A subsidy-fueled boom helped build China into an electric-car giant but left weed-infested lots across the nation brimming with unwanted battery-powered vehicles.

  • @Moonrise2473@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    607 months ago

    They’ve been abandoned not because obsolete but because the unlimited unrestricted capitalism ordered to build a service that nobody wanted to use because “we must grow and be the first to hit the market whatever it takes”

      • @t3rmit3@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        14
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Capitalism dictates maximizing profit by any means, including taking free money from the government.

        • @jarfil@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          57 months ago

          A government giving out targeted free money, is not an “unrestricted capitalism” government.

          China, is an aggressively capitalist society, colliding with a strongly communist facade. Or a disaster in slow motion.

          • @t3rmit3@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            17 months ago

            China is an instance of State Capitalism, where the government owns the means of production, and uses it for profit-generation. The only reason that anyone in the West actually believes it’s at all Communist is because we’re so indoctrinated by Red Scare propaganda that most people can’t tell the difference between “workers own” and “the government owns”, since the only kind of private ownership we recognize is ownership by oligarchs/corporations.

      • Sonori
        link
        fedilink
        107 months ago

        Subsidies are by definition not a restriction on bad behavior but an incentive. There is no reason a company can’t ignore a subsidy if it doesn’t want to.

        • @Hirom@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          4
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Subsidies skew the market toward specific sectors, technologies, or actors. A company that do not benefit from subsidies is at a competitive disadvantage vs a company that do get subsidies.

          A totally free market wouldn’t have any subsidies. But markets aren’t totally free in practice.

          Subsidies are typically a good thing when it benefits cleaner tech or improving energy efficiency. It’s the fossil fuel subsidies that do the most harm.

              • @t3rmit3@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                1
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Sure, in the same way that a central characteristic of Communism is being a Stateless society, even though that part never seems to happen either (thanks, Lenin). “True Capitalism has never been tried before!”

          • Sonori
            link
            fedilink
            27 months ago

            I would argue that being horriblely disadvantaged by not getting free money is not in fact a restriction on the market.

            • @Hirom@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              17 months ago

              That’s technically correct. It’s not a restriction. But it’s not a neutral for the market either.

              • Sonori
                link
                fedilink
                27 months ago

                Of course it’s not neutral, but we’re talking about wether or not it is comparable with unrestricted capitalism.

      • hh93
        link
        fedilink
        67 months ago

        China is not a country that gives subsidies but a corporation that invests in branches it wants to grow