Re: Interesting times
The big difference seems to be that Chinese industry is much more aligned with state policy, which makes sense in their system.
Isn't working out so well for Chinese heavy industry and infrastructure, is it? State bureaucrats picking winners is a recipe for failure, and has been wherever it has been tried, and we're just entering the unravelling phase of China's infrastructure growth plans, where they find that there's no happy ending when you have manufacturing capacity at least double the reliable world demand for coal, cement, steel, shipbuilding, or construction work, all funded by debt they will never repay.
Semiconductors sound a lovely growth idea, but sadly they aren't manpower intensive, nor will they demand the sort of skills of (for example) the 100,000 workers laid off by Longmay Group (a large Chinese coal mining conglomerate) late last year. So seeking to build some national champions in semi fabrication isn't that clever - capital intensive, high risk, low job count, all in a cyclical industry with high fixed costs. It'll play out like the other commodity industries that the party has allowed to build up.
Just as the Soviet Union was bankrupted by economic sclerosis and excessive state directed spending (largely on the military), China is at risk of doing the same, except that the state spending is on state-directed "capitalism".