If recent US policy is any indication, it's far more likely that we'll give them billions of dollars of direct subsidy in a misguided attempt "protect American interests."
Reminds me of a back and forth I had with an NYT staff writer who claimed it was "inhumane" to expect people to totally relearn a set of skills every ten years.
People seem to forget that how they "feeeeeeeel" doesn't matter. The job market dictates what you do and don't have to do, and we live in a time when you must consistently learn new skills to be competitive.
> Reminds me of a back and forth I had with an NYT staff writer who claimed it was "inhumane" to expect people to totally relearn a set of skills every ten years.
It is inhumane to expect people to relearn their skillset every decade on their own dime and time.
It's rare enough that companies pay for small-scale training - a full retraining is pretty much unheard of.
I fully agree. Businesses can adapt or die. They shouldn't receive handouts because they're "job creators", and they certainly shouldn't be rewarded for having inefficient labour practices.
Maybe not. A lot of the lobbying from Ford/GM around electric car subsidies is based around the companies actually selling electric cars.
The board & management may have that plan but until they can sell electric cars that a) exist and b) dont spontaneously combust they wont get significant subsidies.
Also until that time, their competitors (foreign like Toyota, Hyundai, etc and specialized eg Tesla, Rivian, etc) will get more subsidies and continue to undercut them.
IMO what will really light a fire under their ass at this point, even if you forget about saving the planet, is that an EV is a lot more fun to drive than an equivalently price ICE (post rebates). Whenever I go back to an ICE vehicle for a rental situation, I tend to curse often at how sluggish it feels. Feels like an iPhone/Android vs Nokia situation, manufacturers will get with the program or they will get pounced out of the game by competitors.
