructure. They're also trying to make charging at home easier, even if you don't have a driveway, by installing those little channels you can run the cable through.

Yes, the government are putting their finger on the scale in favour of EVs. Nobody's pretending they aren't. If combustion taxes were as high as they need to be to account for the externalities, the economy would collapse, but we need to get off ICEs for myriad reasons. Seems like they're doing a pretty good job overall and the main problem is just our high electricity price.

by cameronh90

4/22/2026 at 12:59:51 AM

Far from ULEZ/CAZ areas I guess?

by muyuu

4/22/2026 at 8:14:06 AM

I live in inner London within the ULEZ zone. ULEZ is about local pollution not GHG and even then the newest cars it affected were 8 years old. My 15 year old car was fine. If anything it didn’t go far enough.

by cameronh90

4/22/2026 at 12:11:16 AM

It would be interesting to see how the market would shake out without all the nudging.

Petroleum companies also get a lot of subsidies—especially if you count implicit things like the cost of cleaning up all this carbon, and oil based geopolitical problems.

by bee_rider

4/21/2026 at 10:48:55 PM

> The problem is that large swathes of the population are outside of that and you're making their lives miserable by punishing ICE cars ownership.

It's obviously not ideal to have an EV if you can't regularly charge at home or at work, but "making their lives miserable" seems like a bit of a stretch. Instead of spending 5 minutes a week filling up at the gas station, you'll spent 30 minutes a week at an EV charging station.

by tshaddox

4/22/2026 at 12:49:13 AM

> you'll spent 30 minutes a week at an EV charging station.

And for a lot of people that can be 30 minutes at a grocery store where they were going to be for 30 minutes anyway. The nice thing about using the grid for fuel is that we have way more flexibility to refuel anywhere we want.

by rootusrootus

4/21/2026 at 10:59:30 PM

In my area, charging prices have been in the £0.70-£0.90 /KWh for a while. That makes ownership VERY expensive, especially for road trips. On top of that privilege, you have exorbitant insurance costs and terrible devaluation.

I rent EVs every couple of years, last time it was recently, just to see how things are evolving. Since anyway it's clear where policy is going. Whatever you think about said policy. Right now, they're lovely commute machines if you can charge at home.

by muyuu

4/21/2026 at 10:37:39 PM

Eh. A new EV can drive 400-700km on one charge. It takes 20-60 minutes to charge on public chargers depending on the charger. Except that charging on public charges is more expensive than charging at home I don't really see the practical issue. I know many people without charging options at home that will never go back to ICE.

by Thlom

4/22/2026 at 9:37:25 AM

> A new EV can drive 400-700km on one charge.

Only when it's one of the more expensive 'long range' models, weather is good and it doesn't exceed 100km/h.

by bzzzt

4/21/2026 at 10:48:28 PM

Except availability of chargers is spotty in most of the country, and charging prices so high that the running expenses are considerably higher. Not even considering insurance, which is also a killer. Been there.

Second hand EVs devaluation is not a product of anecdote. It reflects the current state of the market.

They are a different product and they're great at what they do. In fact, for those in the market for them, "nudging" (state coercion) is not necessary at all.

by muyuu

4/21/2026 at 11:01:04 PM

>Except availability of chargers is spotty in most of the country,

the UK is a small country. The average British driver drives 20-30km per day. One full EV charge almost gets you through England South to North. If you're putting a bunch of charging stations next to workplaces for people to charge once or twice per week that's going to cover most drivers.

by Barrin92

4/21/2026 at 11:10:46 PM

What do you suggest? That people spend most of their time on the road going to and from (very expensive) chargers across the country? That is such a prospect it makes our decrepit railways look good.

by muyuu

4/21/2026 at 10:27:30 PM

"thanks to Chinese competition". More like anti-competitive practices. They can force down Chinese wages to keep labor costs down. They can require companies involved in component technologies to share their IP in order to do business in China, then replicate it and subsidize the hell out of it to push them not just out of China, but out of business globally. Then subsidize the whole final vertically integrated manufacturing of the end product so it's all cheaper and harder to compete with.

Not very free market. It's basically military and intelligence budget combined. If you can hurt auto manufacturing, you further consolidate manufacturing inside China. Then if you can get people to pay for you to spy on them through their own cars, that's well spent intelligence budget. If you reduce the portion of global manufacturing outside of China, you reduce the amount of manufacturing that can quickly pivot to wartime production like we saw during World War 2.

I'm glad that we still have sane enough people in the US that we ban these obvious and transparently bad things. It wasn't that hard to see free trade died.

Hopefully people don't still think that China's green energy initiatives are about the climate. Whatever you think about those initiatives, don't let that blind you to the legitimate questions around China's motivations.

by CMay

4/22/2026 at 12:20:15 AM

Chinese car manufacturers have state-of-the-art automated factories... probably more advanced than EU manufacturers at this point.

by mytailorisrich

4/21/2026 at 11:56:34 PM

Honestly chinese manufacturing doesnt look like the market you describe. If anything it looks like from the outside that working conditions, manufacturing processes and technology are all escalating. EV's in particular, their EV industry used to make terrible cars that were basically just chewing up and spitting out low quality batteries with no range. Now they are making cars that I actually want to drive.

>Not very free market. It's basically military and intelligence budget combined. If you can hurt auto manufacturing, you further consolidate manufacturing inside China. Then if you can get people to pay for you to spy on them through their own cars, that's well spent intelligence budget. If you reduce the portion of global manufacturing outside of China, you reduce the amount of manufacturing that can quickly pivot to wartime production like we saw during World War 2.

The most dangerous nation on the planet, that threatens everyones national security is the USA. And thankfully we averted this risk by basically demolishing their car industry. Its honestly asias gift to the planet. China cant project power anywhere nearly as well as the US, so on balance, they are vastly the more preferable partner for this data.

>I'm glad that we still have sane enough people in the US that we ban these obvious and transparently bad things.

Lmao. Freedomburgerland summed up in one sentence.

>Hopefully people don't still think that China's green energy initiatives are about the climate.

Chinas green energy initiatives are both soft power, and sustainability for a massive population. They only care about the environment as far as it impacts on them economically.

>don't let that blind you to the legitimate questions around China's motivations.

China is the most stable superpower we have. We are right to be suspicious, but honestly the century of American humiliation is playing out pretty well for them without them having to do much of anything.

by protocolture

4/22/2026 at 1:11:37 AM

> EV's in particular, their EV industry used to make terrible cars that were basically just chewing up and spitting out low quality batteries with no range. Now they are making cars that I actually want to drive.

The cars used to be awful, but it's not surprising that they improved. I didn't say anything about the quality of the cars. If the CCP didn't have an iron grip on that country, maybe I would eventually think about them as favorably as Toyota or other Japanese brands. After all, Japan was an enemy and became a great ally with popular culture pervading the US.

> The most dangerous nation on the planet, that threatens everyones national security is the USA. And thankfully we averted this risk by basically demolishing their car industry. Its honestly asias gift to the planet. China cant project power anywhere nearly as well as the US, so on balance, they are vastly the more preferable partner for this data.

That doesn't accurately represent history and nobody serious will make the argument you're making. Culturally, the US is very isolationist. The reason we expand bases around the world is to reduce war (attacking a country with a US base on it is a bad idea, which is a deterrent) and to react quicker to war when it does happen (logistical efficiency). If nobody pushes back, it makes the next world war more likely to drag us in which costs lives.

If we're militarily involved somewhere, there's generally a good reason. It's like firefighting to prevent the whole thing from being engulfed and collapsing. War has a way of normalizing and spreading. Did we start World War 1? World War 2? Vietnam war? Korean war? What were we reacting to with Iraq, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Iran? Do you understand the historical events that resulted in those conflicts? Can you enumerate them?

Do you understand how similar today is to the beginnings of World War 2? Do you know what World War 2 was actually about? Communist Russia was using Marxist communist revolution and political parties in countries around the world to try to achieve global communism, and at the time Russia was doing a massive build out of military that had many countries worried. They had more military hardware than all countries combined including Germany.

Marxism was attacking religion and cultural heritage, which is what spurs these religious racist fascist backlashes. That sat on top of and amplified the industrial trade and power imbalances that remained after World War 1.

Russia's expansion was a combination of weaponized psychological Marxism (it evolved beyond just bottom-up revolution and into a top-down tool of the Russian state). It caused Japan, Germany and Italy to see it as an existential crisis which amplified their race for resource control to prepare to fight back against the eventual final war against Russia. Early CCP members were part of Russia's comintern.

Now we have China creating the most rapid military build-out in history while the CCP is realigning to hardcore Marxist-Leninist purity, on a purging rampage. Russia purged its military not long before invading Poland and Finland.

So, you'll have to excuse me if I don't find your argument convincing that China is the stable power, which is logically incorrect for far more geopolitical reasons than only this.

by CMay

4/22/2026 at 1:46:47 AM

> What were we reacting to with Iraq

"The primary rationale for the invasion centered around false claims that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and that Saddam Hussein was supporting al-Qaeda. The 9/11 Commission concluded in 2004 that there was no credible evidence linking Saddam to al-Qaeda, and no WMD stockpiles were found in Iraq."

by verteu

4/22/2026 at 5:22:46 AM

That's not what we were reacting to, that was the political rationale we used which is not the same thing.

by CMay

4/22/2026 at 1:49:49 AM

You said logical reasons but all you did was repeat standard anti marxist rhetoric a few times. Nations run on internal logic, like all things. Chinas demonstrated interests dont include me. the USA on the other hand, has a history of being unpredictable and invading without any real intent or purpose.

You appeal to history but just compare all the aggressive wars started by the USA vs China since WW2. Tell me who to be more scared of.

China hasn't even done much more than pay lip service to Marx since Deng anyway. They are just the most stable, reliable capitalist superpower right now.

by protocolture

4/22/2026 at 6:04:21 AM

You mean, since the US defended China from Japan? Since the US defended South Korea from North Korea and China? Since we made the decision to allow China into global trade to lift it out of poverty and potentially liberalize its government despite the risk communism posed?

Just because you were told that the US has no intent or purpose behind its actions, doesn't mean it's true. Do you somehow believe that every country has reasons for things, except for the most powerful country in history? If so, that is a very unreasonable belief.

Some people are taught to hate the US, some people are taught to love the US, others are taught to think for themselves.

Marxists were openly interested in global imperialism, it's just that it was psychological imperialism backed by military follow-up.

I would like to see China as neutral-good and look at some Chinese brands as if they were a Sony, LG, Samsung, IKEA, Spotify, TSMC, etc. Unfortunately that is not possible: https://www.csis.org/analysis/new-challenge-communist-corpor...

Vietnam is communist too and they aren't always treating their people the best either, but they haven't been showing a lot of obvious signs of trying to expand physically or ideologically.

> China hasn't even done much more than pay lip service to Marx since Deng anyway. They are just the most stable, reliable capitalist superpower right now.

Reformists have been getting purged. There was a time where we could imagine China giving up on Marxism, but that may be less likely now.

by CMay

4/22/2026 at 8:23:40 AM

> What were we reacting to with Iraq, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Iran? Do you understand the historical events that resulted in those conflicts? Can you enumerate them?

With Iran specifically, it was Epstein files and wish to look masculine. Operation masculine insecurity, if you want. With Venezuela, it was wish to get some extortion money for Trump and wish to look like cool manly man.

From those four, only Afghanistan we reaction to outside world rather then deranged internal politics that just must have war.

> Do you understand how similar today is to the beginnings of World War 2?

It was about gaining living space for Germans at the expense of other countries. It was also about gaining world domination by Germans, extermination of all Jews as fast as possible and eventual extermination of eastern Europeans in about two generation (the plan was to prevent their breeding).

by watwut

4/22/2026 at 1:15:45 AM

Just checked the ranking of EV patent Holders , did not find your country

by litbear2022