Liberals, not in the same league as entrepreneurs
Original Gu Yuan Gu Boss's Lair 2023-11-08
Original: Thunderbolt Plus Original Author: Haze
People who are extremely supportive of the market economy are always regarded as lackeys of capital, because there is a phenomenon in the market economy, that is, only a few entrepreneurs can become extremely rich.
And for many people who want to be rich and poor, those of us who shout every day for a more thorough marketization have become the lackeys of the capitalists in their eyes.
Liberals also often defend entrepreneurs, for example, that there is no monopoly as long as there is no administrative license, free contracts and transactions in the market.
This kind of regular defense has also given many people the impression of being a lackey of the capitalists.
However, liberals, by no means from the position of entrepreneurs, this is a complete misunderstanding, and the real liberals also have a position, that is, consumers.
In this world, entrepreneurs are not only the organizers of production and the creators of wealth, but they are also often the initiators of regulation.
Entrepreneurs use politics to crack down on competitors and promote various regulatory policies, which is the norm in this world, and their identity itself does not represent freedom and the market.
Large enterprises in Europe and the United States have lobbied the government to regulate the imports of enterprises in other countries in order to reduce their competitors at home, and this has been a phenomenon that has lasted in Europe and the United States for more than 100 years.
Because of regulation, it will shackle their competitors and make the position of big business more stable.
For example, the global control of intellectual property rights must have suppressed small enterprises, and large enterprises have promoted the United States to spread the control of intellectual property rights to the world.
India's generic drugs are certainly hurting the interests of big pharma in the United States, who of course want to develop once and eat high profits for decades.
A lot of the regulations in China are also driven by companies.
SOEs, of course, are afraid of competition, so there are barriers to entry, they also demand credit privileges, and they also require various tariff controls to avoid competition.
China's large private enterprises also have such motivation. The more regulation, the more conducive to the development of large enterprises, therefore, in the context of maintaining the healthy development of the industry, they will support the government to introduce more regulatory measures to raise the threshold for small and medium-sized enterprises to compete with them.
BYD's Wang Chuanfu actively promoted the theory of resource depletion, but he hoped that the government would regulate more fuel vehicles, which would be more conducive to the development of his current tram market.
Government regulation does not come from theories, but most of the time, from people's actions driven by the loss of profits.
Meituan has been attacked because many catering companies that have not entered Meituan, or who do not sell well on Meituan, are dissatisfied with Meituan, because merchants who operate better food delivery have robbed them of their business.
Behind the attack on e-commerce and live broadcasting, it is also a public opinion criticism issued by countless brick-and-mortar stores after they fail to compete, and behind their attacks is the hope that the government will regulate e-commerce so that their backward businesses can survive.
In the early days, the United States also had the theory of infant industrial protection, which was similar to China's theory of national industrial protection, which was that those enterprises that were not competitive in the international market maintained their survival by creating public opinion, lobbying the government, and regulating foreign enterprises.
This is also the essence of the trade war between China and the United States, and the global competitiveness of American companies is decreasing, so controlling Chinese companies and raising tariffs on Chinese products is their way to attack competitors.
Wall Street in the United States and securities practitioners in China have long called on the government to release the water, because they are often the beneficiaries of the monetary flood, and by getting the money first, they can deprive others of the income of those who get the money later.
Profit-driven, especially economic profit-driven, is the motivation for most of the actions of people in this world.
There is competition between all suppliers and producers. Labor competes with labor, so American labor advocates preventing Lao Mo from entering the United States. Businesses and businesses are competing, and as a result, they each attack their competitors through political means.
It is impossible for liberals to stand on the side of the interests of a specific producer, because not all producers' actions based on profit are justified.
The position of liberals can only be the consumer.
Consumers are the identity of everyone in this world, and everyone has to consume. The biggest benefit of the market economy is not that the rich have become richer, but that consumers can buy cheaper goods.
This is the most fundamental profit motive for liberals to support the market economy, and he is not only closely related to the personal interests of every liberal, but also represents the long-term interests of all people in the world.
Consumers are the protagonists of the market economy, not entrepreneurs.
In a market economy, consumers vote with their money, they choose who is the best entrepreneur, and they will inevitably oppose any regulation, which can only reduce supply and increase prices, which is contrary to the interests of every consumer in the world.
In the market economy, the consumer is the emperor, the entrepreneur does not meet the needs of the consumer, must be eliminated from the market, without the government compulsion, just through the money vote, the consumer can control the fate of the entrepreneur, or success, or bankrupt.
From this standpoint, it is clear that those regulatory policies are not good for consumers in the long run. They are nothing more than satisfying the privileged interests of a few producers.
The general strike of American auto workers only satisfies the interests of the workers of the three major auto factories, but it definitely infringes on the interests of consumers.
Intellectual property rights, especially patent rights, simply serve the interests of large corporations that own and buy countless patent rights that prevent small businesses from competing with them.
Medical regulation is nothing more than satisfying the interests of medical practitioners in controlling external competition.
And these are all bad for the consumer, because he is hindering the consumer from getting a better and cheaper product.
It is the consumers who need the market economy, and the consumers who need to protect the property rights of entrepreneurs, only in this way can enterprises continue to invest, continue to expand production, and eventually make all consumer goods cheaper and cheaper.
Today, an ordinary Chinese has surpassed the vast majority of ancient emperors and generals in terms of material comfort. As long as the market economy is developing, today's luxury goods are tomorrow's daily necessities.
In the 40s of the last century, most landlords in China only ate white rice during the Chinese New Year, but today a migrant worker in China can buy more than 100 catties of rice with a day's income.
In the fiercely competitive industry, such as the express delivery industry, several major express companies have entered a state of loss, who can become the winner is not known, but a commodity from thousands of kilometers away to your home, as little as a few dollars, all Chinese consumers have benefited.
Therefore, liberals, not the lackeys of the capitalists, but the lackeys of the consumers.
Consumers know no borders, regardless of occupation, so liberals are the ones who represent the long-term interests of all.
On the contrary, those who call for all kinds of regulations every day in their professional capacity as workers, businesses, and industry interests are the enemies of liberals and every consumer on the planet.