What is the biggest difference between state-owned enterprises and private enterprises?

The biggest difference between state-owned enterprises and private enterprises is the whereabouts of working capital.

A friend I know said that the bottom line of state-owned enterprises is the loss of state-owned assets, while the bottom line of private enterprises is cash flow. Yes, but you can actually start talking about it. Since SOEs do not need to consider profitability to a certain extent, their debt can be extended at any time, so they can eat into large investments with slow returns such as high-speed rail/bridges/communications. What if these things were left to private companies? That simply won't do. However, fierce competition and the elimination of the possibility that the capital chain of private enterprises may currently be broken have also generated a lot of vitality, which belongs to the market. They are suitable for reducing the costs of state-owned enterprises.

For example, our company has issued an order to you to make a special screw on the bridge, which is definitely more cost-effective and efficient than opening my own factory. In fact, the layoffs of the 1990s followed the logic of bringing short-lived non-civilian and defense markets to market. The pain was really painful and even a bunch of innocent people were sacrificed, but the economy survived in the end. Then we can see that state-owned enterprises and private enterprises are actually indispensable in our economic structure, and returning to the era of big pots is inefficient.

Improvements in infrastructure will further promote economic development and promote the prosperity of private enterprises. So many people say that state-owned enterprises are zombies, and it is very unreasonable to lay off state-owned enterprises. By cutting off state-owned enterprises, private enterprises will not get better, but will only get worse, taking over the production capacity of developing countries. If you are poor and offer low prices, you will have a comparative advantage in human resources and have access to outside investment and markets. We usually developed in this way before 2008. After 2008, our comparative advantage declined and global consumption weakened. This item will not work immediately. Technological progress makes the cake bigger. Now that we have made some breakthroughs in this area, we are still embarrassed. In fact, the growth of developed countries mainly depends on debt-driven and scientific and technological progress, so an annual growth rate of 1% to 2% is already relatively good.