[constantcrying]

>For example, Daimler's Smart car brand alone posted over 4 billion Euros in losses. They could have gone to space with that money.

Those are private losses, meaning they are subsidized by Mercedes themselves. Also Smart is as much a German Brand as it is a Chinese brand. Geely lost exactly the same money Mercedes did.

Additionally you are not counting the losses correctly, even if smart looses money, selling cheap low emissions often electric city cars is hugely beneficial to Mercedes, due to European car regulations.

>Not just in Germany either, but France and Italy, they're all pushing crazy money in the local auto industry for the sake of maintaining local jobs, with little else to show for.

No. They are selling cars, like any healthy industry would do. I don't get what you think automobile companies could accomplish, besides producing cars for people to use and employing people to make them. The Chinese are doing exactly the same and get the same benefits.

>By comparison, the Chinese taxpayer got a really good deal here.

They got a productive car industry. Like it exists in France or Germany.

[Rinzler89]

>even if smart looses money, selling cheap

1. Smart are anything BUT cheap hence the low sales and the losses.

2. The losses are quoted were before the Geely partnership.

>They got a productive car industry. Like it exists in France or Germany.

The question is which is more productive, the Chinese one, or the German/EU one.

[constantcrying]

>1. Smart are anything BUT cheap hence the low sales and the losses.

The price is irrelevant to the benefits they provide in the eyes of EU regulations. You can not look at the 4 Billion in losses while ignoring European laws. Pure luxury car makers are near impossible to operate. Which is why Aston Martin bought a cheap Toyota design to make into a small city car.

>2. The losses are quoted were before the Geely partnership.

And? Mercedes lost exactly the same amount of money the Chinese did. In no way is this more of a loss for China than it is for Germany.

>The question is which is more productive, the Chinese one, or the German/EU one.

The Chinese has massive advantage when it comes to the cost of materials, energy and labor which is why near identical cars there are insanely cheap. If you consider as an output of the car industry also the social benefits, then obviously German car companies are a great place to work, especially compared with conditions in China.

[Rinzler89]

>You can not look at the 4 Billion in losses while ignoring European laws.

What does the loss and being terrible at selling cars have to do with EU laws? EU laws didn't make them be shit.

>And? Mercedes lost exactly the same amount of money the Chinese did. In no way is this more of a loss for China than it is for Germany.

How would the Chinese have lot money if Daimler lost that money before they entered the partnership with Geely?

>f you consider as an output of the car industry also the social benefits

The social benefit of making Diesel cars that reduce years of our lifespan thanks to air pollution, but at least they're a great place to work? With that logic the war in Ucraine is also a social benefits since it creates places to work.

[constantcrying]

>What does the loss and being terrible at selling cars have to do with EU laws? EU laws didn't make them be shit.

Do you just not understand how EU car regulations work? Otherwise I think you would understand why the 4 Billion loss is something Mercedes is happy to accept. Because it simply isn't a 4 Billion dollar loss.

>How would the Chinese have lot money if Daimler lost that money before they entered the partnership with Geely?

It's been 5 years since the partnership. The company isn't even called Daimler anymore and if they aren't loosing money now...

>but at least they're a great place to work?

Yes. Also people can go wherever they want whenever they want, which is another great benefit. Enormous benefits all together, which is why China is so keen on building cars.