Wu Jinglian: Social contradictions have reached the critical point and must be restarted

I have always opposed the government's offside intervention in the market.
In recent years, the government has been heavily subsidizing technological innovation, but science and technology are two different things. Scientific research is external. It is impossible to say how much money you can get by finding a mathematical theorem. Therefore, the government should be responsible for the investment. However, technological innovation is rewarded by the market. It is unreasonable for the government to take tens of millions and hundreds of millions of dollars to reward a technology. Why should the government take money to reward technology innovation?
What is the government's ability to judge which technology is promising? You can say that a certain technology itself may be advanced, but it can be successful in the market without anyone knowing.
We are all what the government says about developing technology, and then we will give a lot of money. What is the final result? Look at what our PV industry has become.
More than photovoltaic, now the country is doing LED, the most powerful may be my hometown of Changzhou, to become the LED world capital. However, because resources are scarce and given this enterprise resource, that enterprise can't get it.
Now the whole of Jiangsu is in this situation. Shi Shirong has 20 billion yuan of funds, so the government can't afford to support the LED industry.
A LED company in Kunshan thought of financing in the field. Guangdong said that if you move the company to Guangdong, we can invest money, but the local government said that you can't move, and you moved away the few hundred million that I gave you. Therefore, this model of government involvement in investment is extremely abnormal.

The government is a place where the fertilizer and water are not flowing outside the field.
The Ministry of Science and Technology has built a ten-city plan for an electric car. Now there are about 20 cities in the city. The central government and local governments each take a part of the money to subsidize, and the ten cities and ten thousand vehicles are a total of 10,000 cars.
At present, two or three thousand cars should be said to have reached the lowest economic scale, but now they are not used at all. All localities have given orders to local enterprises. If there are more than 20 thousand vehicles, they will not reach an effective scale. This money is white.
As long as the manufacturing industry goes up, the cost will come down, but what is the use of one thousand units for each company?
This kind of thing can be subsidized by the government because it saves energy and reduces pollution. The general principle is that it cannot be subsidized as soon as it enters competition, but we are not. The government will decide which brand to give money to. This is against the fair competition law. .
According to the market economy, the demand side should be subsidized, and then purchased through the market, which one can buy which one.
Home appliances to the countryside is also problematic. Some varieties have already been eliminated, because the home appliance has actually maintained its life cycle, but it is the taxpayer's money, so it also involves the so-called distribution reform.
The problem of distribution reform is very big. I always say that the government wants to save money. The result is that taxes are added so much. What is the solution to the problem?
Some small business owners also told me privately (they dare not say it publicly), saying that the leaders of these industries have received a lot of care from the government, but they simply cannot understand our difficulties.
When I went to Zhejiang for investigation in 2004, I found that there was a list of companies to be fostered from the province to the county. This in itself violated the basic principles of market competition, but everyone is not surprised, of course, this means How much government pays attention to supporting private enterprises!

How much money do you earn for the people?
When I talked about distribution reform, what is the problem with the distribution system? The fundamental problem is that we have problems with our growth model.
From the perspective of investment, the proportion of capital is getting higher and higher, and the proportion of labor is getting lower and lower. As a result, in terms of distribution, the income of capital is getting higher and higher, and the income of labor is getting lower and lower.
Capital is simply not available to ordinary people. The first owner of capital is the government, the second is the enterprise, and the enterprise is dominated by state-owned enterprises. The private enterprises are some enterprises supported by the government. The government is tilting and leaning toward large state-owned enterprises.
The so-called transformation of the economic growth model is to reduce the contribution of investment in the overall growth, to improve efficiency, or technological progress. Specifically, it is to increase the proportion of knowledgeable and skilled labor and the proportion of professionals in growth. From the point of view of distribution, it is the laborer's ratio that is further enhanced.
Changing the growth model is not a slogan. The Party Central Committee will make a decision. It is a lot of work.
In addition to the survival of the fittest in the market, it is necessary to train workers and popularize compulsory education. The Japanese began to attach importance to education from the Meiji Restoration, and took two or three generations of the economy to take off. We now have a large number of migrant workers who have not accepted the nine-year compulsory education.
A large number of children of migrant workers in Guangdong (the local government did not treat the education of the children of migrant workers as equals the education of the children of the local people) The local government said that the children of migrant workers should return to their hometowns to study. Now, where can the second and third generation of migrant workers go back? As a result, social problems continue to occur, and what is happening in the group often appears in Guangdong.
Children from other places can't be employed. Local people rely on the house to make a profit. Sons and grandchildren don't have to work, don't learn, and gamble, so a small thing can cause thousands of people to fight.
Now some companies take the initiative to run vocational and technical universities, the purpose is to cultivate high-level technical workers, as far as possible to achieve production automation. This is a good thing, but some private universities are taking the name of running a school. This is a very complicated matter. It is hard to say which company you should praise.
We have several figures in Internet applications that have been in the world for three consecutive years. Our current average bandwidth is still less than 80% of the world average. The proportion of Internet users in the whole country is declining. To 40% (about 500 million people), the growth is slow and slow, but people are still growing. What is the reason? What?
It is because our informationization cost is too high. For example, our fiber-based backbone network, with our number, one is enough. Counting the combat readiness, two are enough, but we have made six in the country, and now we are Another one of the radio and television. The government has separated the market.
When engaging in e-government, all agencies are engaged in their own systems. In the end, these systems cannot be connected, and they are deliberately prevented from being connected. For example, the corporate information held by the Ministry of Public Security and the Ministry of Commerce are not compatible with each other, as their own property. Monopolize.

The government should not manage so much
The fundamental problem is that the government should not take care of that much. The United States is a Ministry of Commerce, and the Ministry of Commerce is in charge of the market. Regardless of the company, we are not, and have been in charge of the enterprise. Not only the Ministry of Commerce, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Finance, and the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, but because they have the right to have money.
Why do you want top-level design? It is because of these problems. If the entire reform cannot be advanced, there is absolutely no way to solve these problems one by one.
Now that the problems are piled up, we need to study. We need to find out the reasons for the system from the problem, and then sort out the roadmap based on priorities and supporting relationships.
The Economic Work Conference called for a road map to be presented this year, with a clear outline of the overall plan, road map and timetable.
I don't think it is possible for the State Council to do this, or whether it should be done directly by the Party Central Committee.
Of course, some comrades advocate the restoration of the National Reform Commission. However, according to past experience, the 1984 reform plan was not done by the State Commission for Economic Reform, but was established by a program. The 1991-1993 round was the Party Central Committee. Directly, the drafting group of the overall plan was directly led by the central government in 1993. The leader of the drafting group was Wen Jiabao, the director of the then Central Office. In addition, there were 16 investigation teams. The investigation team was sent by the China Finance Office. It is Zeng Peiyan. That time was directly captured by the Party Central Committee. I don’t know if this is the case.

Reform to break the party company
I once said that the reform is to break the "national syndicate" that Lenin said. In fact, the so-called "national syndicate" issue is not a problem of state-owned enterprises, but an issue of system.
Our system is the Lenins Dalin system. Lenin called it "National Syndicate", and the reformist economists in Eastern Europe have a more modern term called "the party country big company."
China's current development is the special state capitalism that Lenin said in 1921. Its characteristics are: on the one hand there is a market, on the other hand, the state holds all the "bearing heights", the translation of "high point" in China is called "lifeline", this thing is what we want to change.
After several rounds of reforms, by the end of the last century, we announced the establishment of a socialist market economic system. However, this system actually has a very heavy legacy of the old system. Especially in the early 2000s, reforms in many areas have regressed, such as “national advancement and retreat”, so China is a semi-market economy country. Power capitalism.
There are two problems that cannot be avoided now: First, the old growth model cannot be avoided. It has been more than ten or twenty years to change the way of economic growth, and the problem is getting worse.
In a shallower sense, it is a shortage of resources and environmental damage; at a deeper level, it has caused a slow increase in the income of workers. Supporting growth by relying on large-issue banknotes has created a real estate bubble.
Inflationary pressures are continuing to rise. Our current currency liquidity is about 200% of GDP, and there are very few countries in the world that exceed 100%.
Second, after power intervened in the economic field, corruption has intensified and it has now penetrated into the bone marrow.
These two problems are not solved. The Chinese economy is likely to have big problems, and Chinese society is likely to have big problems. Therefore, in the past year, more and more people believe that China is not going to reform and it is bound to have a big problem.

Social contradictions have reached the critical point and must be restarted
I believe that the consensus on reform has been formed. My so-called consensus is that social contradictions have reached a critical point and reform must be restarted. In the past, some of my remarks were against more people on the Internet than in favor of the people. This time 90% of people agree, this is the consensus I said.
In fact, the entire atmosphere of Beijing has changed in the past year, including some ministers, who are privately speaking the same as us.
Of course, political reform is directly related to power and interests. Since it is called "the party-state big company", the representative of the "party state" certainly has great interests in it. I do not advocate that the vested interests are generally the resistance of our current reforms. In fact, we are also vested interests.
Where did we live before the reform? Living in the building, the male toilet is on the first floor and the female toilet is on the second floor. We are now given the gift of reform and can live in such a house.
I generally use the special vested interests to use the power to make a fortune to discuss the resistance to reform. They use power to get wealth, and of course they have to oppose reform. But human thoughts are not entirely determined by economic status.
Some people may wish to maintain their current status, but the situation is sometimes stronger than people, and it is not enough to insist on this.
Beijing’s air pollution, they were still hard last year. Our Deputy Minister of Environmental Protection said that Americans are not allowed to monitor again. This is interference in our internal affairs. Does he dare to say this now? In the end, the air that breathes over this land is mainly Americans or our people? Your home may have an air purifier to remove the dust, we can't.
We are all within the system. We don't want to be revolutionary and hope to be stable. As a research worker, I study the regularity of the development of things, conform to the historical trend, and how much can be done, rather than first assessing whether I can succeed or not, but I can clearly understand that no reform is a dead end. One.

Stearic Acid is widely used in the manufacture of PVC plastic pipes, plates, profiles, and films. It is a PVC heat stabilizer with good lubricity and good light and heat stability. In plastic PVC pipes, stearic acid helps prevent "coking" during processing. It is an effective thermal stabilizer added in the processing of PVC films, and can prevent finished films caused by excessive exposure to sulfides. 

Stearic Acid

Stearic Acid,Industrial Stearic Acid,Chemical Stearic Acid,Agent Stearic Acid

Henan Shunbang Chemical CO.,Ltd , https://www.pvcresinchemical.com