That doesn’t change the point. You want a new car that was built on the other side of the planet while claiming that it’s for environmentally friendly purposes? Why not buy a used EV that’s already built and located in the US? Apart from keeping your current car, that’s the most environmentally beneficial move.
Japanese and Korean EVs are not subject to these kinds of tariffs. The environmental argument does not hold.
Mind you: I’m on the fuck cars all the way camp. I am all for walkable dense cities with efficient mass and active transit. Canada should be making a Switzerland of trains out of the Quebec-Windsor corridor and we should be laughing Doug-Ford-“war on the car”-conservative types out of office everywhere.
But in this case, these tariffs are simply not about any kind of environmental concern. This is trade war power politics and Canada following the US into protecting an outdated set of industries (oil, gas, ICE cars) instead of decarbonizing and doing what needs to be done to face the climate crisis.
Japanese and South Korean governments aren’t massively subsidizing their vehicles in order to undercut everyone else in a foreign market which is why they aren’t subject to the same tariffs as China.
What evidence is there to make the claim that this is all about protecting the oil industry, and if that is the case, why isn’t every other EV on the market being targeted as well? Why is China the only country on the planet that can sell cars for this low of a price? Why do fleet MPG regulations continue to rise if the whole point is to sell more gasoline? This argument falls flat when you actually scrutinize it.
Boom, there, you just dropped the environmental argument, and started talking about trade practices and undercutting competition.
Even if my argument about protecting the traditional automotive technology stack is wrong (and I will not litigate that here) I sure am right that these tariffs are nothing about protecting the environment.
I never once said the tariffs were about protecting the environment as that doesn’t make any sense. I was countering your argument that “people need these cheap, brand new cars in order to protect the environment” by explaining why cars built under lax environmental regulations and then shipped halfway across the planet aren’t good for the environment to begin with.
That’s disingenuous. These are not tariffs on all cars.
That doesn’t change the point. You want a new car that was built on the other side of the planet while claiming that it’s for environmentally friendly purposes? Why not buy a used EV that’s already built and located in the US? Apart from keeping your current car, that’s the most environmentally beneficial move.
Japanese and Korean EVs are not subject to these kinds of tariffs. The environmental argument does not hold.
Mind you: I’m on the fuck cars all the way camp. I am all for walkable dense cities with efficient mass and active transit. Canada should be making a Switzerland of trains out of the Quebec-Windsor corridor and we should be laughing Doug-Ford-“war on the car”-conservative types out of office everywhere.
But in this case, these tariffs are simply not about any kind of environmental concern. This is trade war power politics and Canada following the US into protecting an outdated set of industries (oil, gas, ICE cars) instead of decarbonizing and doing what needs to be done to face the climate crisis.
Japanese and South Korean governments aren’t massively subsidizing their vehicles in order to undercut everyone else in a foreign market which is why they aren’t subject to the same tariffs as China.
What evidence is there to make the claim that this is all about protecting the oil industry, and if that is the case, why isn’t every other EV on the market being targeted as well? Why is China the only country on the planet that can sell cars for this low of a price? Why do fleet MPG regulations continue to rise if the whole point is to sell more gasoline? This argument falls flat when you actually scrutinize it.
Boom, there, you just dropped the environmental argument, and started talking about trade practices and undercutting competition.
Even if my argument about protecting the traditional automotive technology stack is wrong (and I will not litigate that here) I sure am right that these tariffs are nothing about protecting the environment.
I never once said the tariffs were about protecting the environment as that doesn’t make any sense. I was countering your argument that “people need these cheap, brand new cars in order to protect the environment” by explaining why cars built under lax environmental regulations and then shipped halfway across the planet aren’t good for the environment to begin with.