#electric-carmaker

[avandelay20]

The Musk-Trump lovefest is based on Musk hoping a Trump administration would reduce competition in the EV market.

"

On its face, a second Trump presidency would be bad for companies [like Tesla] trying to move the country away from fossil fuels.

Musk opened the company's investor call by saying the wave of competition killing its profits and shrinking its market share would pass, but he didn't offer any reasoning.

When asked if he was worried about Trump repealing the IRA, Musk tipped his hand. He told investors that the move would be "devastating" for Tesla's competitors but less so for Tesla — in fact, "long term," he said, it would be good for Tesla.

In essence this was an admission that Musk's best hope is that Trump returns to the White House and dismantles the regulatory regime that has encouraged legacy automakers to enter the EV market. The best thing for Tesla is if US legacy automakers like GM and Ford sit on the sidelines.

Rather than worrying about society's move to an all-electric future, Musk is mainly concerned about maintaining Tesla's dominant position in the EV market. 

...

While he's hoping to use Trump to kill of competition in the EV market, Musk is talking up a world of fantastic innovations that Tesla STILL hasn't built yet.

First, he said that Telsa is not a car company; it is an AI company.

Then he promised autonomous robotaxis by August, never mind that Musk has been promising the robotaxi for about a decade.

Then he said the company was making headway with a new humanoid robot called Optimus — never mind that when Tesla unveiled Optimus it was a person dancing in a robot costume, and Tesla still won't say which tasks it can do.

Then he glazed over the product the world really wants: a cheaper Tesla priced at about $25,000 to $30,000. Without providing more detail, he mentioned that those models would start rolling out of factories in the first half of 2025, never mind that Musk has been saying something like that since 2018.

"

Pathetic.

[ur-mag]

Iconic carmaker to launch first ever EV with new electric supercar factory already in the works | In Trend Today

Iconic carmaker to launch first ever EV with new electric supercar factory already in the works Read Full Text or Full Article on MAG NEWS

[gadgets-ark]

Tesla CEO Elon Musk Signals Potential Further Price Cuts Amidst Challenging Market Conditions

[New Delhi]: Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla, has caused a stir in the electric vehicle (EV) market by implying that additional price drops may be forthcoming in reaction to the unstable global economy and intense competition. Since the EV revolution began, Tesla has faced more competition, which has decreased its profit margins and caused a 4% dip in the company’s stock price in after-hours trading…

[carsthatnevermadeitetc]

VinFast VF3, 2024. A new small electric SUV/crossover from the Vietnamese carmaker. Measuring just 3.2 metres long, the VF3 has a 43hp single rear-mounted electric motor and is good for a range of 210km (130 miles).

[shu-of-the-wind]

Notable quotes from this article include:

"The strike – which marks the first time all three of the Detroit Three carmakers have been targeted by strikes at the same time – is being coordinated by UAW president Shawn Fain. He said he intended to launch a series of limited and targeted “standup” strikes to shut individual auto plants around the US." "They involve a combined 12,700 workers at the plants, which are critical to the production of some of the Detroit Three’s most profitable vehicles including the Ford Bronco, Jeep Wrangler and Chevrolet Colorado pickup truck."

"The UAW has a $825m strike fund that is set to compensate workers $500 a week while out on strike and could support all of its members for about three months. Staggering the strikes rather than having all 150,000 members walk out at once will allow the union to stretch those resources.

A limited strike could also reduce the potential economic damage economists and politicians fear would result from a widespread, lengthy shutdown of Detroit Three operations."

AND, THE BIG ONE: "Among the union’s demands are a 40% pay increase, an end to tiers, where some workers are paid at lower wage scales than others, and the restoration of concessions from previous contracts such as medical benefits for retirees, more paid time off and rights for workers affected by plant closures.

Workers have cited past concessions and the big three’s immense profits in arguing in favor of their demands. The automakers’ profits jumped 92% from 2013 to 2022, totaling $250bn. During this same time period, chief executive pay increased 40%, and nearly $66bn was paid out in stock dividends or stock buybacks to shareholders.

The industry is also set to receive record taxpayer incentives for transitioning to electric vehicles.

Despite these financial performances, hourly wages for workers have fallen 19.3%, with inflation taken into account, since 2008."

[argumate]

Even BMW—a company that literally has "motor" for a middle name—only deigns to reveal on its i3 product page that the motor is “AC synchronous.” Meanwhile, the engine in the base-model 3 Series a few clicks over is described as a “2.0-liter BMW TwinPower Turbo inline 4-cylinder, 16-valve 180-hp engine that combines a twin-scroll turbocharger with variable valve control (Double-VANOS and Valvetronic) and high-precision direct injection.” That's before the site goes on to describe the engine’s electronic throttle control, auto start-stop function, direct ignition system with knock control, electronically controlled engine cooling (map cooling), brake energy regeneration, and driving dynamics control with Eco Pro, Comfort, and Sport settings.

But then, it's hard to blame people for not giving a damn. Most consumers—hell, even car geeks—don’t possess the knowledge or vocabulary to authoritatively converse about electric motors, and on the surface, there would seem to be precious little indication that there’s even anything meaningful to discuss about them. It’s a lot harder to get excited about, say, the difference between permanent magnets and AC induction than it is between V8s and twin-turbo sixes. The fact that carmakers and the media don’t billboard motor innovation naturally leads the public to assume that there’s nothing much going on there.

interesting the way marketing focuses on the battery, which obviously has been the major development in the tech overall

[mariacallous]

With the Olympic torch extinguished in Paris, all eyes are turning to Los Angeles for the 2028 Olympics.

The host city has promised that the next Summer Games will be “car-free.”

For people who know Los Angeles, this seems overly optimistic. The car remains king in LA, despite growing public transit options.

When LA hosted the Games in 1932, it had an extensive public transportation system, with buses and an extensive network of electric streetcars. Today, the trolleys are long gone; riders say city buses don’t come on schedule, and bus stops are dirty. What happened?

This question fascinates me because I am a business professor who studies why society abandons and then sometimes returns to certain technologies, such as vinyl records, landline phones, and metal coins. The demise of electric streetcars in Los Angeles and attempts to bring them back today vividly demonstrate the costs and challenges of such revivals.

Riding the Red and Yellow Cars

Transportation is a critical priority in any city, but especially so in Los Angeles, which has been a sprawling metropolis from the start.

In the early 1900s, railroad magnate Henry Huntington, who owned vast tracts of land around LA, started subdividing his holdings into small plots and building homes. In order to attract buyers, he also built a trolley system that whisked residents from outlying areas to jobs and shopping downtown.

By the 1930s, Los Angeles had a vibrant public transportation network, with over 1,000 miles of electric streetcar routes, operated by two companies: Pacific Electric Railway, with its “Red Cars,” and Los Angeles Railway, with its “Yellow Cars.”

The system wasn’t perfect by any means. Many people felt that streetcars were inconvenient and also unhealthy when they were jammed with riders. Moreover, streetcars were slow because they had to share the road with automobiles. As auto usage climbed and roads became congested, travel times increased.

Nonetheless, many Angelenos rode the streetcars—especially during World War II, when gasoline was rationed and automobile plants shifted to producing military vehicles.

Demise of Public Transit

The end of the war marked the end of the line for streetcars. The war effort had transformed oil, tire, and car companies into behemoths, and these industries needed new buyers for goods from the massive factories they had built for military production. Civilians and returning soldiers were tired of rationing and war privations, and they wanted to spend money on goods such as cars.

After years of heavy usage during the war, Los Angeles’ streetcar system needed an expensive capital upgrade. But in the mid-1940s, most of the system was sold to a company called National City Lines, which was partly owned by the carmaker General Motors, the oil companies Standard Oil of California and Phillips Petroleum, and the Firestone tire company.

These powerful forces had no incentive to maintain or improve the old electric streetcar system. National City ripped up tracks and replaced the streetcars with buses that were built by General Motors, used Firestone tires, and ran on gasoline.

There is a long-running academic debate over whether self-serving corporate interests purposely killed LA’s streetcar system. Some researchers argue that the system would have died on its own, like many other streetcar networks around the world.

The controversy even spilled over into pop culture in the 1988 movie Who Framed Roger Rabbit, which came down firmly on the conspiracy side.

What’s undisputed is that, starting in the mid-1940s, powerful social forces transformed Los Angeles so that commuters had only two choices: drive or take a public bus. As a result, LA became so choked with traffic that it often took hours to cross the city.

In 1990, the Los Angeles Times reported that people were putting refrigerators, desks, and televisions in their cars to cope with getting stuck in horrendous traffic. A swath of movies, from Falling Down to Clueless to La La Land, have featured the next-level challenge of driving in LA.

Traffic was also a concern when LA hosted the 1984 Summer Games, but the Games went off smoothly. Organizers convinced over 1 million people to ride buses, and they got many trucks to drive during off-peak hours. The 2028 games, however, will have roughly 50 percent more athletes competing, which means thousands more coaches, family, friends, and spectators. So simply dusting off plans from 40 years ago won’t work.

Olympic Transportation Plans

Today, Los Angeles is slowly rebuilding a more robust public transportation system. In addition to buses, it now has four light-rail lines—the new name for electric streetcars—and two subways. Many follow the same routes that electric trolleys once traveled. Rebuilding this network is costing the public billions, since the old system was completely dismantled.

Three key improvements are planned for the Olympics. First, LA’s airport terminals will be connected to the rail system. Second, the Los Angeles organizing committee is planning heavily on using buses to move people. It will do this by reassigning some lanes away from cars and making them available for 3,000 more buses, which will be borrowed from other locales.

Finally, there are plans to permanently increase bicycle lanes around the city. However, one major initiative, a bike path along the Los Angeles River, is still under an environmental review that may not be completed by 2028.

Car-Free for 17 Days

I expect that organizers will pull off a car-free Olympics, simply by making driving and parking conditions so awful during the Games that people are forced to take public transportation to sports venues around the city. After the Games end, however, most of LA is likely to quickly revert to its car-centric ways.

As Casey Wasserman, chair of the LA 2028 organizing committee, recently put it: “The unique thing about Olympic Games is for 17 days you can fix a lot of problems when you can set the rules—for traffic, for fans, for commerce—than you do on a normal day in Los Angeles.”

[darkmaga-retard]

It is becoming increasingly clear that the ambitious project adopted mainly by OECD countries to subsidize and force an energy transition away from fossil fuels and drive global greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2050 is failing. An array of corporations and governments at all levels have in recent months announced delays or outright abandonment of aggressive net zero timelines and goals as market forces, resource and capital limitations, and simple realities renders them impractical and unachievable.

In the U.S., this trend has become crystal clear in both the electric vehicles and offshore wind industries over the past twelve months. In the automotive sector, many pure-play EV makers are now either in bankruptcy or teetering on the brink, while legacy carmakers like Ford, GM, Volvo, and Stellantis have spent much of this year having to explain big losses and re-thinking their strategic approaches and investments.

The recent disaster at the Vineyard Wind I project offshore Massachusetts, where the collapse of a 105 meter-long blade littered the Atlantic Ocean and Nantucket Island beaches with chunks of fiberglass core material, forcing federal regulators to shut down the country’s only operational offshore wind project and giving the industry a public relations black eye. It’s also raising public concerns over the vulnerability of such giant blades and turbines perched atop 850-foot-tall towers when rough weather conditions inevitably arise.

[batboyblog]

The Biden administration on Wednesday issued one of the most significant climate regulations in the nation’s history, a rule designed to ensure that the majority of new passenger cars and light trucks sold in the United States are all-electric or hybrids by 2032.

Cars and other forms of transportation are, together, the largest single source of carbon emissions generated by the United States, pollution that is driving climate change and that helped to make 2023 the hottest year in recorded history. Electric vehicles are central to President Biden’s strategy to confront global warming, which calls for cutting the nation’s emissions in half by the end of this decade. But E.V.s have also become politicized and are becoming an issue in the 2024 presidential campaign.

“Three years ago, I set an ambitious target: that half of all new cars and trucks sold in 2030 would be zero-emission,” said Mr. Biden in a statement. “Together, we’ve made historic progress. Hundreds of new expanded factories across the country. Hundreds of billions in private investment and thousands of good-paying union jobs. And we’ll meet my goal for 2030 and race forward in the years ahead.”

The rule increasingly limits the amount of pollution allowed from tailpipes over time so that, by 2032, more than half the new cars sold in the United States would most likely be zero-emissions vehicles in order for carmakers to meet the standards.

That would avoid more than seven billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions over the next 30 years, according to the E.P.A. That’s the equivalent of removing a year’s worth of all the greenhouse gases generated by the United States, the country that has historically pumped the most carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The regulation would provide nearly $100 billion in annual net benefits to society, according to the agency, including $13 billion of annual public health benefits thanks to improved air quality.

The standards would also save the average American driver about $6,000 in reduced fuel and maintenance over the life of a vehicle, the E.P.A. estimated.

The auto emissions rule is the most impactful of four major climate regulations from the Biden administration, including restrictions on emissions from power plants, trucks and methane leaks from oil and gas wells. The rules come on top of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, the biggest climate law in the nation’s history, which is providing at least $370 billion in federal incentives to support clean energy, including tax credits to buyers of electric vehicles.

The policies are intended to help the country meet Mr. Biden’s target of cutting U.S. greenhouse emissions in half by 2030 and eliminating them by 2050. Climate scientists say all major economies must do the same if the world is to avert the most deadly and costly effects of climate change.

“These standards form what we see as a historic climate grand slam for the Biden administration,” said Manish Bapna, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council Action Fund, a political action committee that aims to advance environmental causes.

Mr. Bapna’s group has calculated that the four regulations, combined with the Inflation Reduction Act, would reduce the nation’s greenhouse emissions 42 percent by 2030, getting the country most of the way to Mr. Biden’s 2030 target.

Get in Losers we're going to save the planet.

[szupertibi]

A CNN nem olvassa Mégittvagyunk elvtárs blogját a keleti nyitás csődjéről.

[elektroskopik]

Billionaire on pace to become world’s first trillionaire by 2027, report says

Informa Connect Academy’s finding about the boss of electric carmaker Tesla, private rocket company SpaceX and social media platform X (formerly Twitter) stems from the fact that Musk’s wealth has been growing at an average annual rate of 110%. He was also the world’s richest person, with $251bn, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, as the academy’s 2024 Trillion Dollar Club report began circulating Friday.

The academy’s analysis suggested business conglomerate founder Gautam Adani of India would become the second to achieve trillionaire status. That would reportedly happen in 2028 if his annual growth rate remains at 123%.

Jensen Huang, the chief executive officer of the tech firm Nvidia, and Prajogo Pangestu, the Indonesian energy and mining mogul, could also become trillionaires in 2028 if their trajectories hold. Bernard Arnault, the LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton boss and the world’s third-richest person with about $200bn, is on track to eclipse a trillion dollars in 2030 – the same year as Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Meta.

[jkottke]

What should an electric car sound like? EVs are naturally quiet compared to gas cars, but “the world we built around the automobile relies on sound.” So countries require carmakers to add noise. (Reminder: cities aren’t noisy, cars are.)

[justinspoliticalcorner]

David Zipper at Vox:

Despite a recent slowdown in US sales, global forecasts for electric vehicles remain bullish. Countries across North America, Europe, and Asia are expanding charger networks and offering EV subsidies; global EV sales are projected to nearly triple by 2030, reaching 40 million vehicles annually. The incipient wave of EV purchases raises a question: What will happen to the millions of gas-powered cars whose owners no longer want them? The likely answer: Rather than scrapping used gas vehicles or selling them domestically, rich nations will dispatch them to developing countries where limited incomes and low levels of car ownership have created eager buyers for even older, substandard models.

An influx of used gas cars would be a welcome development for those in the Global South who aspire to automobile ownership, a luxury that many in affluent countries take for granted. But it would undermine efforts to mitigate climate change, since shifting gas guzzlers from one country to another doesn’t lower global emissions. For developing countries themselves, a sharp increase in car ownership could amplify calls to build auto-reliant infrastructure, making it harder to construct the dense neighborhoods and transit networks that can foster more sustainable growth. And since these imported used cars would be fueled by gasoline, air quality would further decline in cities that are already choked with smog. The world is in an era of polycrisis, facing concurrent challenges including climate change, toxic air, and extreme inequality. Difficult trade-offs are often inevitable. Such is the case with the thorny issue of what to do with the millions of gas cars that the rich world will discard as its fleets are electrified. Electrification is a necessary goal. And it’s natural for people in the developing world to desire the same luxuries that characterize middle-class comfort in wealthier countries. The question is how to manage a transition with enormous stakes that has largely been ignored. The experts who do pay attention are growing alarmed.

[...]

How used cars move from rich nations to poor ones

Although it generates few headlines, a massive industry transports used cars across borders every day, with exporters collecting lower-quality models from dealers and wholesale auctions. Ayetor noted that colonial legacies are reflected in the trade flows: the UK, with its car cabins designed for drivers who keep to the left, tends to ship to former colonies like Kenya and Tanzania that still follow the same rules.

According to a report issued in June by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), some 3.1 million used cars were exported in 2022, up from 2.4 million in 2015. Most come from Japan, Europe, and the United States. (In the US, around 7 percent of all cars no longer in use are sent abroad. The rest end up in junkyards where their parts and materiel are sold off.) About one in three exported used vehicles is destined for Africa, followed by Eastern Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America. Imported models often dominate local auto sales, since international carmakers send few new vehicles to the Global South and rarely establish production facilities there. (In sub-Saharan Africa, only South Africa has local factories.) The developing world’s demand for cars is robust, in large part because comparatively few people own one. According to one 2020 estimate, the US had 860 cars for every 1,000 residents, while South Africa had 176, Morocco 112, and Nigeria just 56. Meanwhile, growing populations provide a steady supply of new potential customers. Africa is home to all of the world’s 20 fastest-growing countries, with Angola, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Niger, and Uganda expanding their populations by at least 3 percent per year. (For comparison, the US population is growing at a 0.67 percent rate).

[...]

The world needs a plan to adapt

The risks of aged, polluting cars sent abroad will not be borne by the Global South alone. Climate change is a planetary phenomenon; driving a gas guzzler produces the same amount of emissions in Lusaka as it would in London or Los Angeles. Reducing greenhouse gasses requires reducing total vehicle emissions, not just shifting their location. In an ideal world, electrification would enable the rich world to scrap its most decrepit gas cars. Instead, wealthy nations are likely to ship them to poorer countries, which will be left to figure out what to do when even the most MacGyver-like mechanics cannot keep them running. “All of your worst vehicles end up here,” Ayetor said. “When we want to get rid of the vehicle, what do we do?” No wealthy nations currently screen exported vehicles to weed out those that flunk basic quality tests, Kopf said. But that may soon change. The European Union is now considering new regulations that would prohibit exporting “end of life” vehicles, requiring that cars shipped abroad obtain a certificate confirming their roadworthiness. Its adoption would be a “game-changer,” according to UNEP’s Akumu. (She and Kopf said they know of no comparable proposals under consideration in North America.)

With the increase of electric vehicles in the developed countries, used gas-fueled cars are headed to a developing country (aka the Global South) at increasing rates.

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from the New York Times:

The Biden administration on Friday tightened vehicle fuel mileage standards, part of its strategy to transform the American auto market into one that is dominated by electric vehicles that do not emit the pollution that is heating the planet.

The new mileage standards announced by the Transportation Department are among several regulations the administration is using to prod carmakers to produce more electric vehicles. In April, the Environmental Protection Agency issued strict new limits on tailpipe pollution that are designed to ensure that the majority of new passenger cars and light trucks sold in the United States are all-electric or hybrids by 2032, up from 7.6 percent last year.

In addition to the regulations, the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, championed by Mr. Biden, provides tax credits for buyers of new and used electric vehicles, along with incentives for charging stations and grants and loans for manufacturers.

The push for more E.V.s comes as the world’s leading climate experts say that retiring the internal combustion engine is critical to staving off the most deadly effects of global warming.

But Mr. Biden’s efforts have become a meaty target for former President Donald J. Trump and other Republicans who frame them as the federal government taking away consumer choice. The oil and gas industry is spending millions on advertising that falsely calls Mr. Biden’s policies a ban on conventional cars.

The new standards require American automakers to increase fuel economy so that, across their product lines, their passenger cars would average 65 miles per gallon by 2031, up from 48.7 miles today. The average mileage for light trucks, including pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles, would have to reach 45 miles per gallon, up from 35.1 miles per gallon.

The standards will also require heavy-duty pickup trucks, such as the Chevrolet Silverado 2500 HD, and large vans, such as Amazon delivery vans, to reach 35 miles per gallon by 2035, up from 18.8 miles per gallon today.

The E.P.A.’s emissions rule and the Transportation Department’s mileage standard were designed to achieve similar results through different means. The E.P.A. rule lowers the amount of carbon dioxide that can be emitted from a vehicle’s tailpipe. The Transportation Department rule lowers the amount of gasoline, the fuel that produces the carbon dioxide pollution, that a vehicle can burn in order to move.

[beardedmrbean]

China is facing the prospect of further G7 sanctions.

The G7 has accused it of helping arm Russia against Ukraine.

Balancing its support for Russia with its European trading ties is becoming tricky for China.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg this week warned China it faces a stark choice if it continues backing Russia's Ukraine invasion.

"Publicly, President Xi has tried to create the impression that he's taking a back seat in this conflict to avoid sanctions and keep trade flowing," Stoltenberg said.

"But the reality is that China's fueling the largest armed conflict in Europe since World War II.

"At the same time, it wants to maintain good relations with the West.

"Well, Beijing cannot have it both ways. At some point, and unless China changes course, allies need to impose a cost."

A tough stance

The remarks are part of a tough new stance from the US and its allies over China's alleged provision of crucial dual-use goods to Russia to fuel the Kremlin's war machine.

The US believes China has supplied Russia with equipment such as chips and integrated circuits, which can be used to produce weapons. In response, China has said it is not a party to the Ukraine war and that there should be no interference with trade between China and Russia.

At the G7 summit last weekend, the leaders unambiguously signaled their growing frustration with China in a joint statement. "China's ongoing support for Russia's defense industrial base is enabling Russia to maintain its illegal war in Ukraine and has significant and broad-based security implications," said the leaders of some of the world's biggest advanced economies.

It came days after the European Commission told Chinese carmakers that it would provisionally apply duties of up to 38% on imported Chinese electric vehicles from next month.

And in April and May, the US imposed new sanctions on Chinese banks and companies it accused of supplying goods and services for the Russian military.

Xi's balancing act

Analysts say that China is performing a balancing act. It is backing the Russian invasion to dent US global power while also seeking to maintain the trading ties with Europe its economy depends on.

The US has long been pushing its European allies to adopt a tougher stance toward Beijing similar to its own.

But they have hesitated until now. Many retain close economic ties with China, with the European economic giant Germany long dependent on China's manufacturing might for products such as cars and electronic devices.

But at the G7 there were signs that might be about to change, and Europe's leaders are becoming increasingly exasperated with China.

In the statement, members said they were willing to punish Beijing further for its support of Russia.

"We will continue taking measures against actors in China and third countries that materially support Russia's war machine, including financial institutions, consistent with our legal systems," they said.

China-Europe tensions increase

It's not just China's support for Russia that appears to be focusing European minds on the potential threat it poses.

In recent months, authorities in Germany and the UK have arrested people accused of spying for China, and the European Union has accused Beijing of flooding markets with cheap electronic cars.

China has sought to exploit divisions in Europe, with Xi visiting Hungary and Serbia in May, just after visiting France's President Emanuel Macron. Both have taken a critical stance towards Ukraine and appear keen to do more business with China, in defiance of EU policy. And China also seems keen to drive a wedge between European countries and the US.

But China's attempts to sustain its balancing act appear to be getting more difficult to sustain.

A person familiar with G7 talks told the Financial Times: "The era of naivety towards Beijing is definitely gone now and China is to blame for that, honestly."

[iww-gnv]

A potential strike by U.S. auto workers in September would be a high-stakes problem for President Biden, who's trying to balance his push for electric vehicles with his self-description as "the most pro-union president ever." Driving the news: The United Auto Workers worries that EV factories won't employ as many people as traditional plants, and that new battery factories spurred by the president's tax incentives will pay lower wages. Why it matters: In addition to the political implications, a work stoppage by nearly 150,000 UAW workers at GM, Ford and Stellantis would result in an economic loss of more than $5 billion after 10 days, according to Anderson Economic Group. Zoom in: UAW members will vote this week on whether to authorize their fiery new leader, Shawn Fain, to call a strike against Detroit carmakers when their contract expires Sept. 14.

[Read the rest]