this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2025
265 points (97.8% liked)

News

32926 readers
2746 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 74 points 5 days ago (14 children)

It seems like automakers would much rather sell fewer premium and luxury units at higher margins than sell more units of affordable cars at lower margins. I suppose I understand why, but it does leave a large consumer segment unserved. That seems like a good opportunity for a competitor to come in and serve the unserved market, but none of the big legacy car brands seem interested and new car companies don't have access to the capital it would take to build the manufacturing capacity necessary to mass produce affordable vehicles.

Sounds like a great opportunity for foreign car companies, from, say, China, for instance, to come in and serve that under served lower end of the market. But then, tariffs.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 41 points 5 days ago (1 children)

10ish years ago it was a conscious choice they made, the automakers.

Now?

They are trapped, they can only continue to exist if they have the margins from luxury car prices for basically standard cars.

The other thing that goes along with this is... horrendously shoddy construction and design, they're literally built to break down, intentionally.

They're not really automakers.

They're managers of very troubled tranches of debt obligations who happen to be in charge of auto plants.

We should have let them all die back in 09, but instead we bailed them out and their management became a punch of sycophantic 'dont rock the boat, we're experts' accountants, just like what happened Boeing after McDonnel Douglass bought them out, ousted their middle and upper managers, and wore the Boeing brand name like a skin suit.

They are completely incompetent, but even if they weren't, nobody could solve the mess they are in now after decades of coddling and kickbacks from the government, collusion with regulators... rotted them from the inside out, smothered themselves, not really caring because C suite gets golden parachutes no matter what happens.

[–] extremeboredom@lemmy.world 24 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Your last sentence underscores one of my main frustrations with this system of corporate enshittification. No matter what happens, there is no such thing as real life consequences for the c suite. They do as they please and retire comfortably without a care in the world.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

And the inescapable logic there means that unless people put their own credible threat of violence on the table, nothing will continue to ever change.

You don't play a rigged poker game, you play the uh, meta-game, around and above it, otherwise, you always lose.

Capitalism does violence via complex bureaucracy, via obscuring and normalizing the system itself, by making it very complicated to try to draw some kind of moral line as to where responsibility for the acts of which actors in a system should lie.

The reality is that the system itself is violence, and that you are guilty to the degree that you partake in and profit from it.

This is why Luigi Mangione is pretty much seen as the modern day Robin Hood.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 12 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Capitalism serves capital, not the needs of the people. And the free market of competition is just a convenient myth with which to distract people.

[–] BlueLineBae@midwest.social 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

As someone who just bought car last year, I think Kia is the closest one serving that market. We made a list of potential cars that had what we wanted. It had to be under $35k and it had to have certain features without needing to subscribe to some service. We added a few Kiad to our list and I'll admit they were quite tempting as they had everything we wanted for less than all the other cars on our list. In the end we ended up getting a Prius, but the Kias were pretty close for us.

[–] Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Subaru seems to give the customer a fair shake as well - I haven't had issues with my vehicle or their supply chain, and checking their current prices they do have entry level (albeit a bit higher than the old floor) pricing.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] XeroxCool@lemmy.world 53 points 5 days ago (7 children)

"It's because of those EVs" says man driving $70,000 pickup as his daily driver

[–] fxleak@lemmings.world 21 points 5 days ago (3 children)

It's really because of tariffs.

China has EVs with 300km range that only cost $15,000. Can't buy them in the US, though.

Gotta give the Musks your money, instead.

Hyundai's EVs are so much better than tesla's

[–] scintilla@crust.piefed.social 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'm not trying to detract from your point because we could do this here as well but BYD cars are not $15k outside if china even where you can but them. They are that cheap because the government incentives them to be so.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Perspectivist@feddit.uk 5 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Cheapest BYD in Finland is an used 2023 model with 50k kilometers and costs 28k USD.

[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 6 points 5 days ago

There are tariffs on Chinese EVs in the EU as well.

[–] Ep1cFac3pa1m@lemmy.world 11 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Yeah that was my first thought. How much is this influenced by 7 or 8 year loans on $70,000 trucks?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] LoafedBurrito@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 5 days ago (2 children)

I don't understand how people keep buying new cars when shitty ones are $50k. Even these $100k SUV's are poorly built and tons of issues.

People are so stupid now, they prefer comfort and ease over using their damn heads and not buying crap.

[–] ebolapie@lemmy.world 14 points 5 days ago (1 children)

They're not. Lots are full of old inventory. One superstore near me has "new" 2023 model year units in the lot. Still above MSRP.

Hope they stay that way and they go bankrupt. The whole dealership idea is a scam.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 7 points 4 days ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] skozzii@lemmy.ca 10 points 5 days ago

But Trump said only beef was expensive anymore, did he lie to me?

[–] Ironfist79@lemmy.world 11 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I say this with all my heart. /c/fuckcars.

[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago (5 children)

And American car/vehicle manufacturers are crying over low sales.

Stupid

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 11 points 5 days ago

Crying over fewer high margin sales. They want the same number of sales but with more profit.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago

Maybe if they stopped putting a CPU in every car they wouldn't cost so much and have less problems. Can I get roll down windows and a bare bones car for $15k new ? Make it modular or easily repairable or something so ppl can keep replacing parts on it and it can last indefinitely or something??

[–] qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website 15 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Adjusted for inflation, or better yet something like median salary, would probably be more meaningful.

Seems this will preferentially screw folks in low cost of living areas. If you're in a HCOL/VHCOL area and making ends meet, then a new car is probably affordable. If you're making ends meet in a LCOL area, then this is likely a huge expense.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Fandangalo@lemmy.world 13 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Isn’t BYD a fraction of this cost, but we’re propping up stakeholder bonuses in Detroit?

[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 17 points 5 days ago (5 children)

This is such a tired argument. Literally the only remaining US automakers are GM, Ford, and Tesla. A vast majority of car sales in the US are foreign brands not domestic. BYD is being propped up just the same as what you're claiming here, which is why no other automaker in the world outside of China is able to beat these Chinese prices, so how is this alternative better for anyone?

China is doing this in order to dominate the market wherever they're allowed to enter, and are well equipped to undercut those local markets for as long as it takes to put everyone else out of business. They control a majority of the minerals needed for EVs so they get to set the external and internal price. They have lax safety and environmental regulations. They already control much of the world's manufacturing capacity. They're a massive country with a massive workforce.

Allowing them to dominate the world auto market in order to buy one or two cheap new cars (before prices shoot back up because monopoly) is going to be bad for everyone.

[–] Fandangalo@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago (4 children)

Respectfully, protectionism isn’t that much better. In terms of economic velocity (efficient use of money/value/resources), it would be better if we used the money in other industries.

  • “The Chinese are competitive.” Yup, they are beating the global
  • ”They own the materials.” Yup, good planning on their part
  • ”They have lax safety.” Nope.
  • ”Massive country & workforce.” And a bunch of Chinese manufacturing has reduced humans and/or are dark with no humans.

“Allowing them to sell superior products is bad.” Sure, for the stakeholders. Not for Americans. I’m already being screwed by capitalists all over the place. Let’s expedite capitalism’s demise, please.

[–] Tire@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 days ago

I think they mean lax labor safety. It’s much cheaper to make things if you don’t worry about your workers getting killed or injured at higher rates.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Hopefully it’s a temporary blip from EV incentives going away. We needed those incentives to smooth out the transition while EVs are still expensive, but with them being cancelled anyone on the fence had to consider buying in september.

Now we’ll transition slower and more painfully. We’ll continue pushing climate change, to our own detriment. Legacy manufacturers are already pulling back from EVs to maximize short term profit at the cost of viability on the global market. More people will be stuck for decades with obsolete technology and higher operating cost. We always seem to like doing things the hard way

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 11 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Inflation: how does it work?

[–] dan1101@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago

Not only that, there's just so many huge vehicles full of tech. Not enough people want basic simple transportation anymore, or at least there aren't enough models to choose from.

[–] myfunnyaccountname@lemmy.zip 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I get what you are saying. But we live in a society without a lot of alternatives. No walking neighborhoods. No or little public transportation. Some people don’t have options if they have to leave their house.

[–] balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

There's a big diff between I need a car and I need a car that makes the median reach 50k

Edit: average, for some reason I assumed editors aren't huge assholes

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 9 points 5 days ago (1 children)

WTYP had a great episode on the end of the small American car, with the failure of the Ford Pinto.

The American auto industry basically doesn't make small cars anymore. So much of the modern car price is just the volume of car you're required to purchase.

[–] fxleak@lemmings.world 8 points 5 days ago

Honestly, whatever.

Americans make shit cars anyways.

load more comments
view more: next ›