[snowwrestler]

The market solves this problem. If China makes things too hard on intl businesses, the businesses will invest to go around China. That’s what the rare Earth mine example shows.

China needs big intl businesses. The Chinese domestic market is not big enough to support their current pace of economic growth, and the government relies on that growth for social stability.

[remarkEon]

>The market solves this problem. If China makes things too hard on intl businesses, the businesses will invest to go around China. That’s what the rare Earth mine example shows.

What the rare Earth mineral example shows is that China is willing to incur environmental and human rights costs that the West is not, in order to carve out a seat at the table for negotiating future power projection.

>China needs big intl businesses. The Chinese domestic market is not big enough to support their current pace of economic growth, and the government relies on that growth for social stability.

Really not following this point. If anything, this is evidence that elites in the west - who get rich off of the kinds of "market solves everything" solutions you may or may not be alluding to - will continue to ignore the problem as long as the stock market goes up. I also don't understand your point about the size of the domestic market in China. It's well over a billion people. International business looks at those demographics and see nothing but dollar signs. The difference here is that China's government will only let in that business insofar as they see it as enriching their country, and they make this point explicit. Size alone here is an advantage.

[snowwrestler]

In simple terms, the current growth of the Chinese economy is not yet economically self-sustaining in the absence of foreign investment. They have a lot of people, sure, but most of them are still poor.

So the Chinese government does not hold all the cards in their relationship with foreign investors. They need each other, which creates a balance that they both have to carefully negotiate.

[vimy]

> The World Bank Group suggests that the percentage of the population living below the international poverty line of $1.9 (2011 PPP) fall to 0.7 percent in 2015, and poverty line of $3.2 (2011 PPP) to 7% in 2015.[4] At the end of 2018, the number of people living below China's national poverty line of ￥2,300 (CNY) per year (in 2010 constant prices) was 16.6 million, which translated to 1.7% of the population at the time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_China

[goatinaboat]

The market solves this problem. If China makes things too hard on intl businesses, the businesses will invest to go around China

You’re forgetting the time aspect. A government can play a longer game than most private investors.

Markets: 0.25 years

Western govts: 4-5 years

Autocratic regimes: lifetime of dictator

[hliyan]

Agree about free markets and time. Adam Smith's invisible hand moves slowly. The free market might solve all our problems (including pollution) over time, but our generation (and maybe even the next) may not be alive to see it. And the human casualties may be high. Which is why regulation and subsidies are a practical necessity.

[snowwrestler]

The lifetime of an autocratic regime is limited by their ability to control their population—see my 2nd paragraph.

[Siira]

> their ability to control their population

Seeing the results of protests in recent years, this ability seems to be ever increasing.