[roenxi]

> Fines are there for good valid reason?

Empirically, we know that is not true. Some legislation embodies bad ideas.

China - alleged communists - have outperformed the EU at creating a viable software industry. Regardless of the arguments about what approaches are good and bad, there is pretty evidence that whatever "good" means, Europe is struggling to achieve it.

[forgotmyoldname]

>China - alleged communists - have outperformed the EU at creating a viable software industry.

If anything, this could be because of the communist aspect. Companies of a certain size become entwined with the government in China. Funding isn't really a concern when the state backs you up. Similarly, but without state support, the US has Silicon Valley investors who'll always throw cash at companies with the right connections and sometimes random people with decent business ideas.

Does the EU have anything similar to grow companies?

[panick21_]

Yeah large companies in the EU never get entwined with the government.

In fact, I would argue because of the many small countries, many companies are incredibly entwined with the government. Because many of these countries only have few large companies.

I think the West loves saying 'all China suggests is because the government just finances every single company'. In reality this just doesn't seem to practically hold up. If all the companies are always losing money and have infinite money. Why are many they so good as scraping, forward looking, innovative and so on.

Its not government money that makes some of the China car makers better at software, or faster at adopting new innovations.

A contractor of Arianespace for Ariane 6 had an issue, RUAG had an issue with fairing. And the Swiss government jumped in. And this happen very often in many industries. I am not confident that all of the recent space companies in China would get the same treatment.

[forgotmyoldname]

China literally does finance the companies. They’re required to have N% of their staff be CCP members once they reach a certain size.

It doesn’t mean companies are free to just lose money. It means they can take risks and not just milk immediate profits for stock gains.

[panick21_]

Are you telling me everyone of the 100s of EV startups every single one of them is explicitly backed up by government?

> It means they can take risks and not just milk immediate profits for stock gains.

Given how many US companies do the same and how many companies are heavily protected in Europe I fail to see this as sufficient explanation.

[forgotmyoldname]

You’re really extrapolating a lot that I didn’t even come close to saying.

Sufficiently large companies are required to have a certain percent of their staff be CCP members making decisions. That also comes with money tied up in the company. That doesn’t mean every company is backed up by the government. You’re making wild straw men and getting enraged at your own argument.

[panick21_]

Ok, so if every company has that then so what? Non of that proves that they automatically are save from bankruptcy.

And also that doesn't explain why so many initially small companies end up being successful.

[afiori]

Banning google and facebook opens a lot of markets.