Why do we only talk about the economy at the problem level? And not just because Q&A is useless
"Correct ownership discrimination, state-owned enterprises and private enterprises are treated equally".
This loud voice shouting for private enterprises comes from female scholar Lin Caiyi.
This is a suggestion by Lin Caiyi, vice president of the China Chief Economist Forum Research Institute, and in fact, the most influential scholar who holds the same view is Liu Shijin, who is more radical and demands:
"Abolish the distinction between state-owned enterprises and private enterprises in the competitive field".
Why do you ask such a question, is it because there is an antagonistic relationship between state-owned enterprises and private enterprises? Or is it going to be privatized completely? This perspective, although macroeconomic, is too prone to ideological criticism; As far as economics is concerned, this is only a matter of knowledge, and there is no question that different property rights can be classified differently in the same market, so it is not a problem of economics, but a completely Chinese problem.
China is a socialist country, and the past 40 years have been centered on economic construction.
After the opening of the new economic era in 2018, it was defined as "people-centered", which goes beyond economics and economic phenomena. In the future, China will definitely restrict the expansion of the private economy on the issue of ownership; There is no problem with a small business, it is just a way for ordinary people to support themselves, and the policy cannot ask for it, and they will continue to support it; If you don't slip away and get lucky, you will be greeted by a modern version of public-private partnerships, through mixed reform, to achieve the way of "redeeming the private economy" pointed out by Engels in the Principles of Communism; The mixed-ownership reform is not parallel, and in principle, the state capital holds 70% of the shares.
In such a climate, is it possible to abolish the distinction between state-owned enterprises and private enterprises in the competitive field?
Approximate rate.
In fact, the vast majority of domestic scholars are emphasizing marketization and emphasizing the market economy as the leading factor in resource allocation; Lin Caiyi and Liu Shimian's proposal is not aimed at ownership, nor does it mean that state-owned enterprises should be eliminated and the road of complete privatization should be taken. In this way, the problem becomes a conspiracy theory, which is fundamentally a question of knowledge.
In order to take the market economy as the leading factor, it is necessary to practice the principle of unity in the same field, and we must not practice a dual-track system.
On one side is his own people, on the other side is the head of the house, the head of the house can be fists and feet, and his own people can only kick the ball with their butts; The head of the company does not invest according to market demand, but invests according to the GDP plan target, deviating from the main line of market demand, with more than twice the total assets of his own people, accounting for 80% of the allocation of resources, but only supporting 26.2% of tax revenue and 7% of employment. This leads to a misallocation of resources.
M2 is as high as 300 trillion, but the money has become a pool of stagnant water.
It cannot fully flow into fiscal revenue, into private enterprises to support employment, and finally into residents' pockets. Indeed, this is the basic problem of China, which constitutes the main contradiction of the Chinese economy: insufficient demand.
Further investigation, strengthen the dual structure, break the balance of state-owned enterprises to the market, return to the plan to promote, private enterprises will inevitably decline, there is no fair competition, and ultimately it must be a rent-seeking economy. Powerful private enterprises give up the actual controller, Liu Qiangdong also said that after 12 years, Jingdong will be handed over to the state in its entirety, Tencent state-owned assets are settled, and the secretary enters a private holding company.
This has been accompanied by downward pressure on China's economy, which is not a simple economic choice, but also accompanied by a wave of social migration of rich capital; Like the migration of migratory birds. Ma Yun's wife Zhang Ying spent more than 200 million yuan to buy a row house in Singapore, although it is not an investment, this is indeed not Ma Yun's weather, but it is enough to explain the fate of this generation of once powerful tycoons, and an era of national entrepreneurship is over.
Since there is a structural problem of the dual economy, is it necessary to abolish state-owned enterprises?
It's not this problem, I believe this is not what Liu Shimian meant, state-owned enterprises or state property rights, this will not change, Western capitalist countries also have state property rights, generally accounting for 20% of state-owned enterprises, Singapore's state-owned enterprises accounted for 45%, and the same implementation of unified market rules, without collapse. The focus is on the unification of rules, which is inevitable in an economy governed by the rule of law.
The policy has been doing the classification, distinguishing between commercial state-owned enterprises and public welfare state-owned enterprises, this classification means that the policy is returning to the market, public welfare to support, the subsidy of the subsidy, commercial to compete, no competition where to come from the strong and innovative spirit, can only be huge, just like the expansion of China's stock market is the first is a truth, very huge, everyone loses money, not in sharing wealth, is sharing money, this thing can not be too people's nature. The same is true for the economy as a whole. Whether this action of the policy is a strong signal should be a limited adjustment, and it is an adjustment of the structure of state-owned enterprises in the structure itself.
China's state-owned enterprises need to be trained in a fully competitive market.
It is necessary to have the wolf nature to survive in the wild, so as to truly become a profitable enterprise, rather than a subsidized enterprise, in that way, China's economy will be tired; It can be said that the abolition of the dual structure is a necessary condition for China's economy to return to high growth, only by canceling the so-called "non-marketization", state-owned enterprises can open up the channel of international trade globalization, and now the contribution of state-owned enterprises to foreign trade, according to the data released by the General Administration of Customs on June 7, 2024, in the first five months of 2024, the total value of China's import and export of goods was 17.5 trillion yuan. Among them: private enterprises: imports and exports were 9.58 trillion yuan, an increase of 11.5%, accounting for 54.7% of China's total foreign trade value, an increase of 2.6 percentage points over the same period in 2023. State-owned enterprises: imports and exports were 2.79 trillion yuan, an increase of 1.9 percent, accounting for 15.9 percent of China's total foreign trade value. Foreign-invested enterprises: imports and exports were 5.09 trillion yuan, down 0.1 percent, accounting for 29.1 percent of China's total foreign trade value.
From the data, it can be concluded that the state-owned enterprises that appear to be strong are strong in the domestic market, are the heads of China's economy, and are not strong in the international competitive environment, with total assets twice as large as private enterprises, and their contribution to foreign trade is less than one-third of that of private enterprises; Among them, one of the core problems is that policy subsidies are inseparable, which also undermines the principle of fair and full competition in the international market.
Of course, we can make our interpretations, but what determines international relations, from international politics and military affairs to economics and markets, will not be centered on our interpretations. As a result, it will inevitably encounter joint countermeasures, various tariffs and reciprocal subsidies against China, so as to effectively block China's exports and compress the expansion trend of China's products. And all of this is related to the non-market inertia under the binary structure. Therefore, to unimpeded exports, it is precisely necessary to start by adjusting the domestic economic structure.
In this sense, Lin Caiyi and Liu Shimian's suggestion is positive.
Will the policy adopt the advice of Lin Caiyi and Liu Shimian?
It is a small probability event, because it is not only the public who lacks knowledge of economics, and such suggestions are too easy to cause ideological tension and criticism.
The truth in the truth: the private 56789 is not a contribution, it is the original sin