This grants tends to come with strong rules on what you can and can’t do with the money, it’s hard for them to be used to prop up a company substantially, they are used to nudge an industry in a direction the market may not yet reward.
China’s support is an order of magnitude more and essentially allows their companies to be unprofitable and not worry about.
Similar to how American VCs enabled Uber to unprofitably wipe out many countries taxi industries in a way that those taxi companies couldn’t compete with.
> China’s support is an order of magnitude more and essentially allows their companies to be unprofitable and not worry about.
This is not at all the case in China's EV sector. The EV sector is China is extremely cut-throat. BYD is not living off of government subsidies. It's an extremely competitive company that has invested heavily in R&D and which has reduced costs through vertical integration.
Even with these restrictions, wouldn't it possible for a US company to move own funds/or loans from subsidied operations towards being more innovative? With this in mind, isn't this still a government backed business opportunity. Isn't using this opportunity or not on the company leadership?
Also doesn't this kind of thinking leads to an argument that says US govt does not want it's own companies to compete with Chinese ones with these grants by use of limitations?
And another question would be as USA is more of a private enterprise type of a country why wouldn't these VC's and car companies cooperate for this competition?
China’s support is an order of magnitude more and essentially allows their companies to be unprofitable and not worry about.
Similar to how American VCs enabled Uber to unprofitably wipe out many countries taxi industries in a way that those taxi companies couldn’t compete with.