Every Comment | "Not even a single child" is also the most hardcore affirmation

Questioning AI · How do the boundaries between government and market affect business growth?

Everyday Economic Commentator Fu Keyou

Fame brings controversy. Zhang Xue, founder of Zhang Xue Motorcycles, was interviewed by the media. When asked about the support from the Chongqing government, he candidly replied, “Not a single penny,” sparking public debate.

First, it needs to be clarified that when Zhang Xue said “not a single penny,” he did not mean he received no support at all from the local government, but rather no direct financial investment. His spontaneous remark was obviously misinterpreted in the public discourse.

Of course, this statement sounds blunt and somewhat harsh, even somewhat abrasive. But coming from Zhang Xue, it seems very natural. First, as a grassroots entrepreneur who rose from nothing, he has no words like “waiting for help” in his vocabulary; second, Zhang Xue’s personality is straightforward—he doesn’t deliberately flatter or perform gratitude shows.

Zhang Xue’s bold statement of “not a single penny” precisely indicates his firm belief: success depends on products, technology, and markets, not government subsidies or favors. This is a sincere tribute to market logic and a precise definition of the government’s role.

In my view, “not a single penny” is not criticism or complaint, but rather a strong affirmation of the local government.

Because Zhang Xue’s words touch on a deeper issue: what role should the government play in industrial development? Where exactly are the boundaries between government and market?

From an economic perspective, the market has an “invisible hand,” while the government is the “night watchman of the market economy.” The market is responsible for resource allocation, efficiency, and innovation; the core role of the government is to provide institutions, maintain the environment, ensure fairness, and deliver public services, reducing institutional transaction costs. Clear boundaries and well-defined responsibilities allow effective markets and proactive governments to work together toward optimal economic operation.

From this perspective, the local government does not “give money,” but provides a complete motorcycle industry chain, a fair business environment, efficient public services, a stable and predictable institutional space, and an atmosphere of free competition. This “soil” for market economy is far more valuable than “a penny.”

For example, Chongqing is China’s motorcycle capital. From engines to carbon fiber covers, from electronic control systems to lightweight frames, the complete industrial support allows Zhang Xue to “one-stop assemble.” The ecosystem formed by market competition is the most solid “soil” for Zhang Xue’s entrepreneurship.

When Zhang Xue says “not a single penny,” it means no special favors, no “small kitchens,” which precisely indicates that the business environment is fair, transparent, and inclusive—every enterprise starts from the same starting line.

An entrepreneur from the grassroots doesn’t need connections or background; they can start from scratch and reach the world stage here. This means the soil here can help grassroots grow into towering trees and turn passion into legends—doesn’t this serve as the strongest proof of the local manufacturing industry and industrial chain, as well as the highest affirmation of the local market mechanism and business environment?

Conversely, Zhang Xue also proves with his success: what enterprises need is never special “nurturing,” but the “soil” of a market economy. This is exactly the institutional dividend that Chongqing has provided to Zhang Xue.

For local governments, the greatest achievement is not “how much money was invested,” but how many local champions capable of competing with global giants have been cultivated; the greatest benefit is not short-term glory, but continuous tax revenue, high-quality employment, a driving industrial chain upgrade, and the value of the city’s reputation.

These are more tangible than any government achievements in attracting investment. The government can’t even wait to celebrate; why bother fighting for that “one penny” credit?

For a long time, some localities have developed a fixed mindset: government support means giving money, land, and policies. It seems that not giving money equals “inaction,” and not providing land equals “lack of support.” This mindset is prone to deterioration. In fact, participation by local state-owned investment platforms is also a market behavior, which must follow market rules and bear market risks. If not, it’s easy to cultivate “subsidy dependency” enterprises that reveal their true nature with any market fluctuation. “Fatherly love” support may seem warm, but it distorts market signals and wastes public resources. Because true industrial rise has never been achieved by local governments “betting on” projects, but by countless Zhang Xues fighting hard and pushing through.

Businesses belong to businesses, governments belong to governments; markets belong to markets, and authority belongs to authority. The best support from local governments is to let go; the best environment is fairness; the best success is determined by the market. When entrepreneurs don’t need help, don’t overstep; when they need help, don’t be absent; after their success, don’t claim credit. This is the correct posture for local governments and the logical expectation of a market economy.

Daily Economic News