> I'm not sure how efficient China's hugely state-directed investment system is Every system misallocates resources, but some misallocation is more "beneficial

> I'm not sure how efficient China's hugely state-directed investment system is Every system misallocates resources, but some misallocation is more "beneficial" than others, i.e. arguably it's better to be overcapacity on infra than under. There's something to be said about the tangible byproduct of PRC misallocation. Versus something like US tendency to misallocate resources into intangibles like the stock market, currently with capitalization to GDP nearing 200% that makes PRC misallocation that generates stuff that can be useful seem preferable in comparison. It’s like how hosting the Olympics is notoriously corrupt but simultaneously the only way for some systems to build useful things that are long term beneficial. Ditto with inefficient “industrial policy” that the PRC adopted from the US and US is learning to re-adopt. Misallocating 100s of billions to get semiconductors and turbojets for PRC or reshoring semi for US is ultimately better than not realizing those goals at all. Fast, cheap, good - sometimes optimizing for only one thing is still better than nothing. It's not efficient, but IMO PRC state-directed investment is still largely useful. Question is of course sustainabilty.