U Njemačkoj počela proizvodnja električnog Forda E

A dobro, kad bi o branjenu poslovanja Kina je svjetski prvak ako gledamo istu granu - društvene mreže, tražilice itd. TikTok je samo reakcija na njihovu akciju. Svaka strana ima svoje opravdanje i to je legitimno za njihove političke sustave. Veliki Kineski firewall npr 

Što se tik toka tiče, razlozi zabrane su opravdani i suprotni privacy framework-ima u EU i USA. Politika na stranu, TikTok je EU prekršio GDPR pravila i zaljepili su ima kaznu od 345M €. To je bilo vezanu za zaštitu prava djece, a vezano uz to su i kršili pravilo fairness-a (prema GDPR-u). Ako stavimo politiku u igru, u odboru ByteDance-a (vlasnika TikToka) sjede ljudi iz Kineske vlade. Dakle razlog za zabrinutost postoji.

To ti je tako. Kao što Kineska vlada ne želi da Kinez zna što se dogodilo na tiananmen trgu, ili da je izložen američkim društvenim mrežama (koje nemaju baš dobar track record što se tiče manipulacije mjenjanja mišljenja), tako ni "zapad" ne želi isto takvu platformu iz Kine. Ping Pong.

A ako govorimo o MineOne, sasvim slučajno su zemlju kupili na par kilometara od američke vojne baze i sagradili farmu za "majnanje" tamo To je bilo jedino slobodno mjesto

Pored firewalla od ostalih ekonomskih čimbenika navedimo i da se Kinezi glupo češljaju.

 To je barem jednostavno, ispuniš pristupnicu za <odaberi neku domoljubnu stranku> i to je to.

Oprosti, glup sam, a vidim da ti ekonomiju imaš u malo prstu, pa mi daj još jednom objasni kako je 100% carina za kineske aute slobodno tržište naspram nepostojećih 250%? 

(Ne obaziri se na ovaj tekst dolje, to mi nešto kompjuter kenja)

Currently, China imposes a tariff of 40 percent on U.S. automobiles - https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2018/november/ustr-statement-china%E2%80%99s-auto

Recent Funding:
The Biden-Harris administration announced $15.5 billion to support automotive manufacturing facilities, retain high-paying jobs, and strengthen domestic supply chains2. - https://www.energy.gov/articles/biden-harris-administration-announces-155-billion-support-strong-and-just-transition

Auto industry’s switch to EVs gets $12 billion in loans and grants from the US Energy Department - Auto industry’s switch to EVs gets $12 billion in loans and grants from the US Energy Department | CNN Business 

There are certain goods and services for which prices are controlled or regulated by state or US federal government agencies. These include:

1. Utilities (Electricity, Gas, Water)

   • Public utility commissions in each state regulate the prices that utility companies can charge for electricity, natural gas, and water to ensure they are fair and reasonable for consumers while allowing the companies to cover costs and make a reasonable profit.

2. Alcoholic Beverages

   • Many states have control over the prices of alcoholic beverages through state-run liquor stores or by setting minimum prices that can be charged. This is often seen in "control states" where the state government operates retail or wholesale distribution of alcohol.

3. Insurance (Auto, Health, Homeowners)

   • State insurance commissions regulate the prices of various types of insurance. Insurers must get approval from state regulators before implementing rate changes to ensure rates are not discriminatory, excessive, or inadequate.

4. Public Transportation

   • Prices for public transportation, including buses, trains, and subways, are often set or approved by state or local government agencies to keep them affordable and to ensure that public transportation systems can be maintained and operated efficiently.

5. Healthcare Services

   • While not directly setting prices, state and federal governments influence healthcare pricing through programs like Medicare and Medicaid, which set reimbursement rates for healthcare providers. Additionally, some states have rate-setting programs for hospital services.

6. Tobacco Products

   • Some states impose minimum prices for cigarettes and other tobacco products to discourage consumption and reduce smoking rates.

7. Housing (Rent Control)

   • In certain cities and states, there are rent control or rent stabilization laws that limit the amount by which rent can be increased for existing tenants, aiming to keep housing affordable.

These examples show that while the US largely relies on market mechanisms for pricing, government intervention exists in key areas to protect consumers, ensure fair access to essential services, and address public health and safety concerns.

Problem je šta ljudi nemaju pojma, a imaju mišljenje. 

  nije problem nemat pojma, nego se ne informirat 

The Chinese automobile industry underwent several phases of growth since the start of China’s economic reform in 1978. At that time, Chinese automobile manufacturing had low productivity. In the year 1980, total vehicle output was only around five thousand vehicles. As incomes grew, household demand for passenger vehicles grew rapidly, which resulted in a large 3 amount of cars being imported to China. In order to protect the vulnerable and immature domestic Chinese automobile industry, tariffs were set as high as 250% (Li, Xiao and Liu 2015).

Several large state-owned automobile enterprises in China tried to partner with foreign auto manufacturers to form joint ventures to increase their capacity and enhance their technical capabilities. However, foreign ownership was capped at 50% to protect domestic producers. (do danas je tesla jedini strani proizvođač u kini kojem je dozvoljeno imati vlastitu tvornicu, a i to bez prava na kupnju zemljišta na kojem je)

In 2001, China entered the World Trade Organization (WTO). In order to fulfill its commitment under the WTO, the Chinese government gradually cut the tariffs on foreign automobiles from 100% to 25% during the five-year transition period.

nepostojeće carine od 250% jesu sad, ali kad je kini trebalo bile su i 250% i 100%, a prisila na kooperaciju s državnim tvrtkama vrijedi i danas, osim izuzetka tesle (ali uz stroge obaveze o ulaganju i visini plaćenog poreza svake godine, sa koncesijom na zemljište od 50 godina i bez prava kupnje)

možemo se mi pravit grbavi kak su ameri pizde jer su nabili kinezina 100% carina, a oni jadni imaju sad 'samo' 25%, ali činjenica jest da je kina kad je trebalo zaštititi svoju industriju nabila 250 i 100% carina, subvencionirala ih masovno (što ne čudi obzirom da su sve ili su bile tvrtke u državnom vlasništvu), ograničavala uvoz i na razne druge načine ograničavala stranu konkurenciju

to što su ameri napravili sada s carinama ista je stvar koju su kinezi radili prije

a da ti pokažem popis robe koju kina carini ili čak zabranjuje uvoz, poput mikrovalnih pećnica, frižidera, printera, električnih kuhala riže, žičnih telefona video kamera itd itd itd., a sve to u zaštiti svoje industrije, pa tako u kini nemereš kupit nego kinesku mikrovalnu ili kuhalo za rižu, dok je popis proizvoda koji se carine visokim carinama još i veći

link (ovo je stariji popis zabranjenog uvoza, noviji se ne da prevest)

usporedba 'slobodnog tržišta' samo po carinama (američkim za kineska vozila) je upravo ovo što si napisao gore - nemaš pojma, a imaš mišljenje

 EDIT

da se ne natežemo...

u bilo kojoj usporedbi kinesko je tržište daleko više pod kontrolom države od bilo kojeg zapadnog, ne samo carinama i drugim uvoznim ograničenjima i zabranama, nego i ograničenjem investicija i raznoraznim zabranama investitorima u kini, zabrane kupnje zemljišta, birokratskim preprekama, prisilama itd. itd. itd.

Hvala za najsvježije podatke iz 1978. i 1980.! Ti si vrelo znanja! Htio sam pitati što je to "nedavno", ispada da je to 1978. Hvala za objašnjenje.

Oprosti, i dalje sam glup kako su postojeće carine do 100% slobodno tržište, a neopostojeće carine od 250% nisu? 

(Opet dolje nešto kompjuter kenja, ne obaziri se na to)
 

Currently, China imposes a tariff of 40 percent on U.S. automobiles - https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2018/november/ustr-statement-china%E2%80%99s-auto

Recent Funding:
The Biden-Harris administration announced $15.5 billion to support automotive manufacturing facilities, retain high-paying jobs, and strengthen domestic supply chains2. - https://www.energy.gov/articles/biden-harris-administration-announces-155-billion-support-strong-and-just-transition

Auto industry’s switch to EVs gets $12 billion in loans and grants from the US Energy Department- Auto industry’s switch to EVs gets $12 billion in loans and grants from the US Energy Department | CNN Business 

The price of EpiPen (epinephrine auto-injector) varies significantly between the United States, Canada, and China due to differences in healthcare systems, regulations, and market dynamics. Here is a summary of the price differences:

United States

• Price: The price of EpiPens in the U.S. has been a subject of controversy. As of recent years, the list price for a two-pack of EpiPens has been around $600 to $700, though prices can vary. The high cost is attributed to a lack of competition, the patent system, and the pricing strategies of pharmaceutical companies.
• Factors: Insurance coverage can significantly affect out-of-pocket costs for patients. Some may pay less through insurance, while others without adequate coverage may face the full list price.

Canada

• Price: In Canada, EpiPens are significantly cheaper. The cost for a two-pack is typically around CAD $120 to $150 (approximately USD $90 to $115).
• Factors: The lower price in Canada is due to the country’s regulatory framework, which includes price controls and negotiations conducted by the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB).

China

• Price: In China, the price of EpiPens can vary widely depending on the region and availability. Generally, it is reported to be much lower than in the U.S., often closer to prices found in Canada or even less.
• Factors: China’s government regulation and bulk purchasing strategies help keep prices lower. Additionally, domestic production of similar epinephrine auto-injectors can further drive down costs.

Comparative Summary

• United States: $600 to $700 for a two-pack
• Canada: $90 to $115 for a two-pack
• China: Similar to or less than Canada, often influenced by government regulation and domestic production

These price differences highlight the impact of national healthcare policies, regulatory environments, and market competition on drug pricing. The U.S. tends to have higher drug prices due to a market-driven approach with less government intervention, while Canada and China have mechanisms in place to keep drug prices more affordable for consumers.

country          EpiPenPriceByCountry 2023 (US$)

India            30.39

United States      600

Japan            98

Germany         84.74

United Kingdom    60.59

France           76.08

Canada          80

Australia         65.67

(EpiPen Price by Country 2024 (worldpopulationreview.com))

United States

In the United States, private insurance companies often negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical companies or through Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs). PBMs are intermediaries that manage prescription drug benefits on behalf of health insurers and negotiate discounts and rebates with drug manufacturers.

However, there are some limitations, especially when it comes to government programs:

• Medicare: Traditionally, Medicare, the federal health insurance program for people aged 65 and older and some younger people with disabilities, has not been allowed to negotiate drug prices directly. This restriction is a result of the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003. Instead, Medicare Part D plans, which are offered by private insurers, negotiate prices through PBMs.

Recent policy discussions and legislative efforts have focused on changing this aspect to allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices directly, which proponents argue could lead to significant savings for the government and beneficiaries.

Other Countries

In many other countries, national health systems or government agencies directly negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical companies. These negotiations often result in lower drug prices compared to those in the United States. Countries with single-payer systems or strong governmental oversight typically have more leverage to negotiate prices effectively.

Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs) are third-party administrators of prescription drug programs primarily responsible for processing and paying prescription drug claims. They act as intermediaries between insurers, pharmacies, and drug manufacturers to negotiate prices and manage drug benefits for health plans. PBMs are involved in a variety of activities aimed at controlling prescription drug costs and ensuring efficient drug delivery to patients.

Key Functions of PBMs:

1. Negotiating Discounts and Rebates: PBMs negotiate with drug manufacturers to secure discounts and rebates on prescription medications, which can lower the cost of drugs for health plans and patients.
2. Formulary Management: They create and manage formularies, which are lists of covered medications. PBMs decide which drugs are included based on cost-effectiveness, clinical efficacy, and safety.
3. Pharmacy Network Management: PBMs establish networks of pharmacies where patients can fill their prescriptions. They negotiate dispensing fees with these pharmacies.
4. Utilization Management: They implement programs to ensure appropriate drug use, such as prior authorization, step therapy, and quantity limits.
5. Claims Processing: PBMs handle the processing of prescription drug claims for insurers and ensure that the correct amount is paid.

Financing PBMs:

PBMs are financed through a combination of the following revenue streams:

1. Administrative Fees: PBMs charge health plans, employers, and insurers fees for managing their prescription drug benefits.
2. Spread Pricing: In some models, PBMs charge a health plan more for a drug than they reimburse the pharmacy, keeping the difference (spread) as profit.
3. Rebates from Drug Manufacturers: PBMs negotiate rebates with drug manufacturers. A portion of these rebates may be passed on to health plans or kept by the PBM.
4. Pharmacy Fees: PBMs may charge pharmacies various fees, such as network participation fees or fees for performance-based programs.
5. Clawbacks: In some cases, PBMs collect a portion of the patient's copaymentif it exceeds the drug's cost.

Overall, PBMs play a critical role in the healthcare system by working to control drug costs and ensuring the availability of medications to patients, though their practices and the transparency of their financial arrangements have been subjects of ongoing debate and scrutiny.

 nema problema, lako se objasni

carine služe za zaštitu vlastitog tržišta, kad je kini pasalo za zaštiti tržište bile su 250%, kad im je industrija ponešto ojačala spustili su ih na 100%

kad je ojačala još više, spustili su na 25%, ali su zadržali sva druga ograničenja stranim investitorima da bi tržište držali pod kontrolom i da bi dali domaćim proizvođačima svu prednost koju su mogli dati

to što ti, po vlastitom nahođenju, odabireš razdoblja koja ti pašu kao relevantna, pa tako za zagađenje trebamo gledati 200 godina unazad kako bi usa bila najveći zagađivač, a kad ti paše kod pitanja carina onda ne treba gledati niti 25 godina unazad kad je kina još uvijek imala 100% carina, je ponovo isti problem cherrypickinga koji i inače imamo u raspravi

da kina nije politikom maksimalne zaštite i protekcije svoje industrije napravila ovo što ima sad, ne bi ni spuštala carine

ali trebamo se pravit blesavi da kina zadnjih nekoliko desetljeća na sve moguće načine protekcionira i štiti od konkurencije svoju auto industriju do razine da ista sad ugrožava europsku i američku, pa ćemo sad odjednom carine proglasit zastarjelima ili nepoštenima

licemjerstvo do bola

Hvala, ali i dalje mi mi objasnio kako su carine od 100% slobodno tržište, a carine od 40% nisu slobodno tržište? Kako je državna regulacija cijena u SAD slobodno tržište? 

E, kako se zove ta grana ekonomije gdje uspoređuješ sadašnje podatke jedne zemlje s podacima druge od prije 50 godina i izvlačiš ekonomske zaključke za tu drugu zemlju za sadašnjost, umjesto usporedbe kurentnih podataka da bi imao kurentan zaključak? Mislim, nisam prije naišao na tu metodologiju, pa zato pitam.

(Zanemari ovo ispod...) 

Administered prices - Wikipedia


Surveys conducted in the 1980s found that 70–85% of American industrial prices were markup or cost-added prices.[2]^[3] An American survey from the 1990s covering an industrial and non-industrial pricing behavior found that a majority of prices take cost into account.^[4] A Canadian survey from 2002 found that 67.1% of major Canadian firms attributed price-stickiness to markup pricing. A 2003–2004 survey done in France found that 36.9% of prices are cost-added (another 4% of prices were "regulated").[5] Writing in 2006, Fabiani et al found that administered prices account for 42% of prices (of both goods and services) in Italy, 46% in Belgium, 52% in Spain, 65% in Portugal, and an average of 54% of all Eurozone prices. They also account for 40% of the prices of goods sold in France and 73% of those sold in Germany.[6]^[7] A survey of 725 Norwegian firms from the 2000s found that 69% of those firms use markup pricing.^[8] A survey of 5,300 New Zealand firms found that 54% of business prices were cost-added,^[9] while another survey of 700 Australian companies found that at least 49% of their prices were marked-up.^[10] A study of 630 Japanese firms from 2000 found 54% of them use mark-up pricing.^[11] A survey of 580 Icelandic firms found that markup prices were the most common, accounting for 45% of all prices set by those companies.^[12]

tako što se carine povećavaju ili snižavaju kad to državi odgovara

uporno isticanje aktualne situacije bez da se uzmu u obzir uzroci i posljedice te situacija otprije ne 50, nego 25 godina i dalje je cherrypickanje

isto kao i uporno insistiranje isključivo na carinama sad i nikad prije, dok sve ostalo uporno zanemaruješ

ograničenja investitora u kini uporno zanemaruješ, zabranu uvoza isto tako uporno zanemaruješ

kakvog smisla ima objašnjavati išta kad uporno izbjegavaš sve što ti ne odgovara

kao da mi zavežeš ruke i noge i kažeš da ti pokažem kako sam to brži od tebe na 100 metara 

 zahvaljujem na upornom vrijeđanju, to više govori o tebi samom

Znači carine od 100%, 40% ili 250% nemaju nikakve veze sa slobodnim tržištem? Zar nisi tri posta ranije rekao da je bitno koje je tržište slobodnije i naveo navodne carine od 250% (koje ne postoje) kao dokaz? 

Ako bi mi mogao objasniti, i dalje ne razumijem po kojem je kriteriju neko tržište slobodno?

Zašto ne naručuješ s američkog slobodnog tržišta kad je ono bolje?

Hvala!

Da rezimiramo, Elona ide ovih dana - 56 milijardi bude kapnulo, poticaje za aute smije kupit i u SAD-u i u Kini, i smije ih proizvodit u Kini i prodavat u cijelom svijetu bez ikakvih dodatnih carina.

A vi se sprdate s njim, da vidimo sad Thunderfoota 

P.S. nadodajte na to ovaj članak koji komentiramo, i sve vam je jasno, kako će stvari od sad stajati na EU tržištu auta...

Pa mislio sam da govorimo o ovom trenutku ili ti naručuješ iz Kine u 1978.? I dalje nije jasno zašto ne naručuješ iz Amerike kad je tamo slobodno tržište?

(Zanemari ovo dolje!)

The Heritage Foundation - Wikipedia: 

" an activist American conservative think tank"

"discontent with Richard Nixon's embrace of the liberal consensus, and the nonpolemical, cautious nature of existing think tanks,^[16] Weyrich and Feulner sought to create a conservative version of the Brookings Institution that advanced conservative policies." (smetao im liberalni Richard Nixon, poznati liberal...)

"advocated for pro-business policies and anti-communism in its early years, but distinguished itself from the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) by also advocating for cultural issues that were important to Christian conservatives"<sup>[11]"

" In 1993, Heritage was an opponent of the Clinton health care plan, which died in the U.S. Senate the following year, in August 1994." (Dobro je - spasili Ameriku od javnog zdravstva na vrijeme tako da na slobodnom tržištu mogu dozu inzulina platiti 300 dolara i epipen 700 dolara! Fiju, zamalo!)

"in 2001, the Heritage Foundation supported the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in the war on terror.[28][29] The Heritage Foundation challenged opposition to the war.[30] They defended the George W. Bush administration's treatment of suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay.[28]"</sup>

^{... itd.}

Ukratko, umjereni, neutralni, pouzdani! Aktivisti, ali s mjerom!

 china’s economic freedom score is 48.5, making its economy the 151st freest in the 2024 Index of Economic Freedom. Its rating has increased by 0.2 point from last year, and China is ranked 35th out of 39 countries in the Asia-Pacific region. The country’s economic freedom score is lower than the world and regional averages. China’s economy is considered “repressed” according to the 2024 Index.

U pravu si, samo sam ja glup pa još ne razumijem i ako mi možeš dati odgovor na ova tri pitanja i više te neću gnjaviti:

1) Zašto naručuješ s ekonomski "repressed" tržišta? 

2) Je li veće carine imaju veze sa slobodnim tržištem ili nemaju?

3) Ako ne, zašto si rekao da imaju?

(Ne gledaj ovo dole, užasi ekonomski "repressed" tržišta!)