China’s Consumers Rattle Global Automakers as Sales Plunge

by Wolf Richter • Jan 14, 2019 • 16 Comments

Welcome to the Big Club of Saturation & Decline.

For the month of December, light new-vehicle sales in China plunged 13%, compared to a year ago, to 2.23 million vehicles, the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers (CAAM) announced on Monday. Sales through June had risen 6%, but then came July, and now there have been six months in a row of year-over-year declines – with the last four months dousing any remaining enthusiasm about China’s consumers with double-digit declines:

• July: -4.00%
• August: -3.8%
• September: -11.6%
• October: -11.7%
• November: -13.9%
• December -13.0%

These declines pushed light new-vehicle sales down 4.1% for the year, to 23.7 million. This phenomenon of declining auto sales is new to China’s managed and pump-primed growth-no-matter-what economy. Data going back to 1990 show relentless annual sales increases. Between 2005 and peak-year 2017, new vehicle sales multiplied by a factor of six:

By comparison, over the same period from 2005 to 2017, US auto sales inched up 1%, from 16.95 million vehicles in 2005 to 17.13 million in 2017, with a huge trough in the middle. The Chinese market is now 40% larger than the US market.

Even during the Financial Crisis, China’s auto market boomed enormously. By comparison with the US, for the years 2008, 2009, and 2010:

• In the US, over the two-year period 2008-2009 combined, new-vehicle sales plunged 35%. In 2010, sales began to recover, but it still left sales down 28% for the three-year period.
• In China, new-vehicles sales rose 7% in 2008, and then more than doubled over the two-year period 2009-2010, bringing the three-year sales increase to 118%.

An annual decline in new-vehicle sales of 4.1% was just unheard of in modern China. So we welcome China’s auto market to the big club of saturation and decline:

Global automakers were betting heavily on China by building large-scale auto manufacturing capacity with their required Chinese partners. Now these joint-venture investments are translating into the dreaded word: overcapacity. GM and Volkswagen sell more vehicles in China than in any other country, including the US, and most of the vehicles they sell in China are made in China.

For US automakers in China:

• GM’s sales dropped 10% to 3.65 million vehicles, including a 25% plunge in Q4. But its premium brand Cadillac saw sales jump by 17%.
• Ford’s sales plunged 37% to 752,000 vehicles, including a December collapse of 59%.

Volkswagen Group was the largest automaker in China in 2018. Its luxury brands did well. Audi sales rose 11% and Porsche sales rose 12%. But VW sales fell 2.1% to 3.1 million vehicles. All brands combined, the group eked out a 0.5% gain for the year, to 4.21 million vehicles.

The largest Chinese automaker, Zhejiang Geely Holding Group, had a strong first nine months, but then sales also dropped: October -10%; November -10%; and December -45%.

As a sign of the times in China, the premium brands gained: Cadillac gained 17%, Mercedes-Benz 11%, Audi 11%, and BMW 7.7%.

Sales of battery electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids surged 62% to 1.255 million vehicles, reaching a record 5.3% of total vehicle sales. China has been piling incentives on electrified vehicles, trying to push this segment to reach 20% of total sales by 2025. In addition, all automakers are now required to produce and sell EVs in China.

The plunge in overall auto sales over the past six months says a thing or two about the state of China’s consumers. There is nothing in the data indicating that this was just a blip, as we might have inferred in July or August, or that the surge of demand is coming back.

Auto sales are a reflection of the consumer. And the double-digit plunge in auto sales over the past four months is not a propitious indication about China’s consumers going forward or China’s economic growth that increasingly depends on these consumers.

“We did not foresee the magnitude of the economic deceleration,” Apple said, starting the year out on the right foot. Read…  iPhone Sales Croak, China’s Economy Deteriorating Faster than Expected, Apple Warns. Shares Plunge

Would you like to be notified via email when WOLF STREET publishes a new article? Sign up here.

War mongers united

Nonwhite Privilege

photo credit: Wikimedia CommonsShaun King

Did you hear the one about the white and the Asian who went to court over a black man’s ball? It was October 2001, and the San Francisco Giants were about to play their final game of the season. Slugger Barry Bonds, who’d already broken the single-season home run record for an MLB player, was looking to add at least one more homer to his tally. Needless to say, thousands of fans were in the stands that day hoping to catch the record-setting orb.

Bonds, true to form and totally not due to steroids, homered in his very first at-bat. A white guy named Alex Popov caught the ball. Well, for an instant, at least. Before he knew it, a mob of peace-loving San Franciscans tackled his alabaster ass. A rolling melee ensued, and when the dust cleared, a little Japanese-American critter named Patrick Hayashi emerged with ball in hand, triumphantly displaying it for the camera as if he’d caught it. But no…Popov had caught it. Hayashi only had it because the mob knocked Popov down.

The value of the ball was estimated at $1.5 million. So, naturally, the matter ended up in court.

In law, sometimes a judge hands down a decision that’s so well reasoned, so wise, it becomes the stuff of legend. And sometimes a judge hands down a decision that’s akin to when Grandpa farts at the Thanksgiving table; you’re left with a foul stench and a bunch of people trying to pretend it never happened. Such was the case with California Superior Court Judge Kevin McCarthy’s umping in Popov v. Hayashi. McCarthy ruled that Popov caught the ball. This was evident from the video of the event. The ball entered his glove. It was his. The judge also ruled, and this too was supported by the video, that Hayashi was not one of the hooligans who initially tackled Popov. Rather, he crawled into the mass of sweaty superfans after the assault had already occurred.

McCarthy ruled that Popov caught the ball, so it was his. And Hayashi emerged from the huddle with physical possession of the ball, so it was his. Um…what? McCarthy established Popov’s pre-possessory interest and the crowd’s malicious interference (a teen testified that, inside the huddle, Hayashi bit into him like a piece of ika in order to gain possession of the ball). Nevertheless, McCarthy ruled that Popov gets the ball, and Hayashi gets the ball. He ordered them to sell it and split the proceeds.

And then something really unfortunate happened for both men. The obese diabetic nerds who make up the sports-memorabilia community got pissed that the media had repeated again and again the claim that the ball would fetch $1.5 million at auction. “No one is going to dictate to us how much we’re willing to bid for a ball,” the nerds said in unison, and they purposely depressed the price. The “$1.5 million ball” ended up fetching a mere $450,000. That amount, split evenly, wouldn’t cover either litigant’s legal fees.

Wait, did I just say that this was an unfortunate turn of events for both men? Stupid me. I meant to say that it was an unfortunate turn of events for the white guy. See, Popov, being white, had to pay for his attorneys. But Hayashi hired hisself a Jap advocate who works pro bono for Asians, because race! So Popov, the dude who caught the ball, lost a boatload of money. And Hayashi, who grabbed the ball after the white guy was tackled, made a cool $225,000. Plus he got to bite a teenager on the leg, which I’m fairly certain is some kind of Japanese sex fetish.

All in all, a good day at the ballpark for the Asian, and a bad day for the white guy who actually did the work.

Putting aside the right or wrong of McCarthy’s legal reasoning, we’re left with one indisputable fact: In the big picture, Popov lost because he’s white, and Hayashi won because he’s Asian. This is a privilege that nonwhites have. If you’re an attorney who isn’t white, you can totally declare that your practice exists to benefit people because of the color of their skin or the shape of their face. But if you’re white and you try to be a “pro-white” lawyer, you can literally be denied a license to practice law on the basis of “character and fitness.”

I’m not advocating pro-white or pro-Asian or pro-anything. I’m just pointing out the double standard. One group of Americans gets to have attorneys who can unashamedly claim, “I’m here to advance the interests of people of my race,” and another group of Americans doesn’t. Here in Cali, Asians are on average more economically successful than whites. There’s no metric by which one can claim that Asians in this state are “oppressed.” So allowing pro-Asian attorneys while condemning pro-white ones cannot be seen as a necessary hypocrisy to assist the underprivileged.

I thought of the Popov/Hayashi case last week as I watched the farce surrounding the murder of 7-year-old black Texan Jazmine Barnes. Barnes was shot to death by a passing vehicle while driving with her family. It was a horrific, senseless act. Barnes’ family members told police that the shooter was a white guy in a pickup truck, and that the murder was racially motivated (the killer’s air freshener in the shape of a lynched Medgar Evers gave it away). The minute the media, the Democrats, and the SJWs (we can lump that collection of human detritus under the single heading of “the left”) heard the magic words “dead black” and “white suspect,” they could barely hide their glee. Soon enough, black activists and the whites who pander to them turned the Barnes murder into the latest cause célèbre for the perpetually angry and gullible.

Rewards were offered! Marchers were mobilized! And news organizations ensured that the case was given front-page, top-story treatment. For a few days, everyone was having the best time ever until the Harris County cops, under intense pressure to arrest Pickup Truck Panzerschütze, made the shocking and completely expected discovery that the drive-by shooting was carried out by the very people who made “drive-by shooting” a recognized and commonplace term in American cities: black gangbangin’ thugs. Turns out the only white bad guy involved was Shaun King, who defamed an innocent cracker by falsely accusing him of the shooting.

As NPR was forced to admit, had the Barnes family reported that the shooters were black, no one would have given a damn. Black-on-black crime gets lower ratings than CNN. Still, NPR’s David Greene stressed that the people hunting the phantom white shooter were justified: “Remember, it was only two decades ago that a black man named James Byrd Jr. was lynched by white supremacists about two hours away from Harris County.” Yep…21 years ago, a black guy was killed by racists in a town that’s also in Texas. Therefore, why wouldn’t we be on pins and needles expecting it to happen again any minute now?

This from the same NPR that constantly tells Americans to stop worrying about Muslim terrorism because 9/11 was seventeen years ago. Yawn, old news. But James Byrd? My gosh, that was practically yesterday!

So strong was the reluctance to say goodbye to the white-shooter myth, Harris County Sheriff Ed Gonzalez told reporters that even though the white shooter doesn’t exist, it’s good to act like he does, because it opens a “discussion about race.” With his newfound determination to pursue fictional criminals, Gonzalez then put out an APB on Thanos.

I have no idea if Jazmine Barnes’ parents knowingly fabricated the white-shooter story to garner national attention and ensure a speedy police investigation (and to make $85,000 through a GoFundMe campaign). If they did, I can’t exactly blame them. The white-shooter ruse ensured that Jazmine’s death was taken seriously, and that’s what any of us would want for a murdered loved one. At the moment, cops claim that the white-shooter story was an innocent mistake, and maybe it was. But what’s not in dispute is that once the white-shooter tale had been told, all sorts of things—free legal aid from high-priced lawyers, international media coverage, and lots of money—flowed in. None of that would have happened if the truth of the shooters’ identities had been known.

Even if Barnes’ family didn’t purposely concoct the nonexistent white shooter (who is obviously related to Tawana Brawley’s invisible white rapists…I mean, the resemblance is uncanny), boy oh boy did they start to exploit it quick. Little Jazmine was barely at room temperature by the time her family members were doing the “We must fight racism! We must end hate!” krump dance on national TV. The grandstanding about “fighting hate” and “Trump’s America” very quickly—a bit too quickly—took center stage over “Let’s find our baby’s killer.” The white-shooter angle gave the family an advantage, and they used it. That’s human nature. It’s not a black or white thing. It’s what people do (even if they’re not 100% aware they’re doing it). As kids, we start doing that shit the minute we find out which parent gives in when we pout. It’s in our DNA to seek advantage and exploit it.

Many times I hear conservatives ask, “Why do most U.S. Asians continue to vote Democrat? Aren’t they aware of what affirmative action is doing to their young? Why aren’t they more supportive of the Harvard bias suit?” Simple. Asians are crafty little devils. They’re like Jews but with women men actually want to date. Asians know their children will be fine. They lose out on Harvard to straight-D student DeJaunté Odom? No prob—their kids have about a hundred other acceptance letters. Asians don’t want to side with whites against blacks and Latinos, because they have a greater edge by siding with “oppressed people of color” against whites (even though they are not even remotely oppressed by any definition of the word). Whites, not blacks, are their business competitors. It’s always better to have an advantage over someone you may need it against. What Asian businessman cares about having an advantage over a black D-student?

It’s much more profitable in America these days to identify as oppressed, and to get all of the goodies and benefits that come from framing your life as a struggle against racist whites. Just ask Patrick Hayashi. He got a quarter-million bucks just for not being white, and for having an opponent who was.

Who’d want to give up such an advantage? Certainly not Jews, who’ve recently been fighting tooth and nail against being referred to as “white” by the “Women’s March” loons.

The Jazmine Barnes strategy worked. Cops found the killers, and people donated money, at a speed and with a determination that would not have been present had the killers’ true race been reported. Expect to see this tactic repeated.

This is nonwhite privilege, and it’s the future.

Pay to Play – Put your money where your mouth is and subscribe for an ad-free experience and to join the world famous Takimag comment board.

https://unherd.com/2018/08/elitist-britain-closed-shop/?=refinnar

The UN, the “State of Palestine” and the Torture of Women

The Palestinian Authority’s recent arrest and torture of a Palestinian mother of three is the kind of story that the “State of Palestine” does not intend to raise during its chairmanship of the largest bloc of developing countries at the UN. Pictured: Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas addresses the UN General Assembly on September 27, 2018 in New York City. (Photo by Stephanie Keith/Getty Images)

A Palestinian mother of three has accused the Palestinian Authority (PA) security forces of torturing her and threatening to rape her during the two months she was held in a PA prison in the West Bank.

The accusation by the woman, Suha Jbara, 31, came on the eve of PA President Mahmoud Abbas’s visit to New York, where he is scheduled to assume the chairmanship of the largest bloc of developing countries in the United Nations, known as the “Group of 77 and China.”

As chairman of the group, which represents 134 nations, Abbas and the “State of Palestine” will negotiate and co-sponsor proposals and amendments on various developmental, humanitarian and legal issues that are on the agenda of the UN.

On January 11, Jbara, who was released last week from detention, held a press conference in Ramallah in which she detailed the various methods of torture she experienced at the hands of her Palestinian interrogators. Her horrific experience, however, does not seem to be on the agenda of the UN or the Group of 77 and China, headed by Abbas. Apparently, the UN group’s members, who voted in favor of naming the “State of Palestine” as chairman of the group, do not care much about the human rights record of the PA security forces in the West Bank.

Jbara, a dual citizen of the US and Panama, was arrested by the Palestinian Authority security forces in early November 2018 at her home near the West Bank city of Ramallah. According to Jbara, she was accused of “illegally collecting donations” for families of Palestinians killed or wounded during clashes with the Israeli army.

Bizarrely, the PA is accusing Jbara of something that the PA itself has done for years and is still doing: paying salaries to Palestinians in Israeli prison and the families of Palestinians killed while carrying out attacks on Israelis. According to Jbara, her interrogators also accused her of “collaborating” with Israel. During her detention, she went on hunger strike for 27 days.

The torture, according to Jbara, included pouring cold water on her face, solitary confinement for several days, strip-search, sleep deprivation, lengthy hours of interrogation and verbal abuse.

“The first stages were the worst,” Jbara told the Palestinian Wattan TV station.

“They interrogated me for several hours, without taking into consideration that I felt sick. They moved me from one office to another. I saw a number of detainees who were blindfolded and handcuffed. The interrogators were pouring cold water on their faces and some of the detainees were lying on the floor. It was a horrifying experience for me.”

Jbara also said that the Palestinian interrogators threatened to take her three children away from her. “They used my children to blackmail me,” she reported. The interrogators apparently also threatened her mother, her sisters and her with sexual assault. “I’m now in a very bad health condition,” she said. “I even have difficulty walking.”

Last month, a representative of Amnesty International met with Jbara, while she was still being held in Palestinian detention, and heard about her brutal treatment at the hands of her interrogators. “The Palestinian authorities must urgently investigate the torture and ill-treatment of Suha Jbara, an activist who has told Amnesty International that she was beaten, slammed against a wall and threatened with sexual violence by her interrogators,” the organization wrote.

According to Amnesty’s report, Jbara described how, upon her arrest, she had a seizure, lost consciousness and was taken to a hospital. Armed security officials later dragged her barefoot, out of the hospital, and transferred her to the Jericho Central Prison.

There, when she asked for a drink, a male interrogator threw water in her face, slapped her, punched her in the chest and back, and threatened her with further violence. She was blindfolded and handcuffed throughout her interrogation, and was not allowed to drink water or use the lavatory.

“He insulted me all the time,” she said, “used very dirty and violent sexual language, threatened to bring a doctor to look into my virginity and say that I was a whore, and threatened to hurt my family and to take my kids away from me.”

According to Saleh Higazi, Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International:

“Suha Jbara has described her torture in harrowing detail. In her testimony she gives an account of ruthless interrogators who have shamelessly flouted Palestine’s obligations to treat prisoners humanely and violated the absolute prohibition under international law of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.”

Yet, Jbara’s story has barely attracted the attention of the international mainstream media. As far as many foreign journalists covering the Middle East are concerned, a Palestinian woman complaining about torture in a Palestinian prison is not newsworthy. Had she been detained by Israel, Jbara would have most likely made it to the front pages of the world’s leading newspapers and magazines in a matter of minutes.

This is the kind of story that the “State of Palestine” does not intend to raise during its chairmanship of the largest bloc of developing countries at the UN. It seems that, from the point of view of the Palestinian Authority leadership, Jbara’s ordeal does not fall within the category of human rights.

The PA regularly complains about human rights violations of Palestinians held in Israeli prison for security-related offenses. But when the PA’s own security forces detain and torture a mother of three, Palestinian leaders are found elsewhere — like at the helm of a UN bloc.

Actually, Palestinian leaders can rest easy concerning their torture of Palestinians. By being selected to head the bloc of developing countries, Abbas and the leaders of the “State of Palestine” will be in the company of countries rewarded for human rights violations — including Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iraq, Venezuela and Yemen — just elected as the vice-president of the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women, despite Yemen being ranked “as the worst country in the world on gender inequality (149th out of 149)” — as well as several countries in Africa and Asia. That group exemplifies the old saying: birds of a feather flock together — and these birds are definitely of the predator type.

Khaled Abu Toameh, an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem, is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at Gatestone Institute.

It seems that a jury found a illegal immigrant that had been deported six times and was a convicted felon, innocent of the death of Kate Steinle. Not even a verdict of negligent manslaughter was awarded to the case.

My guess is that since the City of San Francisco had recently refused to hold him for ICE agents, before the murder, city officials were concerned about their civil liability. They figured that by politicizing this man as a hapless victim with the verdict, they would not be liable in the civil case.

That poor girl and her family deserved justice, and received none. The moral fabric of our country is in bad need of repair. This was a political lynching of our justice system.

The Governor of California is proposing the taxation of water 💦. Funny because regressive taxes such as this, would hurt the very people that social justice politicians claim to care about. The hunt for taxes intensifies in these virtue signaling sanctuary states and municipalities as taxpayer funded benefits are handed out to the various groups of perpetual victims.

It is easy to virtue signal with other people’s money 💰. They never seem to grasp the cause and effect correlation here, or they just don’t care.