I’m sorry, but that’s just regurgitating the loaded propaganda of the rich and powerful designed to fool the poor to act against their own best interests to take power from a benevolent state trying to protect them and give that power to the capitalists desperate to exploit them. Donald Trump is the poster child of the free market approach. He will send his lawyers in to bankrupt you in court and win by default even when everyone involved knows full well he is wrong. That is exactly the world the rich and powerful capitalists in the west wants, where their (usually inherited) wealth can buy them anything and everything they can dream of, and where they can use their wealth to destroy anyone who stands in their way.
If someone had a Time Machine and went back to introduce regulato prevent the Subprime financial crash, you can make the same airy arrangements about no one knowing the future so no one should do anything to stop the rich from doing plainly wrong and stupid shit.
All this hand wringing about state intervention being ‘brutal’ just sound naive and ignorant, as if free market collapses are a piece of cake. And you only need to look back at recent history to see how the capitalists are magically all for state intervention to bail them out of messes they themselves created from their own greed and hubris.
It’s funny you use the term ‘nanny state’, which was coined to attack the NHS. Look to America’s free market solutions before complaining about how bad the NHS is.
However, you do make some good points that state intervention should be minimised, and that is exactly what China does. It only acts to pre-empt major issues. The key impact of the Chinese system is less that the state jumps in and corrects everything, but rather its moderating impact in getting business and the rich and powerful to check their own worst impulses in the first place.
If you look at things purely logically, China is actually less interventionist than most western capitalist countries. For all their PR BS sound bites, western governments actually directly intervene in global markets far more than China’s government. The big difference is that when the Chinese government intervenes, it does so to benefit society at large. But when western governments intervene, it’s usually to protect the interests of rich capitalists who legally bribed the politicians.
Rather than being ideologically committed to ‘intervention’ or ‘free market’, it’s far more reasonable to look at why governments are intervening in the first place.