Wu Jinglian's words and words: the reformers are not reformed

The "Sina·Changan Forum" (No. 300) was held on June 30th at the School of Economics and Management of Tsinghua University. Wu Jinglian, an honorary member of the Academic Committee of the 50-member Forum of the Chinese Economy and a researcher at the Development Research Center of the State Council, attended and delivered a speech.
Wu Jinglian said in his speech that to promote reforms with "real swords and real guns", we must first establish a consensus on reform, and secondly, implement the main body of responsibility. Finally, we must establish a mechanism for supervision, inspection, and responsibility tracing for responsible institutions. A kind of person-oriented under the reformer and the non-reformer." The following is an excerpt from the speech:
Wu Jinglian: The topic I am talking about today is "What is structural reform? Why is it so important?"

Why should we propose structural reforms?
Focusing on the structural reform on the supply side is a red line that runs through the entire economic work for a period of time. This is a very important judgment and a very important work policy. However, there is actually a lot of debate about the supply-side structural reform and the judgment of the situation. For example, the problem facing our economic development is whether the strength from the demand side is not enough, or whether the quality from the supply side is low or inefficient, and then, for example, the problems encountered in the current development - the slowdown in growth, whether it comes from supply and demand There are two common issues, and there are very different opinions being discussed.
In addition, there are many different understandings of the economic work policy contained in this formulation, which focuses on promoting structural reforms. For example, structural reform is to change the structure or system. There are many different opinions in theory and in actual work.
Today I want to talk about the issue of structural reform, talk about my understanding of this issue, and talk about what is structural reform in my mind, why it is so important.
The formulation of the supply-side structural reform actually has two "structures" with different meanings. When we explore the reasons for China's economic slowdown from the supply side, we will find that the most important and core problem on the supply side is that it is not efficient. The supply side mainly contains three basic contents: labor, capital, and efficiency.
Since the beginning of this century, the economic growth rate has continued to decline, what is the basic reason? We can say that it is not efficient, it can also be said to be structural distortion, that is to say, the structure of the allocation resources has been distorted (resource mismatch). The result of resource mismatch is inefficiency.
At the beginning of this century, the growth momentum we have relied on is fading, and we cannot use efficiency-enhancing methods to remedy the decline of growth momentum. For example, when China’s economy has reached a certain level, the demographic dividend will enter the final stage, industry, The structural changes in agriculture and services have also begun to weaken. Under this circumstance, there is a problem that China’s total factor growth rate has started to decline significantly in the first decade of this century, which eventually caused China’s potential growth rate to enter the downward channel, thus causing the economy. The downward trend of growth.
This problem is a fundamental factor for the economy to enter the downward channel. It can be expressed as low supply efficiency, low supply quality, and can also be expressed as misallocation of capital, that is, deterioration of economic structure or distortion of economic structure. This is a fundamental problem we face and needs to be addressed.
This is the first structural problem in the judgment. We need to implement structural adjustment or resource reconfiguration.

Using administrative commands to adjust the structure is not only invalid or even counterproductive
How can the structure be improved? This is the second question. The improvement of the structure should be achieved through the improvement of the system. How can the system be improved? It is necessary to adopt structural reforms. Here, there are two "structures" with different meanings.
I feel that these two "structures" are often confused now. The two “structures” have different meanings. The former “structure” is the supply side problem, the structural distortion, and the distortion of resource allocation. This is the “economic structure”. The latter "structure" is about "structural reform", which is about "institutional structure." If these two problems are mixed together, structural adjustments may be used instead of structural reforms.
In order to solve the first problem, the current task is to "three to one, one to one," to achieve optimal allocation of resources. The question is how to configure again? There can be different methods, such as directly using the various administrative tools in the hands of the government to configure. In fact, there are problems in this area. For example, when it comes to supply-side structural reforms, the various designs on reform since the 18th Congress are often put in it. They directly consider how to change the structure and how to use administrative means. Capacity, destocking, and short-boarding will create deviations in work.
There are two different ways to adjust the structure and optimize the allocation of resources. One is to adjust through administrative orders in accordance with policy plans, government plans, and government policy requirements. The other is to optimize the allocation of resources through market exchange under the guidance of price signals reflecting the relative scarcity of resources. We have solved the problem in the first way for a long time in the past, but historical practice proves that this method is almost ineffective and even counterproductive.
As early as the beginning of reform and opening up, people have realized that China's industrial structure is distorted, its benefits are damaged, and adjustments are needed. Therefore, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, there were two economic adjustments. This economic adjustment was carried out under the conditions of the government's dominant resource allocation. The approach adopted was to adjust through administrative means, such as which industries or Which departments should be reduced, which industries should be strengthened. There are two shortcomings in this approach. The fundamental problem is that the government has no way of judging what is a good structure. Therefore, the structure after adjustment is often not optimal, and because the various institutional and policy factors that cause this structural distortion have not changed, it will not take long after an adjustment, and the old structure will be returned again. Also requested the next adjustment.
In the circumstances, the market has not yet grown, and the government is absolutely in a dominant position in resource allocation, so it can only be adjusted in that way, but later through the reforms of the mid-1980s, and even further systems after the 1990s. Sexual reform, the market has gradually grown and developed, but this habit of using administrative methods to allocate resources and government-led resource allocation remains, and many government departments believe that the only visible adjustments made by administrative orders can be effective. The fastest. Therefore, in the 1990s and even the 21st century, this method remained largely.

Administrative adjustment of excess capacity seems to be repeated
In the 21st century, the government still continues to adopt such a method to adjust the structure. The problem of structural distortion has not been solved. Especially in 2004, when the economy overheated, it was necessary to adjust the national economy. At this time, it was explicitly adopted. The method of "protecting and having pressure" and "having support and control" is used to adjust the structure. On the one hand, it controls and cleans up the so-called "overheated industry". On the other hand, it supports various aspects of the government's selected industries.
However, in 2004, the adjustments of “protection and pressure, support and control” did not see results, so the distortion of industrial structure and the distortion of economic structure became more prominent. By 2006, some of the more important relationships were found to be distorted. For example, the distortion between investment and consumption, the distortion of the balance of payments is getting more and more serious.
In 2006, the State Council put forward a higher requirement for adjustments in the distortion of the industrial structure. Therefore, in 2006, the State Council issued a “Notice on Accelerating the Structural Adjustment of Overcapacity Industries”. This work has not been carried out smoothly, although the structural adjustment of the overcapacity industry has been emphasized since 2006, but it has not been effective. We can see the example of the steel industry now. The steel industry is a key industry to adjust overcapacity in 2006, but the result of regulation is more and more. So in 2012, in addition to adjusting the industries with excess industry, in the face of the global financial crisis, the State Council made a decision to vigorously develop seven strategic emerging industries as the ten key economic work of the State Council. one. Require financial, financial and other means to vigorously foster seven strategic emerging industries. As a result of various subsidies and various policy incentives to support these seven strategic emerging industries, coupled with the distortion of price signals, some industries have quickly become overcapacity industries. Therefore, the situation has become more and more serious.
In 2013, the State Council and relevant ministries and commissions issued seven documents requesting the governance of the overcapacity industry. Up to now, using this method to solve the problem of structural distortion seems to be very poor, and it is often counterproductive. As a result, the excess capacity is more and more adjusted, and the structure becomes more and more distorted, so that now "three to one down one Complementing the first place is to go to production capacity, which is a fatal weakness in the middle of the economy.

The transformation of development has not been effective for 20 or 30 years.
In fact, in 2003-2006, when summing up the tenth five-year plan and planning the "Eleventh Five-Year Plan", I discussed why such a problem occurred. It has been proposed for twenty or thirty years because of improving the quality of growth, optimizing the economic structure, and transforming the development mode. As early as the beginning of reform and development, we have put forward the so-called "Ten Economic Development Guidelines", which is based on the improvement of economic efficiency. These ten economic construction guidelines are centered on the issue of improving economic efficiency. I hope that this will lead to a new path of economic construction. Of course, the ten major economic construction policies contain many articles to improve the industrial structure and improve the industrial structure. .
By 1995, it was officially proposed to change the mode of economic growth. The most important part of transforming the mode of economic growth was to improve the economic structure. This slogan went to the 16th Congress in 2002 and made a little change in the text, called the transformation of the economy. Development methods. Afterwards, the middle income trap was crossed, and the “new economic normalization” in 2014 and the “supply-side structural reform” in 2015 were all aimed at the same problem, but the results were not very effective, especially in 2001. During the tenth five-year plan of 2005, the structure has further deteriorated.
So in 2003, especially in the 2005-2006 eleventh five-year plan, there was a big debate, that is, "why should adjust the economic structure, transform the economic development mode, and improve the quality of growth, so many times, But nothing can change." This discussion actually yields far-reaching results and draws a very important conclusion because of the existence of “institutional barriers”.
What are the institutional barriers? The core content of the institutional barriers at the time was that the government still played a decisive role in resource allocation. The discussion at that time listed many specific reasons. When I participated in this discussion, I wrote a book called "The Choice of China's Growth Model." It introduced the discussion at the time, why the transformation and structural adjustment could not achieve results, and there were many The specific reason. For example, economic growth is the main performance of political achievements. For example, the government has too much resource allocation power, which comes down to one point. In fact, the government mentioned in the 18th National Congress has played a decisive role in resource allocation, but has suppressed or excluded the market. The role.
We are now facing the same problem, and the problem becomes clearer and clearer, that is, there are serious problems in our economic structure. The experience and lessons of past history tell us that we must solve the problem by giving full play to the decisive role of the market in resource allocation.

"Three to one, one drop, one supplement" is difficult to achieve by administrative orders
We need to achieve structural optimization. The key task now is to “three go, one drop, one make up”, to go to capacity, destock, deleverage, reduce costs, and make up the short board. What do you want to do in the “three to one, one drop and one make up”? It is to achieve optimization and reconfiguration of resources. To achieve this, regardless of theory or practical experience, we can only rely on the market to play a decisive role. Of course, we must also give full play to the role of the government. Here, we must have an accurate positioning of the role of the market and the role of the government.
Why should we play a decisive role in the allocation of resources in the market? Because the market has two main functions, one is to optimize and reconfigure resources. The second is to establish an incentive mechanism that can stimulate the enthusiasm of innovation and entrepreneurship. The things to be realized in the "three to one, one drop, one supplement" are actually these two things, and it is difficult to solve them by administrative orders.
For example, in the past, if it is going to capacity, it is determined by the administrative agency that “steel needs to be compressed by 100 million to 150 million tons”, and then the indicators are decomposed to reach various departments and regions, and the regions are further layered. Decompose under. At the end of the day, there are some very simple ways to cut through the required capacity. Often cut off is not necessarily the least efficient one, and because each administrative department must protect its own industry, there will be many distortions in the implementation process.
On the other hand, to make up for the shortcomings, we must promote the development of some industries with high efficiency and in short supply. The administrative approach is also different from the market to stimulate the enthusiasm of innovation and entrepreneurship, that is, relying on political mobilization and relying on the government. Fiscal policy, credit policy, subsidy policy, and support policy to develop some industries that the government has determined should develop, the effects of the two are obviously completely different.
In this case, if we want to play the role of the market, what role does the government play? The role of the government is not to directly adjust the structure, but to provide public goods. Instead of directly controlling the market to intervene in the micro-economy, it provides better conditions for the operation of the market; it provides a stable macroeconomic environment and a rule of law environment for enterprises, entrepreneurs and innovators. Of course, it needs to be in places where some markets cannot work, such as using social security systems to provide support for laid-off workers, and providing basic social security for some employees. All in all, it is to provide public goods, rather than directly to adjust the structure.
If the theory and practice indicate that the goal of structural adjustment and structural optimization is to be completed, it should rely mainly on the power and mechanism of the market. Where is our problem? The system that makes the market play a decisive role in resource allocation is not fully established. This requires an institutional foundation. Otherwise, it is only a slogan, an understanding goal, not an economic practice.

The system in which the market plays a decisive role in resource allocation has not yet been established.
If we have already recognized the market-based approach to optimizing the structure both cognitively and theoretically, the problem we have encountered is that this market does not exist at all. We announced at the end of the last century that we have initially established the basic framework of a socialist market economy, but it still has many shortcomings. A system that truly guarantees that the market plays a decisive role in resource allocation is not fully established.
Under this circumstance, the only way out is to work hard to comprehensively promote deepening reforms and establish the institutional foundation that will play a decisive role in resource allocation as soon as possible. This system is based on the Third Plenary Session of the Fourteenth Central Committee in 1993 and 2013. In this context, we put forward the requirement to promote structural reforms in the context of the “Decision” of the Third Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China. .
People often think that the so-called "structural reform" is a special formulation of China. In fact, this is not the case. This is a common saying in the market economy countries for a long time. I have checked some documents. When a country’s market economy has been established, some of its institutional structures may still have problems, so it needs to reform these inadequate and flawed institutional structures. Called "structural reform."
People like me, the earliest contact with the word structure, was the time of the "communist debate." When we came into contact with this issue, we repeatedly proposed structural reforms in the market economy countries. China has raised the issue of structural reforms. In fact, we have seen that the G20 announcements are all about structural reforms. Therefore, structural reform is not a special formulation of China, but a general formulation. Therefore, it is a concept commonly used in market economy countries. China has already announced the establishment of a basic framework for a socialist market economy, and it is also necessary to reform some of its flawed structures. Therefore, in this sense, we have used such a statement to summarize the reforms we are going to carry out, and it is completely practical.
From the documentation point of view, the practice of structural reforms in other countries is instructive to us. In 2004, the International Monetary Fund proposed some countries to carry out structural reforms. At that time, the director of the IMF Research Center wrote an article explaining what structural reforms they proposed. The title was “Structural Reform Why So difficult." Among them, the results of the structural reforms and the benefits are long-term, but in the short term, some people will be damaged, so it is difficult to be accepted. What we are talking about is not the question in this regard, but his explanation of what constitutes structural reform. This explanation is very similar to our current situation. At that time, some people thought that the problem of the world economy at that time was not from the supply side, but from the structure. He said this, many economic problems are caused by problems in the operation of the market, not because of shortage of resources or insufficient demand. In the eyes of most economists, it is clear that structural reforms are needed at this time, that is, to change the institutional structure and regulatory framework for market-related behavior.
I want to make it clear that the structural reform we are talking about is the institutional structure of reform. Through the reform of the system and structure, the market system is established, the open market system is established, and the market plays a decisive role in resource allocation. An effective incentive mechanism to achieve structural optimization.

Six aspects of reform need to be promoted
This will require observation and analysis of what tasks our current reforms face. In order to achieve structural optimization, in order to change the passive state of economic growth and the efficiency has not been able to improve, we need to pay for what reforms. There are 336 reforms stipulated by the Third Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee. There are more than 200 directly related to the economy in the middle, and many of them are indirectly related to the economy. There are priorities among them.
Recently, people from all walks of life have proposed some projects that require persecution to focus on reforms. I have also read some articles. There are six aspects of reform that need to be carried out in particular.
First, develop and implement a negative list of market access. The government's reform of the mechanism, the decentralization of government and the decentralization of power to the first step, in fact, we had a round of simple decentralization in the early 21st century, to the Third Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee in 2013, the simple decentralization of power adopted a world-wide approach - - Develop a negative list rather than project one by one to increase the positive list. The government has also placed two lists, one for the negative list of market entry and one for the positive list of government authorization. It seems that the positive list of government authorizations may be difficult, the negative list should not be so difficult, and because of the involvement of other foreign economic issues, such as the negotiation of the China-US investment agreement, it is also necessary to develop a negative list, so this work should be carried out more. Judging from the performance of the previous stage, there are some difficulties in the negotiation of the China-US investment agreement, but these difficulties should be overcome.
Second, financial reform. In the two aspects of interest rate liberalization and exchange rate marketization, the financial reforms carried out relatively smoothly in the previous period, even exceeding the original expectations. But only these two important price reforms can't guarantee the success of the reform of the entire financial system. For example, the financial market supervision system, such as the transmission mechanism of interest rates, needs other aspects of cooperation. The imperfections in the financial market, under the current high leverage ratio, the private willingness to invest is low, and people are reluctant to put funds into a relatively low liquidity in the case of a certain recession on the balance sheet. The field is unwilling to be placed in the real economy. Under this circumstance, the accelerated reform of finance has more important significance.
Third, it seems that there is not much discussion now, but a very important area is the state-owned economic reform. The reform of the state-owned economy has made a very major breakthrough in the "decision" of the Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee. It is to transform the management of state-owned assets and state-owned enterprises from direct management to management of capital. This is of great significance. . Although the proportion of the state-owned economy in the national economy has dropped a lot, accounting for only about one-third of the entire economic activity, it is not because of this that the reform of the state-owned economy is not important. Although the proportion of the state-owned economy does not have an absolute advantage, the resources it possesses are the most important resources, and its industry is often in a high-level position in the national economy, which has a major impact on the operation and efficiency of the entire national economy. . Therefore, if the efficiency of using resources cannot be improved, the efficiency of the entire national economy will be difficult to improve. And now the leverage is too high is a big problem, and the leverage of state-owned enterprises is particularly high. Therefore, if the economic efficiency of the state-owned economy cannot be improved, its leverage ratio cannot be lowered, and its return on investment cannot be improved, then it will have a drag on the entire national economy. Therefore, whether the reform of the national economy can advance in accordance with the "decision" of the Third Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee is of great significance.
Fourth, we need to grasp the implementation of competition policy. In the past, we also called competition policy "anti-monopoly", but the "anti-monopoly" formulation may not be more accurate and comprehensive than the "implementation of competition policy." Ten days ago, the State Council issued a document called "Opinions on Establishing a Fair Competition Review System in the Construction of a Market System." This document points out that the implementation of fair market competition policy is not good. In the real life field of China, local protection, regional blockade, industry monopoly, corporate monopoly, illegal preferential policies or derogation of market participants, and violation of fair competition. Very serious. Coupled with the great influence of traditional anti-competitive thinking in our country, the generation of people who study political economy usually talks about the serious problems of capitalism, competition and anarchy, and competition for past traditions. Economics is the opposite, but for the market economy, it is the soul of the market economy. Without competition, it is impossible to find the price, and it is impossible to realize the law and the survival of the fittest. Therefore, this situation needs to be changed. In our recent life, violations of fair competition have occurred from time to time. This requires reviewing and adjusting the institutional regulations and policy provisions that violate the principle of fair competition. Starting from July 1st, some new institutional rules and policies must be reviewed in advance for fair competition, and then the original system and policy settings must be reviewed to eliminate the system that violates fair competition policy. And policy.
This is a very important thing. In the past, both central and government documents require a level playing field to ensure fair access to production factors. But there are many violations of the principle of fair competition, which are actually difficult to implement. Therefore, how to implement competition policy is still a very important reform task.
V. Experiments on the free trade zone. The trials in the Free Trade Zone have now been extended to several regions, but the progress of the free trade zone trials does not seem very smooth. According to the central leaders, the significance of the free trade zone is to create a market-oriented, rule-of-law, international business environment that can adapt to the further improvement of trade and investment rules. This is a worldwide trend. This test not only makes sense in foreign economic relations, but also directly affects the establishment of a domestic market system of “unified, open, competitive and orderly”. Therefore, the trials in this area should be speeded up. In particular, it is necessary to prevent the trials of creating a market-oriented, rule-of-law, and internationalized business environment from returning to a low-level practice of tax incentives and preferential policies.
Sixth, building a country ruled by law. A good market system must be based on the rule of law. Since the fifteenth Congress of 1997 proposed the slogan of building a socialist country ruled by law, there has been progress in this area, but there is still a long way to go from the requirements of a good market system. Because China lacks the rule of law environment, it is a country with a strong tradition of human governance. After entering modern times, because the government's decrees played a leading role in economic operations, the practice of the rule of law and the rule of law became weak. The Fourth Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee made a special decision to "govern the country according to law", but now it seems that progress in this area is still not fast, and if the progress in this area is not fast, then the market competition system lacks a basis for rules. Therefore, no matter how legally, especially in law enforcement, how to build a market economy that conforms to the rule of law, this issue must be tightened and accelerated.
The reforms in the above six aspects cannot be just a task or a slogan, but need to be implemented urgently and need to be accelerated. But we must also think about why the reforms have ideological swings, and the delays in the steps, we must take measures against these factors.
There are several major obstacles that can be seen to hinder the acceleration of reforms, and they need to be eliminated.

Three factors hinder the reform must be eliminated as soon as possible
Since the beginning of this year, the Deep Reform Group has held three meetings. In a recent meeting, it was pointed out that comprehensively deepening reform is a revolution and must be done with real guns. How can we promote reforms with real knives? I think there are three aspects that need to be seriously broken. Everyone will think of strengthening administrative responsibilities, strengthening supervision, and strengthening responsibility investigation. However, I have observed the actual situation of these reforms. First of all, the problem is still a problem of ideological understanding, and a consensus must be formed.
Take the reform of state-owned enterprises as an example. Many people, including myself, feel that the reform of state-owned enterprises seems to be progressing too slowly. The Third Plenary Session of the Eighteenth Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on the reform of state-owned enterprises directly governs enterprises, managers, management, and assets under the control of state-owned capital. The establishment of certain capital management companies has established ownership of the original state-owned enterprises as investment entities. The government's governing body should treat all companies equally.
This issue is different in terms of understanding. For example, some acquaintances are in the state-owned enterprise sector. They think that it is very important to manage people, manage matters, and manage assets. Under this circumstance, as the core of the modern corporate system, how can corporate governance be established? Therefore, we must first seek unity and consensus on the issue of understanding. This is probably a prerequisite for being able to move forward.
The same is true of other reforms, the competition policy we just mentioned. Some people think that equal competition is a wrong slogan. Different ownership entities and different enterprises cannot compete on an equal footing. It is precisely because of this concept that equal competition is an incompetence and cannot be said.
The second question is to implement the responsible body. In the words of the 21st Deep Reform Group meeting, it is necessary to put the main responsibility of the reform in place. Taking the competition policy review as an example, the opinions expressed by the State Council are quite good opinions, and it is decided to review the newly formulated policies from July 1st. However, reading this document carefully still feels that it has some shortcomings. For example, the review starting from July 1 is based on self-censorship, but there is no regulation on how social supervision and superior supervision are carried out. The review and social supervision are combined, but only self-censorship, how to review, how to do social supervision, and who is responsible, for example, to complain that a certain policy does not comply with the competition policy, then who will accept the complaint, who will accept further Review? do not know.
At this time, let's take a look at our Anti-Monopoly Law. There is such a problem in the enforcement of the Anti-Monopoly Law. Law enforcement was carried out by three departments, and its coordination had problems. Who will coordinate? There is the Anti-monopoly Committee of the State Council. But this anti-monopoly committee is not a permanent institution, it is an extraordinary institution between ministers. Therefore, in the past when discussing the implementation of competition policy and the implementation of anti-monopoly law, many Chinese and foreign scholars proposed to establish a high-level, especially authoritative anti-monopoly institution, or an institution that implements competition policy. Things like this should be done in our reforms, so that the main responsibility is implemented to specific units.
The third question, according to the 21st Central Deep Reform Group meeting, is to tighten the responsibility screw. For those responsible, we must improve their supervision, supervision and responsibility tracking mechanisms, and implement them in the appointment and dismissal of personnel. As stated in the 25th meeting of the Deep Reform Group, it is necessary to form a reformer. The orientation of employing people without reform.
Only in this way can we be regarded as a "real knife and a gun" to push these key reforms forward, so that our market system can be gradually improved, so that the market can play a greater role in structural optimization, thus better completing structural adjustment and structural optimization. Reconfigured tasks.
My speech is here!

On-site question and answer
Question: I have always been interested in the economy. I think that the Chinese economy has two elements, one is production and the other is consumption. Can it solve these two problems equally important?
Yi Gang: I am going to throw a brick into the jade, and the Chinese economy is transforming into an increasingly important economic form of consumption. The original driving force of the economy is mainly investment and export. Consumption accounts for a small proportion of total demand. We know that total demand is composed of consumption, investment and import and export. In recent years, the proportion of consumption in GDP has become larger and larger, and this road is undoubtedly correct. Simply answer your questions, consumption will become more and more important, and the proportion of total demand and GDP will be more important.
Question: Thank you, Teacher Wu. You have a concept of a short form, can you give an example? In the adjustment of the short-board policy, is there an opportunity for ordinary people?
Wu Jinglian: Of course everyone has a chance. The statement of the short board is actually a bit negative. On the one hand, structural improvement is the flow of resources from inefficient and oversupply industries and enterprises to the more efficient departments that are in short supply. The language of policy is called the shortcomings. In fact, the shortcomings are to develop those enterprises with high efficiency and industry. In this process, innovation and entrepreneurship have opportunities. On one side, the government needs to prepare for such an environment. On the other hand, everyone can't think too high. It seems that innovation and entrepreneurship are unattainable things. There are all kinds of businesses and various innovations. Everyone can make their own. The ability to choose your own hobbies.
Yi Gang: The shortcomings are a very broad reason. For example, we help the poor. We still have tens of millions of people. Their consumption is relatively low. If young students go to poor areas to teach for one year, they will help the poor and the education of backward areas. The contribution is to make up the short board.
Question: I would like to ask a question, the recent Vanke incident, Teacher Wu, what do you personally think.
Wu Jinglian: I don't know exactly what is behind the stage here, but a basic problem is to follow the rules, that is, according to the company system, especially the rules of the corporate governance system. There are a lot of arguments now, like the pursuit of justice, who will have the upper hand, what will happen to the enterprise. This kind of judgment of justice will be different for everyone, and it is not easy to understand. However, the rules stipulated in the "Company Law" and the rules stipulated by the Securities and Futures Commission are what everyone should follow.
Question: I have a confusion. The adjustment of the system and the adjustment of the structure are two concepts or two categories. After I adjust it, if it changes, will there be some discounts on its effect? Or is it still a little slow in the process of implementation?
Wu Jinglian: There are two ways to adjust the structure. One method is to operate by the government. According to his own understanding, he thinks which industries should be and which industries should be under, and then uses administrative means, including the means of the rule of law, fiscal taxes, Credit and other policies, even directly to plan indicators to adjust, this is a way.
The second way is through the market.就是靠对外反映稀缺程度的价格引导资源的配置，使资源从效率低的地方流出，进到效率高的地方去。
这两种办法相比较，前一种办法看起来好象简单易行、直接有效，但是基本的问题是没有人知道，包括政府尤其不知道什么样的结构是好的，于是就出现了许许多多不好的后果，比如说，要压缩过剩产能，另一方面要扶植战略新兴产业的发展，从2008年以后一直是用这个办法，结果怎么样？因为政府没有可能预知，必须要通过市场的试错把资源引到最合适的地方去。当然这个过程中会有波动，会有曲折，但总的路子是靠市场信息来引导资源配置，从中长期看这是有效的。
提问：我想问的问题是，我们已经看到供给侧改革靠国家的行政调控是不可取的，而且有反复，需要靠市场。同时又看到完善的市场体系还没有建立，所以教授说我们得出的结论是必须要全面深化改革。但同时我也听到说差不多从20年前就已经意识到要建立法治社会，要建立市场经济，然后也不断地改，但是效果都不好。您也提到要真刀真枪的改革，我请问您，您认为这次真刀真枪是一个口号，还是真的会真刀真枪呢？
吴敬琏：希望是建立在真刀真枪上的改革。至于说它会怎么样，这不是我所能判断的，我只能说这是一个大势所趋，除此之外，别无出路。所以，我们每个人要努力去争取为民族、为国家好的建设。
提问：对于经济学我是一个门外汉，但是我想问一个大众特别感兴趣的问题，现在房价的高涨对结构性改革，对经济转型到底是有益的还是有害的？
吴敬琏：房价的高涨在我看来肯定是不利的，但问题不在于我们判断它的结果，而在于追寻原因。我想最重要的原因在于货币超发和信用膨胀。在货币超发、信用膨胀的情况下，人们都要寻求一个保值的安全港。
我很同意一位美国经济学家的说法，他说近些年来的金融危机，其实质都是资产负债表的衰退。也就是说泡沫破灭以后，由于杠杆率过高引发生了金融危机。在金融危机发生的情况下，在资产负债表衰退的情况下，现金为王，人们有了多余的货币，他不愿意去从事实业，因为实业流动性很差，所以就往往在资产市场上寻求避风港，实现货币的保值，于是就造成了房价的高涨。
房价高涨的同事，如果没有效率提升的话，那么劳动者的生活水平就难以得到保障。所以，对补短板，发展高效率的企业，也会有负面的影响。至于说对中低收入者，就要造成生活上的困难。而且房地产泡沫如果过分膨胀，它会酝酿市场崩盘和触发金融危机的可能性。

EL100

Automatic Door Operator Sliding,Automatic Glass Door Drive System,Auto Door Operators,Automated Door Operator

Caesar door control co.,ltd , https://www.caesar-door.com