Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Automakers, Dependent on Mexico, Face a Rougher Road with Trump (reuters.com)

Posted by msmash on from the aftermath dept.

An anonymous reader shares a Reuters report: The election of Donald Trump as U.S. president puts new pressure on automakers and other manufacturers that have become dependent on open trade with Mexico, and raises the risk they will face higher costs. Automakers could also take a hit if instability in financial markets undercuts the confidence of consumers in the United States and other major markets at a time when growth in U.S. auto sales has stalled. Investors sold off U.S. stocks and the dollar in reaction to Trump's unexpected win. Shares in Japanese automakers, which also rely on Mexico as a production hub for the U.S. market, slid as well, underperforming the benchmark Nikkei index, which fell 5 In afternoon Tokyo trade, shares in Toyota Motor Corp were down 6.5 pct, Nissan Motor Co Ltd was down 6.0 pct, while Honda Motor Co fell 7.8 pct. U.S. manufacturing groups and companies on Wednesday said they want to work with the new administration.

106 comments

  1. It was bound to happen. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There will certainly be a rejigging of trade. It's not fair trade when it becomes a race to the bottom for workers.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    1. Re:It was bound to happen. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      which is why the REAL Issue is that Mexico has a pay of $3.00 PER DAY. What is needed to adjust NAFTA to make it fair and better for all, is to require Mexico to slowly bring their pay up to $3/hr or better.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:It was bound to happen. by CRCulver · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If companies are limited in what they can import from cheap-labour countries, then they can just bring the manufacturing here and automate the hell out of it so that labour costs are minimal. "Rejigging of trade" need not equate to a significantly higher standard of living for Americans in those particular state. I found this recent election interesting because of two things that were not talked about my the candidates. One was any kind of awareness that automation is changing . Both candidates uttered similar promises of job growth, and Trump offered bringing factories back as an employment panacea, as if this were 1986 and not 2016. Perhaps both candidates thought that offered a longterm vision would just cost them support when so many voters wanted comforting and nostalghia instead of a sober look at the future. (The other was religion. In previous elections, at least one if not both major-party candidates had to position themselves as men of faith, show they were well-known to a particular local congregation, etc. This time, neither Clinton nor Trump even bothered making a pretence of that. Just goes to show how religious observance in the US has dwindled, even if evangelicals are still a major voting bloc and, bizarrely, were often more pro-Trump than anti-Clinton.)

    3. Re:It was bound to happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      which is why the REAL Issue is that Mexico has a pay of $3.00 PER DAY. What is needed to adjust NAFTA to make it fair and better for all, is to require Mexico to slowly bring their pay up to $3/hr or better.

      I don't see that happening. And if it does, the manufacturing will probably come back here - and be done by robots. That's the only reason why it's still down there - Mexicans are still cheaper than automation (and of course the capital investment has to be recovered; which adds to the inertia of staying there.)

    4. Re:It was bound to happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I'm reading the summary as "American automakers pissed that Trump might make it harder to outsource jobs."

      I'm breaking out the world's smallest violin for them.

    5. Re:It was bound to happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And where does it stop? Do you think they're then going to bring jobs back to the US where they have to pay $30 an hour? No. They'll either move manufacturing to another country, or continue moving to more automated manufacturing.

      No matter what happens, either we're going to have to pay more for our goods and probably get nothing out of it (no new manufacturing jobs). Since wages have been stagnant in the US, the only way that we get an increased standard of living is by buying products that are produced in other countries for near-slave wages. If you do something to change that, you're still not going to get the jobs back, and everything will be more expensive, which will drive our standard of living down, not up.

    6. Re:It was bound to happen. by knightghost · · Score: 0

      Support of that automation requires more training, resulting in more pay. Automation is a great thing. Unfair free trade is a terrible thing. A great example of this was a small engineering group coming up with a moving ladder that tripled fruit picking. 1/3 as many people - and cheaper. Farmers shied away from it because it was simpler to hire illegal aliens.

      Trump got the religion vote because they speak the same language - figurative communication rather than literal. He also supports police and other things that make our homes safer. Clinton/Obama/DOJ incited race wars and gutted our police departments - the corresponding riots and lack of safety terrified us.

      Clinton supported antisocial groups such as Wall Street, BLM, and illegal aliens. That drove away mainstream America.

      Clinton's economic plan was to continue scraping the bottom of this recession. Trump's tax plan is a disaster but otherwise he has listed out many concrete steps to bring back and create jobs.

      The gender, race, and other bits were far worse on the Democrats side - misandry, giving money and safety away to those with a better tan, taking bribes, etc.

      There was a lot of bamboozling from both sides but it came down to who is going to support the majority of people. Same thing as Brexit.

      What scares me is that the Senate has 51 Republicans. The next 2 years comes down to Trump staying the maverick and protecting us from the Corporate Party (Clinton & GOP).

    7. Re:It was bound to happen. by mlw4428 · · Score: 1

      And those Mexican companies are going to laugh and say "nahhh". US Automakers will shutter their factory doors in the US, leave an office with a desk and a lamp, and move down to Mexico. Assets will be "transferred" and then sold, but they'll raise the price and claim it's due to government interference. Be ready to pay $40000 for that subcompact 4 cylinder.

    8. Re:It was bound to happen. by scamper_22 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Isn't it strange that America and most Western countries have stricter trade between their own states/provinces than they do with other countries?

      If you're in the US, ponder the interstate commerce clause. Ever wonder why there is a federal minimum wage? It's because when minimum wages were being introduced, it didn't take a PHd to understand that if Alabama had no minimum wage and New York had a $5 minimum wage that a lot of jobs would go to Alabama. New York workers would actually be prevented from competing to get those jobs.

      The result is the rather common sense interstate commerce clause. If goods/services are destined for trade they are subject to be regulated by the federal government... part of it is to ensure common labor, environment standards...

      The question every western country should ask is where did this logic go when it came to international free trade. This is not a left/right issue. It is an issue of the rule of law.

      There are various resolutions to the issue.
      1. Could mandate that any goods coming in from another country must obey the US federal minimum wage.
      2. Could not sign free trade deals with countries with significantly lower labor/environmental rules.
      3. Remove minimum wage regulations in the USA, giving American workers the ability to compete on a level playing field. ...

    9. Re:It was bound to happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      25% Tariff

    10. Re:It was bound to happen. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      which is why the REAL Issue is that Mexico has a pay of $3.00 PER DAY.

      Average manufacturing wages in Mexico are more than $2 per hour or about $17 / day. That is low compared to America, but the cost-of-living is low in Mexico, so money goes further. The maquiladora close to the US border usually pay even more.

      What is needed to adjust NAFTA to make it fair and better for all ...

      What is really needed is for people to spend a few seconds checking their facts before posting nonsense.

    11. Re:It was bound to happen. by Feral+Nerd · · Score: 1

      There will certainly be a rejigging of trade. It's not fair trade when it becomes a race to the bottom for workers.

      There is no concept of 'fair' in capitalism and a race to the bottom is nothing but capitalism.

    12. Re: It was bound to happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Naww I buy Toyota which is still built in the USA. Not too expensive and runs better too;)

      http://blogs.wsj.com/drivers-seat/2010/06/23/made-in-usa-a-toyota-is-most-american-car/

    13. Re:It was bound to happen. by Feral+Nerd · · Score: 2

      which is why the REAL Issue is that Mexico has a pay of $3.00 PER DAY. What is needed to adjust NAFTA to make it fair and better for all, is to require Mexico to slowly bring their pay up to $3/hr or better.

      I don't see that happening. And if it does, the manufacturing will probably come back here - and be done by robots. That's the only reason why it's still down there - Mexicans are still cheaper than automation (and of course the capital investment has to be recovered; which adds to the inertia of staying there.)

      That is true, Trump promises to bring back jobs for completely uneducated people but many of those jobs will be taken over by robots even within his first term of office. If Trump really wanted to improve the lives of these rust belters that elected him he'd be promising them education levels that allow them to function in a future economy instead of goading them with toll barriers and bigotry.

    14. Re: It was bound to happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      giving someone education doesn't mean there is a job waiting for them. education is not a job.

    15. Re: It was bound to happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. Who cares about shitty US vehicles anyway. No need to boycott the rust belt when the products are already garbage...

    16. Re:It was bound to happen. by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      As far as the religious portion goes, I think Pence covered that for Trump.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    17. Re:It was bound to happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Giving some one an education who isn't interested in one probably will fail.

    18. Re:It was bound to happen. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      That's some tasty Kool Aid there. If you think Trump is structurally different from Clinton - other than being less disciplined and with a rather muddied view of the world - you are in for some nasty surprises.

      As, I suspect, are we all.

      May you live in interesting times.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    19. Re: It was bound to happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you really think voters understand basic principles of economy? They are just pissed off and want to elect someone pissed off. Well, enjoy you collapse of the economy US. I'm sure you'll find a way to blame it on someone else. That's your real talent.

    20. Re:It was bound to happen. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      manufacturing is already moving back to the states in droves and it is being handle by manufacturing.
      Tesla will have a production line that is 100% robotics for the main assembly.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    21. Re:It was bound to happen. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      not really. $3 / hr for manufacturing still sucks and is very low. Again, if trump is going to deal with NAFTA, they need to argue with them to bring the MINIMUM WAGE up to $3 / hr. That will bring up the manufacturing pay as well.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    22. Re:It was bound to happen. by Howitzer86 · · Score: 1

      What's to stop us from limiting the use of robots and computers? I'm not arguing for anything, we already agree. I'm just wondering where this is going to go. How far are we willing to go to bring back 1950's American manufacturing and other unskilled jobs?

    23. Re:It was bound to happen. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Trump's move will disadvantage American automakers who move manufacturing to Mexico, vs Japanese automakers who do the same. Like if GM, after laying off 2000, build their plant in Mexico and try shipping those cars back to the US, they'll face a 35% tariff. But if Toyota shuts down a plant in Japan and builds one in Mexico, they won't get hit w/ this tax, since it ostensibly only impacts companies who screw US workers to the benefit of themselves - and Mexican workers. As a result, this tariff would make it cheaper for a Toyota truck to be imported than it would be for a Chevy. Only thing - it doesn't address how to make a Chevy made in Detroit more price competitive than a Camry made in Mexico.

    24. Re: It was bound to happen. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Not just that, giving someone an education will only increase either his debt, or the government's debt if they fund it. Also, there is a glut of educated people who can't find jobs and live in their parents' basements. This glut has resulted in even low skill or low wage jobs requiring degrees - just b'cos they CAN. It's true that a lot of the jobs can be taken over by robots, and honestly, that's the whole purpose of robots - to do repetitive mundane jobs that humans will very quickly get bored repeatedly doing. The alternate solution is to retrain workers for other roles in the organization, depending on their skills. On the job training, if you will

    25. Re: It was bound to happen. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Actually, some Japanese and European car companies have moved manufacturing to the US. But not to Detroit, but to southern states like AL, SC and TN. That way, they sidestep the UAW, while getting a friendly working environment in right to work states.

    26. Re:It was bound to happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the US doesn't exist in a vacuum? I mean, if you're goal is to cause the country to lose its worldwide economic position, then by all means...

    27. Re: It was bound to happen. by losfromla · · Score: 1

      Repeatable boring jobs like diagnosing illnesses, reading x-rays, analyzing documents for lawyers, composing music, writing software, etc? Yeah, I guess they can have those jobs, we'll keep the good paying ones like planting flowers and reading to kids (oh, they can read to kids too!? Snap!). Which jobs do you think humans are going to still be better than robots/software in the next 5 years? How about 10? 20? It won't be long till they come for your job pal.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    28. Re:It was bound to happen. by losfromla · · Score: 1

      Yes, we need a new movement of people against the advancement of technology. Lets call ourselves TNL (The New Luddites). I'm not being entirely sarcastic here, we either put strong brakes on technology or prepare for a violent revolt, or a guaranteed minimum income. Either one works though I prefer the latter, it sounds more productive, no pun intended.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    29. Re: It was bound to happen. by losfromla · · Score: 1

      You mean in states that are winning the race to the bottom both environmentally and in earning power for the working class, right?

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    30. Re:It was bound to happen. by losfromla · · Score: 1

      Blame the economists. They provided an underlying economic theory that made such policies seem the best (safest) option from a perspective of improving a country's economy. It is based on Ricardianism and a misunderstanding of some of its limitations, specifically that in a modern world, capital has no "home country" and no desire or need to invest at home. Couple that with our psychopathic corporations (by law and charter) and you have a recipe for the hollowing out of a country's working class and subsequently its economy.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    31. Re:It was bound to happen. by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      I don't see that happening. And if it does, the manufacturing will probably come back here - and be done by robots. That's the only reason why it's still down there - Mexicans are still cheaper than automation (and of course the capital investment has to be recovered; which adds to the inertia of staying there.)

      That is true, Trump promises to bring back jobs for completely uneducated people but many of those jobs will be taken over by robots even within his first term of office. If Trump really wanted to improve the lives of these rust belters that elected him he'd be promising them education levels that allow them to function in a future economy instead of goading them with toll barriers and bigotry.

      If I remember the stats I saw earlier today, most of Trumps supporters are in the 45+ bracket. I doubt offers of education for future economies will really interest them that much. Still, every president I've seen in the last 35+ years has promised more jobs and a better economy, and I've yet to see anything yet that makes me think there is a sure fire way to do that besides dumb luck. I certainly haven't seen anything to make me think that Trump knows anything more than all the past Presidents that have failed to do so by their own actions.

    32. Re:It was bound to happen. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      they need to argue with them to bring the MINIMUM WAGE up to $3 / hr.

      This is a dumb idea on many levels. First, America has no business micromanaging the Mexican economy. Second, it will force tens of millions of Mexican workers into the informal economy, where they will pay no taxes, have no pensions, no healthcare, no safety checks, etc. The informal economy is already a big problem in Mexico, and making it worse will lower labor standards, not improve them.

      Trump is going to get little support from Congress in his effort to "fix" NAFTA. Most Republicans are pro-business and pro-trade. Most Democrats do not want to be seen as supporting Trumps anti-Hispanic agenda. That leaves him few allies.

    33. Re:It was bound to happen. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      yeah, it is absolutely horrible bringing mexico's minimum wage up higher. And obviously, minimmum wages being raised will kill jobs. I mean thank god that we are still at .75 / hr because otherwise, we would have no jobs.

      In the mean time, you might want to take up some macro economic classes.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    34. Re:It was bound to happen. by Sky+Cry · · Score: 1

      4. Replace minimum wage with Universal Base Income, both ensuring quality of life for local workers and leveling the playing field regardless of laws of other countries.

    35. Re:It was bound to happen. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      And yet under the new deal, there was the concept of fair. Businesses were not allowed to grow so big as to become unfair competition by cornering the market and reaping robber-baron profits while paying ever-dwindling wages because there is no competition for labour in a monopoly environment.

      This is a long read, but it lays out the blame for the current situation, and how post-Watergate democrats killed the New Deal and sucked the cock of big business and big finance.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    36. Re:It was bound to happen. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Wrong. Imports from Japan would also have a tariff. Trump said that ALL trade deals are under the microscope. Ditto for Japanese imports from Mexico. BTW - Japanese and German manufacturers can just expand their current American assembly plants. Assemble enough cars in the US for export, get to skip import duties on the same value of vehicles from the other country. It's how things worked before the so-called free trade agreements. Don't you want that?

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    37. Re:It was bound to happen. by michael_wojcik · · Score: 1

      Just goes to show how religious observance in the US has dwindled, even if evangelicals are still a major voting bloc and, bizarrely, were often more pro-Trump than anti-Clinton.

      Jason Levine has already noted that Mike "Let's Return to the Middle Ages!" Pence was the Christian-fundamentalist-bait in this election.

      Beyond that, many of the Christian-Fundies in the US are either single-issue voters or strongly influenced by a few issues. Among the big ones are abortion and LGBT rights. Trump claimed to be against both (who knows what he really believes; he's a con man with no clear ideological position beyond "more for me!").

    38. Re:It was bound to happen. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      I support Trump, but my reading of his speeches - which I followed - was that if any company shut down its US plant, built another in Mexico and then tried exporting cars made at that plant back to the US, that's when the tariffs kick in. He said nothing about blanket tariffs on all foreign goods, which was once championed by unions, as well as protectionists. Maybe he will, but that's not what I took from his speeches

    39. Re:It was bound to happen. by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Robots are managing fastfood outlets --bye bye Burger King kitchen help.

      Ditto for the car industry.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    40. Re:It was bound to happen. by gwolf · · Score: 1

      which is why the REAL Issue is that Mexico has a pay of $3.00 PER DAY.

      Average manufacturing wages in Mexico are more than $2 per hour or about $17 / day. That is low compared to America, but the cost-of-living is low in Mexico, so money goes further. The maquiladora close to the US border usually pay even more.

      Nope. No, not by a long shot.

      I am a Mexican. I work as an academician at a university, and have a quite comfortable lifestyle. I earn about US$20 a day.

      Many of my students work part-time to get through life, although the university itself is free. They usually earn between a quarter than what I do.

      Basic income (~US$3.5 a day) is not uncommon. Often, those jobs allow for extra income (say, tipping), but that's far from the norm.

    41. Re: It was bound to happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah that is the thing for sure, if you can't use cheap labour outside the country anymore.. the next best thing isn't too hire workers in the USA, it is automation. Trump won't bring jobs back, he'll just force manufacturing to pay no one.

    42. Re:It was bound to happen. by stdarg · · Score: 1

      First, America has no business micromanaging the Mexican economy.

      That's hardly micromanaging, come on.

      Trump is going to get little support from Congress in his effort to "fix" NAFTA.

      Considering that the only Republican senators who lost their seats were ones who distanced themselves from Trump, I wouldn't necessarily agree with that. They know something has changed in politics, at least for the time being.

      Not only that, but the Republicans reeeeeeally want to get rid of Obamacare, and now they have the chance to do that. Will they resist much if Trump says "I'll sign that repeal bill right after you sign this NAFTA bill?"

    43. Re:It was bound to happen. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      So you missed all those times that he said he wanted to renegotiate NAFTA and all the other trade deals? Incredible. It was a YUGE part of his campaign. It was most definitely not limited just to companies that moved production from the US, but all external production. It is meant to encourage existing manufacturers to stay, and foreign manufacturers to expand to the US. It's a damn smart move, and as someone who campaigned against free trade in Ottawa (but couldn't find a single politician who actually read the agreement, but were voting for it because "it's free trade", when it was nothing of the sort) I'm all for ending the global race to the bottom. Don't have the same environmental standards, tariff. Don't respect human rights? Tariff (I'm looking at YOU Saudi Arabia - how's a $50 a barrel tax on oil sound?). I have no problem with that - not hitting them with tariffs is subsidizing their behaviour. F*ck that.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    44. Re:It was bound to happen. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      and yet, Trump is already backing off on his taking out ACA. In fact, lots of promises and statements that he made, he is backing off from.
      And so many thought he was not a good GOP. I think that he is shaping to be the PERFECT GOP.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    45. Re:It was bound to happen. by stdarg · · Score: 1

      Are you suggesting that "repeal and replace" means Trump is obligated to come up with something that has absolutely nothing in common with Obamacare, or that is the exact opposite of Obamacare somehow? To me that seems silly. Obviously if there are things about Obamacare he likes, then those provisions will remain afterwards. And some stuff like making family plans last until age 26 are popular.

  2. No, not all automakers will take that hit by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Tesla is made in America and while they import parts, they are in the process of bringing that all in-house, or least their manufacturing to California.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet, the fact of Trump's repudiation of climate change science and general anti alternative energy stance has pushed Tesla's stock down quite violently post election. I guess the question is where Trump and the Republicans really will draw these lines on trade and energy. Alot up in the air right now.

    2. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      they are in the process of bringing that all in-house, or least their manufacturing to California.

      They are? If that is true, it's going to make it very hard for them to make money at the current prices of their cars.

      The auto industry uses assemblies - just about everyone does - except for those very very high end super cars. It's much more efficient and cheaper to buy from a company that specializes in say suspensions than make your own. Even companies with very large volumes do this. Bosch, VDO, Delco are just some of the very large companies that do this. And some car companies are pretty much just body makers: everything under the hood and body is made by others.

      And if Trump starts mucking with international trade, we will be headed for some hard times. That last time international trade was screwed with via tariffs, we had something called the Great Depression.

    3. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by Drethon · · Score: 1

      And yet, the fact of Trump's repudiation of climate change science and general anti alternative energy stance has pushed Tesla's stock down quite violently post election. I guess the question is where Trump and the Republicans really will draw these lines on trade and energy. Alot up in the air right now.

      You mean that 10 point drop today vs the 70 point drop over the previous 7 months or the 35 point jump over the past 9? I think Trump is the least of their worries at the moment, can't say if that will remain true over the long run yet.

    4. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

      Right on. And don't forget Elio motors, also to be made in the USA.

      I don't have the money to buy a Tesla but I will sure be snapping up an Elio when it goes on sale to the general public.

    5. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 2

      The question is whether it's more important ot support companies that do business entirely in America, or to support someone's energy agenda and associated kickbacks. I'm fine if Tesla starts looking like a value compared to its competitors, but I have this funny feeling it's not going to go down that way.

    6. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by Drethon · · Score: 1

      http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/2...

      I don't know if their profit includes subsidies, I'm assuming not. I don't mind seeing government assistance for something as large as a new US auto manufacture, particularly one investing in new technologies. Though I'd like to see that money specifically listed as research or startup investments, preferably to be paid back eventually or have Tesla share their research results with other US companies, rather than through subsidies.

    7. Re: No, not all automakers will take that hit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Soros has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in Musk's ventures. I would love for Trump and Musk to be on the same side, but unfortunately that is impossible as long as Musk is in Soros's pocket.

    8. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have those things been able to get an exception from helmets laws? They are classified as motorcycles because they have less than 4 wheels.

    9. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      What if the $7,500 Federal tax credit for EVs is dropped? That's going to hurt Tesla, especially with Model 3 sales.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    10. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by knightghost · · Score: 1

      Expensive Green = Brown. It just shifts the extra money to pollute a different place in the supply chain.

      Tesla is not Environmental. If they were then they'd sell electric commuter cars for $10k. Cost is the greatest indicator of environmental impact - and when it isn't, the rules need adjusted so that it is.

    11. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by Drethon · · Score: 1

      Picasso must have been an evil genius then to pack that much environmental impact on a canvas.

    12. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

      Have those things been able to get an exception from helmets laws? They are classified as motorcycles because they have less than 4 wheels.

      They're working on it, state-by-state. Helmet laws vary from state to state and they have received exemption in some of them.

    13. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It includes some ... let's be charitable and say avant garde ... approaches to the manner in which they account for the timing of credits.

      Basically they reported in the current period a whole lot of credits that don't actually relate to the current period. Whether that's 'avant garde' or 'cooking the books' is a separate discussion.

    14. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ummm Tesla lost 750 million dollars in the 3 previous quarters, with that +80 million they are only 400 million short of making a profit this year. That is with a estimated $2.4 Billion in subsidies last year, and likely even more this year.

    15. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      LOL.
      Why would anybody sell a mercedes level car at 10K?
      You would have to be an IDIOT to do that.
      As it is, the Model S is destroying all of its REAL competitors in terms of sales, and with more than 400,000 model 3 pre-sold, it is obvious that tesla is going to JUST FINE.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    16. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      ROFL. Uh, yeah. After waiting more than 10 years for them to come out with their car, I think that you can safely assume that it will NOT be happening.
      As to Tesla, if you can afford a 35K BMW 300 series, then you can afford a much better car with Tesla Model 3.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    17. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by Drethon · · Score: 1

      ummm Tesla lost 750 million dollars in the 3 previous quarters, with that +80 million they are only 400 million short of making a profit this year. That is with a estimated $2.4 Billion in subsidies last year, and likely even more this year.

      Takes money to make money. Rounding for ease of calculation, 100 million profit a quarter makes 400 mill a year. 2.4 billion could be paid back in 6 years, with no profit growth.

    18. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by Drethon · · Score: 1

      It includes some ... let's be charitable and say avant garde ... approaches to the manner in which they account for the timing of credits.

      Basically they reported in the current period a whole lot of credits that don't actually relate to the current period. Whether that's 'avant garde' or 'cooking the books' is a separate discussion.

      Yeah, this is where I'm afraid the actual profits are questionable. I'm just hoping they are on the actual upswing but time will tell.

    19. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      First off, they have made profits 2x. As musk has shown, they can make easily just be slowing down investments.
      And What gov subsidies? The 7500 tax break for the car buyers? You really think that is making ppl buy MS and MX? Absolutely not. The reason that Tesla model S outsells ALL OF THEIR COMPETITORS is that they have a SUPERIOR product. In addition, it is obvious that Model X will outsell its competitors as they increase production. Basically, Tesla is held back by their production capability.

      Lastly, the companies that are dependant on gov subsidies would be all of others. Germany is now funding VW, BMW, MB, Audi, Porsche, etc to move to EVs.
      America gave LOADS of money (in both subsidies and massive loans) to GM, Ford, Chrysler, and even a number of none American car makers to re-tool into hybrids. Total joke. In less than 1 year, Tesla will still be unable to meet the demand of .5-1M cars while nearly all other car makers are going to be plummeting in sales.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    20. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      $7500 does not impact a car that runs from 60-140K, so once the subsidy ends there, it is over. In addition, that same subsidy is available to Tesla competitors, but, they have not made the sales. Basically, Model S outsells its competitors and both have the same subsidies.

      As such, I think that when M3 hits, and is a superior car to its competitors BMW 300 series, etc and at the same price point (35K), then it is obvious that Tesla will be selling as many as they can produce.

      BTW, if the GOP kills the 7500, then you can bet on it that many others WILL be impacted on sales. The leaf, volt, bolt, i3, etc are $20-25K cars that sell for 35+K and the 7500 DOES make a HUGE impact on their sales. But even with that, they still can not compete against Tesla.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    21. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      First, ppl buying 60-140K cars are not really impacted by 7500 tax break.
      Secondly, even with that same subsidy offered to the competitor cars, Tesla STILL outsells them all.
      Third, the 7500 for Tesla will run out by sept 2017 or in less than 9 months. Ppl buying the M3, KNOW this and yet, they have pre-sold 400,000 cars. The most in history EVER.
      Fourth, while 7500 DOES impact sales of $20-25K cars that sell for 35K, it does not impact a 35-40K car that sells for 35K.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    22. Re: No, not all automakers will take that hit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the 7500 subsidy isn't a factor for buyers let's just end it.

    23. Re: No, not all automakers will take that hit by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      well, go ahead. Of course, Tesla's runs out in less than 9 months. After that, it is just GM, Ford, Chrysler, Hyundai, Jaguar, Toyota, Honda, Lexus, VW, etc. etc. that have it. And with it gone, and tesla having gotten their 250,000 EV or hybrids done, they will be happy to see the others loose it.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    24. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      As such, I think that when M3 hits, and is a superior car to its competitors BMW 300 series, etc

      No. You cannot call the Model 3 the M3, especially in the same breath as "BMW 300 series" which by the way is never, ever called that. It's called the 3-series.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    25. Re:No, not all automakers will take that hit by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      I can and those of us either owning or buying Tesla call it such. So there.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  3. Re:Higher minimum wage or more jobs? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    ROFL.
    and yet, it is the red states where you see the most slackers and highest level of gov spending.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  4. Spoken like a true businessman by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...at a time when growth in U.S. auto sales has stalled.

    Still believing in perpetual, ever-increasing, never-ending growth? Might as well believe in Santa and the tooth fairy. The laws of physics and common sense say that perpetual growth is not possible.

    1. Re:Spoken like a true businessman by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      As long as the population is increasing, if auto sales aren't going up at least proportionately then there are fewer new cars per person, which on the surface implies that on average people are getting poorer. Fortunately, cars last longer now. (Hey! that's not a race to the bottom.)

      This point applies to the economy in general. Since a static condition has zero width, for practical purposes if things aren't getting better, then they're getting worse. All you critics of unending growth want humanity to become more miserable. We are orders of magnitude below the point where worldwide, nobody could reasonably want more.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  5. The automakers earned this by Tailhook · · Score: 1

    How tone deaf must you be to announce that you're wiping out all small car production in the US and moving it all to Mexico at the height of a campaign that features the most vociferous anti-NAFTA candidate ever? Trump's Michigan win is smaller than the number of employed US citizens Ford is about to discard with that move. If you can think of a more effective way to get the attention of a "Reagan Democrat" please let us know, because I sure can't.

    --
    Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
  6. Sold off stocks... by Drethon · · Score: 1

    "Investors sold off U.S. stocks and the dollar in reaction to Trump's unexpected win."

    I'm assuming this must be foreign investors since the DJIA is up over 1% as of the time of this post.

    1. Re:Sold off stocks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Press still not learning lesson from last night, continuing with their campaign against Trump (and reality).

    2. Re:Sold off stocks... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Last night though Dow was way down in after hours trading. Always happens after some sort of unexpected event though. If it's gone up since then that's good.

  7. Tumpy by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

    There are more Trump branded posts on the front page of /. than there are Trump branded buildings...

    Trump dot

    --
    My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    1. Re:Tumpy by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Not just that, there was no reason for the 'Donald Trump Wins US Presidency' to be moved back to the top - that story already has 2k+ posts, and one has to click '500 more comments' to load everything, and a really short scrollbar. They could have posted the update as a new and different story - it too would have raked up 1k posts by now

  8. Good fences make good neighbors by Max_W · · Score: 1

    People were building walls (and bridges) for millenniums. They were not stupid, - our mere existence proves it.

    1. Re:Good fences make good neighbors by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Yes but the issue is more complicated than the simplistic politics. We have lots of undocumented workers showing up each day; but we ALSO have lots of undocumented workers leaving the US each day voluntarily. The net increase is much much smaller than what many politicians are implying. There have been periods of time when more undocumented workers left the US than arrived and this happened without extra enforcement. Many of these workers are taking seasonal and temp jobs and then going back to their real homes.

      An oddity that happens sometimes is that when border enforcement is cracked down then it becomes much more risky to go back home to Mexico and Central America and come back later. So more workers then stay in America when they normally would have migrated back home. Which means that a crackdown can cause the number of undocumented workers in the US to go up.

      When you get down to it, 90%+ of the undocumented workers are indeed doing work that is very difficult to get domestic workers to do. Many industries rely on this migrant labor to keep costs down, and many of these industries are in very solid conservative districts. These aren't liberals sneaking in Mexicans, these are conservatives making use of cheap labor. Yes, this can mean wages can below minimum wage but it's nice to see conservatives defending the minimum wage now and then. The other thing you see a lot is people seeing a dark skinned hispanic worker and assuming this person must be illegal; but this is not necessarily true, it is not so easy to tell the difference. Many hispanics come from families that settled in the southwest US before there were any gringos there.

  9. Bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And this is bad how? Any country that allows businesses to leave and set up shop in the country next door for peanuts and STILL allows it to earn money in that same country deserves whatever it gets.

    Yes, i know, there isnt a single country on earth that doesnt do this. Still, when you fuck yourself in the ass, it should hurt no?

    1. Re:Bad? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      And by what right do YOU claim the ability to stop them?

      Foreign manufacturers have been selling better-value cars in the United States for decades. This left US automakers with only two choices: do manufacturing where costs are lower or be driven out of business.

      The primary reason US costs are too high is unions, although government meddling also hurts.

      If you want to keep auto manufacturing in the US, there are only 3 ways to do it.

      • Massive subsidies (Hurts all taxpayers and the economy generally)
      • High trade barriers (Hurts all consumers and the economy generally)
      • End the government protection of unions. (Hurts union members by ending undeserved high pay, helps the economy generally)

      Just becuase "there isnt a single country on earth that doesnt do this." doesn't make it right.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    2. Re:Bad? by Tailhook · · Score: 1

      And by what right do YOU claim the ability to stop them?

      Trump hasn't proposed stopping them. He has said over and over, hundreds of times, in public, they're free to go where they wish and pay the tariff we impose when they import.

      Prior to 1900 the US government earned most of it's revenue from tariffs. One would think that leftists would have some interest in tariffs as a source of revenue given the hundreds of billions of dollars they might use to buy more votes but, strangely, taxing imports is always off limits. I've always suspected this is because ruining "deplorable" incomes is more important to them.

      Anyhow, there are well run and prosperous western nations that limit and restrain trade in all sorts of ways. The poster child of this is Germany, the nation propping up all the PIIGS with its productivity, where employers still train employees and where the industrial base and working class are not being deliberately ruined. Companies, workers and the government can all independently file suit against importers for unfair trade, so the working class and their employers in Germany aren't left to compete with disposable Asians and their unregulated mercantilist employers. Alsa, with prosperity come SJWs and so Germany has self-inflicted an immigrant problem, but their trade policy is proven sound.

      If you want to keep auto manufacturing in the US, there are only 3 ways to do it.

      Reagan addressed this is the 80's. He, the UAW and Democrats in congress created domestic content laws that require some fraction of value add be domestic labor to avoid tariffs. The result is that there are many foreign auto manufacturers operating plants and employing 'muricans in the US. Reagan also negotiated limits to Japanese motorcycle imports and is credited with saving some domestic manufacturers that are still around today. Not credited by most of our bought-and-paid-for politicians, mind you, just those of us that understand trade history.

      Andrew Grove wrote about the importance of the industrial base to the health of an advanced economy. The scum and villainy that actually operate that industry are also really important — as you've just learned in this election — so you might want to figure out how to conduct yourselves without shitting on them at every single opportunity. Either that or take away their franchise so they can't vote.

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
  10. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good. Trump's mandate is to stop their treasonous race to the bottom. Bring it back home and raise prices if you need to, but try to keep the bitching down when you get buried by the competition.

    1. Re: Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That made no sense.

    2. Re: Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump won, get over it.

      Trump 2020!

  11. Oh, "That's it": Hide the truth SOROS, lol... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: To the cronies & sycophants of "God SOROS" - I won't LET you https://tech.slashdot.org/comm...

    LMAO - it's ALL YOU KNOW HOW TO DO (but folks see it anyways, lol)

    APK

    P.S.=> Trying to HIDE the fact SOROS said literally he was GOD & that he wants to DESTROY THE USA as well as leading HIS OWN JEW PEOPLE INTO HITLER'S CAMPS? When he'd DO THAT TO HIS OWN, what makes you THINK he wasn't going to do that to US thru his puppet Hillary? Please... lol! apk

  12. e mail marketing by Disparo+Digital · · Score: 0

    e mail marketing Turbine suas vendas com e-mail marketing e potencialize suas oportunidades de negócio!

  13. e mail marketing by Disparo+Digital · · Score: 0

    e mail marketing Turbine suas vendas com e-mail marketing e potencialize suas oportunidades de negócio!

  14. It's their own fault by wellwhatever · · Score: 1

    If they had not played profit for a zero sum game with the rest of the people in the world, including Americans, then Trump would not be President and they would not be in the position they're in.

    There are lots of ways to divide up the booty an economic success which reward owners over an above workers but don't involve larceny and race to the bottom predation.

    There are lots of ways to outsource prosperity to developing nations which don't destabilize the outsourcing nation yet have the long term effect of bringing the standard of living of that developing nation up.

    They choose none of them.

  15. oh noes by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    perhaps they shouldn't have shut down all their USA based manufacturing plants and fired all the workers?

  16. "... As SOROS simmers/stews in RaGe" lol! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: LMAO @ U Soros (puppetmaster behind Clinton w/ banker SLIME! Mainstream media mass mind manipulation games are OVER (& the results prove it...)).

    * All those misanthropic ass-kissers of theirs profiting? Are LIVING IN FEAR, lol...

    (Rightfully so & about time! Folks have had QUITE ENOUGH of easily seen thru "mass-media manipulation" games... too bad those morons will have to realize it doesn't WORK anymore (due to the internet itself - they can't OWN & CONTROL every single outlet of information...)).

    President WHO, losers?

    (All these "this will be 'bad' under trump" stories on /. especially from LOSER TECHNICA? Please... lol, give up, losers!)

    ROTFLMAO - "SOROS CRONY DRIVEN 'DAMAGE CONTROL'" WAS ATTEMPTED TWICE TRYING TO DOWNMOD "HIDE" THE TRUTH OF THIS POST LAST TIME I POSTED IT https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... & https://tech.slashdot.org/comm...

    Keep blowing those downmod points - you'll run out soon, lol... you can't win an election & YOU CANNOT WIN vs. ME.

    (How fucking predictable! I am glad we don't have mindless dolts like those downmodding me running this nation INTO THE GROUND anymore, lol... they're too easy to overcome as I just have, easily!)

    APK

    P.S.=> By the way? Yes, I am LAUGHING @ the "cronies & sychophants" of "SOROS" the wannabe God also (who LITERALLY said he was God himself & that he wants to destroy the USA (fucker even LED HIS OWN JEW PEOPLE INTO HITLER'S CAMP'S FOR PETE'S SAKE so what EXACTLY makes you *think* he wouldn't do that to the USA which he IS out to do, admittedly? (talk turncoat traitor))... apk

  17. Re:Higher minimum wage or more jobs? by unixisc · · Score: 1

    To do this, we'll need parallel currencies. Maybe something like bitcoin, where everybody gets a certain amount just for living to cover basic needs - housing, car, food et al. The jobs would cover any frills

  18. Mexico's poor quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    International truck moved two of its truck plants, one to Canada and one to Mexico. The trucks coming out of Mexico were of such poor quality that trucking companies refused to buy International trucks that were built there. This became so bad that International shut down their Mexico plant. Ford should have the same experience when they start building their cars there. Don't buy anything made in Mexico. If that statement makes anyone unhappy, then go cry in your beer. I am a realistic person.

  19. That was the whole point! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which idiot at Slashdot thought that bringing jobs back to America didn't entail bringing jobs back to America?

  20. Working with, not against economics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Work is a strange thing, both a purpose and a curse.
    Some work because they like to, but most work to support themselves.
    This means basic necessities like food, shelter, health care, and a better life for their kids.
    It also means some pleasures, which increasingly, lifestyle expectations make us feel are necessities.

    The fact is that there is an able labor force outside the US that is willing to work for less that US workers.
    Currently, US trade policy encourages this outside labor force to supply it with cheap stuff.
    It then pays folks inside the country not to work through welfare and worse.
    This leaves essential jobs unfilled in the US, which in turn, invites illegal immigration to satisfy these.

    The result is a strange, engine of commerce.
    It provides a supply of cheap stuff.
    It also demonstrates the the US is still a land of opportunity where one can bootstrap one's self through hard work.
    It also makes for a wealth transfer from those doing the work to those at the top.
    It moves the machinery necessary to make things outside the reach of labor in the US.
    It also tends to sap the US work force of the will and ability to make stuff for itself.
    This last, limits the customer base for the goods in question and makes for a less than robust engine.

    So, would closing borders help this situation?
    Well, it would certainly slow the engine.
    But the problem is that the engine is a mixed bag of good and bad.

    It might be better to redirect the engine and use it to make it possible for the US labor force to thrive.
    Before we completely loose the ability, we could supplement minimum wage to make the cost of labor in the US more competitive with that outside.
    This would be a much better alternative than paying folks not to work.
    It would also eliminate many of the incentives for illegal immigration.

  21. America Great Again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    USA = USA
    AMERICA = CONTINENT