I agree that they could probably do it, just figure for engineering sake, V8 and I-4 are easier for joint production. V-6 would be an even easier fit though.

Yes, that is true. But if the OEM goes away and it bricks itself or something really goes wrong before you plan to trade it in and it is no longer useable, that is a much bigger issue. 

Buh Bye Fisker! See you for round three!

I would assume packaging a I-6 into the bay wouldn’t be easy since the I-4 is just half a V8 essentially. 

Nah, only the one that took this deal. 

Holy negative equity and shitty credit BATMAN! That is a fucking whopper. At least everyone will think he is cool since he is paying nice MB money for a Kia!!!

And that is in response to there being way too much money available and not enough goods. They saw that they could squeeze money out of consumers and did. Not saying it is good, but that is what happened. Unfortunately, most people are very bad at budgeting and companies know that. 

I agree on the first part and I should have stated that in my original comment that a 100% blanket tariff is a bad idea. But if you constrain it to just cars made in or by Chinese entities the result is pretty much nil. 

Like I said in my other comments, I don’t agree with 100% import tariffs across the board, but looking specifically at cars made in and by Chinese entities elsewhere is a good idea overall. A blanket tariff would be very dumb, because as you said, they would retaliate.

We don’t have Chinese cars in the US now. So that wouldn’t do much, now a tariffs on Mexican made cars would be terrible. But if that was only applied to Mexican made cars made by a Chinese company it wouldn’t matter at all. 

That is a good one and you are honestly correct. With 100% tariffs, phones would get more expensive or phones from elsewhere would move into that hole.

No, not when it is wanted items and not needs. Inflation is around things you need, people would just buy less of those “wanted” items. Most of the stuff coming from China are items you don’t need to live, there would just be less of those bought, so no real change in measured inflation.

OK, then we will force the Chinese companies to setup shop in the US and do it as a 49/51 partnership with a US owned entity. Because right now, any company importing a car to sell in China has a 25% import tariff. BUT, if you want to build a car to sell in their country without the tariff you need to do it in a 49/51…

I guess my concern would be a new OEM going away would leave you with little to no support. But if you are able to buy something else, it isn’t a huge deal other than maybe a bit hit on resale. 

Fair enough.

I don’t know if it would be good or bad for the economy. If it leads to more jobs here in the US making goods to replace those cheaper Chinese ones, it could be better or it could be a bit of a wash or maybe worse? I don’t know the answer. Was just refuting the “runaway inflation and joblessness” part of the article…

Not quite sure what that has to do with this tattoo...

It is an extremely poor example, possibly the worst example to use in the past 40 years. We had a huge reduction in supply of goods from shutdowns and a huge increase in supply of money AT THE SAME TIME.

“Currently, electric cars make up less than 10 percent of vehicles on America’s roads.”

Using COVID is a very poor example. Inflation then was caused by poor monetary policy (too much money) and messed up supply chains (too few goods produced). Tariffs do not change the M2 rate, but may decrease goods. Again, with cars in the US we do not have a limited or low supply of domestic or terribly tariffed vehic…