Chinese Economics Thread

You goofed again. You took out the word "technological" before the innovation and it made things so different. Billionaire businesses have their innovations like lithography, jet engines, supercomputers, etc... and small businesses have their innovations, like noodle splash mouth-guard, humane mousetrap, tuna flavored ice cream, etc... You tell me which is more important to national power.
The character and charm of small business innovations do contribute to soft power, it is a significant complement to hard power.
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



Lmao some 4D chess from the regulator here. They collect these sweet billions from Alibaba, and then use part of money to increase their staffing and capabilities so that they can catch them and other companies, faster in the future.

TLDR: The anti trust campaign is serious this time

Jack Ma did say once that he is keeping his money safe for the country and China could nationalize Alibaba if the need arises...

Xi Jinping: time to put your words to the test.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
The character and charm of small business innovations do contribute to soft power, it is a significant complement to hard power.
Absolutely, and they are still the backbone of the economy. I would never say to get rid of small businesses but the debate was whether you could just eject all the billionaires as "not needed" and my response is that in a simple small town style economy, you might be fine but technologically, all the cutting edge high tech innovations are too big and out of reach for small businesses. It's only the billionaires and their mega-corps that can tackle that and add to national technological growth.
 

spring2017

New Member
Registered Member
Big businesses (and billionaires) do not lead in technogical innovation.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"government is behind the boldest risks and biggest breakthroughs"

This is a old FT article, but worth read again (and again). I agree with you, Billionaires are not the source of innovation, otherwise USSR would not have had any advanced technologies as it did.
 

B.I.B.

Captain
Just wondering, if SMIC dominates the supply of the older chips mostly used in current consumer electronics and vehicles, then why is it not reflected in its share price? If it achieves its set goals, then its future prospects look good......right?
 
Last edited:

voyager1

Captain
Registered Member
Just to give you the scale of China's ambition in developing a self-sufficient semiconductor industry

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Top companies and their country as a % share of Chinese (not sure if global or Chinese, i think its Chinese) revenue in 2019:

semicond-fig5.png
 
Last edited:

montyp165

Junior Member
Just wondering, if SMIC dominates the supply of the older chips mostly used in current consumer electronics and vehicles, then why is it not reflected in its share price? If it achieves its set goals, then its future prospects look good......right?
A good recent example how share price and actual provided value isn't necessarily aligned would be Gamestop stock.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"government is behind the boldest risks and biggest breakthroughs"
It's not a matter of big and small but a matter of putting as much power and as many sources of technological innovation possible behind the national drive to advance. You don't butcher a large engine of innovation just because it's not your biggest one; you use all of them together.
This is a old FT article, but worth read again (and again). I agree with you, Billionaires are not the source of innovation, otherwise USSR would not have had any advanced technologies as it did.
Billionaires are not the only source of technological innovation, but when government alone (Soviets) went up against government plus private sector (USA), government alone lost. You fight one arm tied against someone fighting with both arms and you're gonna have a bad time unless he's a total shrimp compared to you.

Any nation on a quest to malign and destroy its rich and exceptional individuals is on a crusade against its own development. All of the most technologically advanced countries in the world harvest both the power of the state and that of it champions of private industry, which are the billionaires. Nobody supports illegal and corrupt activity but when a billionaire does everything legally and is simply a winner in the system, the only complaints against him/her amount to sour grapes, jealousy and hatred for those who have achieved more.
 
Last edited:

KYli

Brigadier
Just wondering, if SMIC dominates the supply of the older chips mostly used in current consumer electronics and vehicles, then why is it not reflected in its share price? If it achieves its set goals, then its future prospects look good......right?
SMIC's valuation is already inflated due to the expectation of 14nm and 7nm being fully commericized and further support from the government.
 
Top