This then creates a stagnant pool of market shares as the private sector fresh flow of economics drys up as it is all being dammed up in the SOE's. This means were there was once taxes from a private ownership and jobs and decentralized spending on things of the market place now rests a stagnant pool of economic were the government decides were to spend the money.
This in natural law is bad. As it actually creates a bigger loss of jobs than it creates. This is because purely it becomes so centralized that the money that was once flowing in and out of the valleys of economics is now being dammed up and only being placed were the government wants. This means were once you might have had a group of production facilities creating things and spreading out the wealth to different people in different areas. Which could then create small rivers of economics for other shop keepers of persons of need of jobs. Is know lost to a big SOE Champion who dams the market shares in centralized areas and leaves out decentralized effect of spreading out the wealth instead of centralizing it all in one area. Along these lines it creates a more SOE cartel because the government is investing and using the money in its wants and needs as the political party wishes and not what naturally the individuals want. As the Political party wishes to do want the people want but they also do wishes for the natural ideas of country to dominate.
This then takes away possible areas of new investment or even more consumption which then breads more producing and bigger and brighter streams of economics. As the SOE's dams control the stream of economics and centralize it. The private citizens would allow it to naturally flow to and from proper areas of necessity and citizens wishes. Then this creates more taxes, as there becomes more business and more economic spending from the decentralized money being placed back into the stream into a dammed pool. The citizens become busy with their work of what they love and they get to feel close to their work because the business is owned by a person they know and not the government. As such this allows the government to then turn their ideas to more of the citizens and their well being by creating high level of employment laws just like the correlation we have seen with the Chinese privatization we have seen better employment laws. And my keen little grasshoppers may I say the idea to not allow union reps to be paid by the government or the business is a great idea.
That idea in itself proves the free flow of economics and the liberalization of dammed market shares. The idea that the government SOE's which huge portions of their profits flow right back into the government instead of the market place is exactly like the union rep. Right now the SOE's are being paid and working for the government which has its interests of expansion, political dominance possible land acquisition ( that talk about Chinese unification is a little scary) and the such. Much like the union member who works for the business. That union member has in the back of its mind to do what is best for the business and not the citizens. However, when the union rep is allowed to be paid by the union members outside of the ties to the business then it becomes a better freer mindset and that rep is more able to create better employment laws and places to work. Much like the SOE's being liberalized back into the market place and not damming up market shares which then can allow the citizens to do what they wish with their market place as the money will flow freely from one business to the next business creating green fields around it of smaller business which in turn in a proper algorithm could actually create more tax income and ability to legally and fairly compete in the international market. Cause you know, if Chinese individuals or corporations avoid of government ownership wish to compete and whoop but then we really can't say anything. However, right no with the use of SOE's and government straight line of business, y'all cheating and damming up your domestic market shares and international market shares
I am sorry I use stream and dam. That is just how I think of economics. Again I don't think all SOE's are bad, I believe in poverty level market share SOE's as truly we should take care of our poor, sick and elderly. However, I believe the healthy form of economics is liberalization of grasp of SOE's through the streams of economics. Which then creates the freest form of socialist market with the most economic benefit as the tax wealth and public servant expenditures spreads out through the rivers and streams way better and more equally than it does through the dams of SOE' markets as the government uses and dams up the economic flow and then uses it were it thinks it should be used instead of letting it flow freely to create life. Again I am for poverty level SOE market sharers
In Conclusion, I see free markets like a bunch of little rivers with at times big rivers become of nature when the market place finds that business is worth a big value and they wish for it then a creation of a natural economic dam like Detroit used to be. I therefore, see American economics and similar free markets like valleys and hills with streams flowing freely and creating little bushes and green patches as it goes. Were as I see SOE economic strategies like a stagnant pool of economics which grows green and dirty like a lake with no proper streams coming in our out of it. As the dam is created the areas of the stream dry up and pray for the dam to release some of the water to feed them. Where as, the liberalization of the SOE's instead of the conservation and creation of so Called Champions of SOE's will create a bigger employment pool, more taxes, which will create a better quality of life more equally spread out through China, and it will really leave the world international community a fair fight as right now SOE's are cheating and I can say they are cheating without properly explaining line by line legalities. So they are cheating, and they are starting to dam up international resources in the same centralized Champion style that they do domestically.
Therefore, properly regulated streams of economics will work better to spread the quality of life out throughout China instead of the SOE's damming it up and spending money on other things and politically motivated things, rather than proper booming of cities and spreading of economics as is seen in Free Markets. This is how free markets had been run for many years and one of the reasons why America has the highest quality of life through its interior. Economics were allowed to flow through its veins naturally and without to many dams. Then again when it was proper to dam it up it was done by privatization and then properly and strictly regulated by the government. China has the world biggest market. Yet, their quality of life for their interior is not as equally to the states because the government dams up the economic stream and then only allows parts out were and when it thinks it is good. Instead of letting it flow freely through the veins of China. It is much like what we saw in a drastic microscopes view of the same principles in Russia. Were Russia dammed up every industry through government ownership. This in turn left many parts of Russia poor and very unhealthy with little to no public servants during the reign of Leninist Communism. After the fall we can see streams in Russia starting to grow green and creating a spread of wealth more evenly throughout the land than a centralized idea of classless system.
This is another reason why I never understood Marxists theories. As damming up economics or centralizing it so much so as to create it for a communal living situation is not good in macro views. As in macro economics we want diversity and spreading out of the wealth and productivity. This allows for more evenly spread wealth and economic healthy. Were as a centralized economic system wishes to create the cheapest products for the most people. This then creates a vacuum of energy, capital and fair competition. Which is much like a dam starving out the rest of the river unfairly. As such in Macroeconomics the actually liberalization of SOE's would be better to create a higher quality of life more equally spread out because it takes one big company and then spreads it out to many different areas which then create many more different areas of wealth and business creation.
So after my long conclusion through the idea of free flowing economics creating a more equally spread out quality of life to the natural fact that SOE's are doing the bidding of their countries and in this case their single party dominance wishes. I would have to say that if China wishes to create a better quality of life for their citizens they should liberalize their SOE's and not Create SOE champions. Because it will not be to much longer to were every single underdeveloped country and ever free market that has become a satellite dependent on the centralized economic country will become upset and will start to cause detriments in furtherance of free markets by creating protective measures from all competitors. As such for the worlds behalf and for the building of Chinese quality of life through a better quality of life for their citizens they should liberalize their SOE's and not Create SOE champions. Because it will not be to much longer to were every single underdeveloped country and ever free market that has become a satellite dependent on the centralized economic country will become upset and will start to cause detriments in furtherance of free markets by creating protective measures from all competitors. As such for the worlds behalf and for the building of Chinese quality of life through a properly spread out economic flow. I ask humble that China does not create SOE champions yet it allows Champions to naturally grow with nudges and proper bridges and regulations through privatization of economics as it will spread out the quality of life faster and broader than SOE's will.