>>28696992
They literally would not though. Do you want to know how I know? Look at how US automakers reacted to cheap Chinese EVs. Here's a list of things they did not say:
>"Deregulate the market so we can make cheap cars too!"
>"Give us lots and lots of state funding and subsidies so we can match China's price-point!"
>"Help us with R&D costs into research to make better and cheaper cars!"

Here's what they DID say:
>"BAN THEM! DO NOT LET THESE CARS IN!"

Are these the words and methods of an industry interested in cheap cars and healthy competition? No. Because expensive cars bring in better margins than cheap cars do all other things equal, regardless of market, and regardless of regulations, and the reason why is what I call the Quality Valley. Pic related.

Cars have a unique market dynamic: they are a long-lasting yet depreciating asset with easily-differentiable variations in technical capability. These variations can be packaged into differing levels of "quality" in the eyes of consumers depending on what they want (speed, comfort, safety, tech factor, simplicity, etc). Their depreciation is somewhat unique in the sense that it is market-wide, occurs regardless of a car's features in the vast majority of instances, and is only reversed after a long period of time or after significant cultural change. The result is that most old cars, regardless of capability, will be cheaper than most newer cars. This creates the Quality Valley.

For any given feature set a consumer desires (Perceived Quality) there is a high chance of a used car possessing all of the required features for a cheaper price than a used car. $17,350 gets you a new Nissan Versa, a 122 HP 4-cyl shitbox only in shades of grey and no features other than lane and pedestrian detection. Meanwhile, $17,350 on the used market gets you basically any kind of car you want. Golden age muscle cars. Golden age luxury cars. Sports cars. Sports compacts. Luxury SUVs. Hybrid sedans. Why buy the Versa at all?