Background: By the end of 2009, the China government had purchased more than 800 billion US dollars of US Treasury bonds and at least 400 billion US dollars of other bonds. Even the American media exclaimed that China has become the biggest creditor of the richest and most powerful country in the world.
On the other hand, the main task of governments at all levels in China is to attract foreign investment, which is vigorously introduced every year. According to the national statistical bulletin, foreign investment in 2008 was 92.4 billion US dollars, and by the end of 2008, foreign investment had been introduced for 29 years.
According to the data of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, by the end of 2007, the assets of foreign capital in China had expanded to 2. 1 trillion US dollars. What is this ridiculous phenomenon?
2. Is material wealth wealth wealth or white dollar wealth?
Why do we prefer to sell material wealth at low prices in exchange for unusable, accumulating and depreciating dollar IOUs? Do we send away all our material wealth and get countless dollars in debt, which means that we are rich and the economy is developing?
Problem background: In the past 29 years (1980-2008), we artificially depressed the RMB exchange rate and sold our material wealth at a low price. According to the internationally recognized purchasing power parity exchange rate method, we always * * * take away material wealth worth $40 trillion, only get goods worth $6 trillion and debts worth $2 trillion, and give away $32 trillion for free (appendix 1). Because we have been in a trade surplus, we have no chance to use these dollar IOUs at home, and these dollar IOUs are still increasing. Because of the low price and cheap sale, if you exchange dollar white bars for material wealth, the material wealth you get will be greatly reduced. Is it better for our country and people to let people save 34 trillion dollars worth of material wealth, or is it better for the country to save 2 trillion dollars of debt?
3. Why do we have the money to make export tax rebates, but we don't have the money to push housing, education and medical care to the market and let the people solve it themselves?
Background: In recent years, the annual export tax rebate of export enterprises reduces the price of export commodities, which is equivalent to subsidizing foreign consumers and spending 500 billion yuan every year. On the other hand, in order to reduce expenditure, the state has put housing, education and medical care on the market and let the people solve it themselves. In order to increase income and keep raising house prices, ordinary people can't afford to buy a house after working all their lives, and hard work can't solve the basic survival problem of a family. For example, due to technological progress and the improvement of agricultural production efficiency, there are very few farmers engaged in agriculture in China, and most farmers go to cities to work, but they cannot become urban residents. In fact, the reduction of agricultural tax only reduced by 20 billion yuan, which is absolutely incomparable with the export tax rebate subsidies for foreign consumers.
4. Why do we exchange our material wealth for US dollar IOUs and then issue RMB in China? Why can't we issue RMB directly in China according to the needs of economic development? Is the real material wealth inferior to the declining dollar IOUs?
Background: According to western economic theory, we can't issue RMB at will, but the central bank can issue RMB to buy foreign exchange for export products of enterprises. Therefore, after enterprises export material wealth to obtain foreign exchange, a large number of RMB will be issued in China to purchase foreign exchange of enterprises. By the end of 2009, China's foreign exchange reserves were 2.4 trillion US dollars, and at least 16 trillion RMB was issued in China. Without material wealth, we can issue more RMB. If the material wealth is in China, you can't issue more RMB. What is the reason? According to western economic theory, the issuance is based on the US dollar in hand, but the actual purchasing power of the US dollar has been declining. In the past 40 years, the depreciation rate has exceeded 30 times in terms of gold price. Moreover, because the dollar is cheap and cheap to sell, when the dollar is exchanged for material wealth, the material wealth exchanged is much less than when it is sold.
5. Why can't we give RMB to ordinary people, let domestic capitalists make money, make people happy, and leave material wealth at home? We must send our material wealth abroad free of charge, and RMB will also be used by foreign capitalists in China to collect some useless and depreciating dollar IOUs?
Question background: See the previous question. What the author puts forward here is an economic development route based on domestic demand, not export-driven economic development. The only difference between the two is that the domestic demand route is that material wealth is in the hands of ordinary people, while the external demand route is that material wealth is sent abroad. After the country gave away a lot of wealth for free, it held a small amount of unusable and depreciating dollar IOUs (100 years, I'm afraid the original value of 1% was less than 99% cheated by Americans). As foreign markets are controlled by foreigners, most export enterprises are controlled by foreign capital, which is fully proved by customs statistics. Therefore, it is mainly foreign capitalists who export material wealth and obtain RMB in China. Which of these two routes benefits the country and the people? The fundamental reason for the development of western countries is to increase the income of ordinary people and increase the domestic market. There is no market, products can't be sold, how to expand production and develop economy.
6. Is it good for China that both enterprises and banks are managed by foreigners? The theoretical basis of western economics is that people are selfish and everything depends on foreigners. Is it reliable? Don't you know that your family property is also managed by outsiders?
Background of the problem: Over the past 30 years, we have introduced foreign capital with preferential treatment, reduced three exemptions, reduced various taxes on foreign capital, and refunded taxes on export products, making it in a competitive advantage. In the 2 1 open industry, foreign capital has completely defeated domestic capital and become the overlord of foreign capital. At the end of last year, there were few state-owned enterprises left after foreign mergers and acquisitions (Appendix 2). Should we eliminate all domestic enterprises and hand them over to foreign investors for management? Anyone who has studied western economics knows that the theoretical basis of western economics is that people are selfish and all enterprises related to people's livelihood are handed over to foreigners. What should foreigners do if they want to leave? What do you think of Google's recent retreat? It is technically very complicated to maintain the operation of industrial enterprises now. A water plant and a power plant are all made up of countless machines and equipment, and none of the key equipment or components can be started. If all enterprises are managed by foreigners, one day, they will all withdraw. Can you start at once?
7. If your own business is sold to foreign capitalists and China people are wage earners, can you get rich? Can you get rich as a boss or as a wage earner?
Background: At the end of last year, elites were still encouraging foreign investors to merge with the few remaining state-owned enterprises, giving priority to land and credit. When all enterprises are sold to foreign investors, China people can only be wage earners. China is a wage earner, a migrant worker, unable to settle down in the city, a college student, an adventure island, let alone get rich. Can this method lead the people of China to get rich?
8. Why did the banking law enacted by China not lend money to its own government, but to the US government hostile to splitting China?
Background: See 1995 Article 29 of the Bank Law of China passed by the National People's Congress, which prohibits the central bank from lending to its own government. But we can see that the central bank, which manages foreign exchange reserves on behalf of the government, bought more than 800 billion US Treasury bonds and lent money to the US government. The Americans bombed the Embassy of China and sold weapons to support the secession of Taiwan Province Province ... As we all know, they are hostile to China. If there is a war with the United States, will you lend money to Americans to buy guns and ammunition to kill you? This is an absurd law under the guidance of western economic theory. The U.S. government does not attach importance to this theory and will not legislate to restrain itself. During the American crisis in 2008, it printed $700 billion to several American banks it rescued. Why do you want to use this absurd theory to bind yourself? Why can't we see that both the United States and Japan borrow a lot from the central bank, even exceeding one year's national output value?
9. Since the imported foreign currency is actually not used, it is equivalent to giving wealth to foreign capitalists for free to set up factories and earn money from China people. Why can't you print money and lend it to your own people to set up a factory?
Background: The so-called introduction of foreign capital means that foreign capitalists take a sum of foreign exchange, for example, change US dollars into RMB at the Bank of China and set up factories in China. Because China doesn't use foreign dollars, it is equivalent to giving wealth to foreign capitalists to set up factories for free, and all profits are owned by foreign capitalists. Why can't we lend money to our own people to set up factories, and let China people make profits, but give them to foreigners? It is we who depress the income of ordinary people, make the profits of enterprises meager, and introduce foreign capital with preferential treatment, crowd out domestic capital, and let domestic enterprises completely close down.
10, what is the purpose of economic development, to improve the consumption level and quality of life of ordinary people, or to increase production capacity, output value and foreign exchange reserves? At present, the material wealth produced in China fully meets the needs of China people. Why do we sell a lot of exports cheaply in exchange for not being able to use the declining dollar IOUs, and at the same time let a large number of domestic people have food and clothing problems?
Background: Per capita, the grain and meat we produced exceeded the per capita consumption of Japan and reached the level of developed countries (Appendix 3). The housing we built, calculated per capita, reached 30 square meters, which is also close to the average level in Japan. The clothes we produce are supplied all over the world, far exceeding the demand of ordinary people in China. However, the income and per capita consumption level of our people are too low. Statistics from the National Bureau of Statistics show that China has a population of 430 million, and its average daily consumption is lower than that of 7.2 yuan, which is not enough for a person to eat a fast food in an ordinary city. Ordinary residents, a serious illness, will lose everything and be penniless. Are we going to send a pile of dollars in arrears and everything will be fine, or should we allocate enough material wealth to the people to solve the problems of food, clothing, housing and transportation? In any era, if a certain proportion of ordinary people's basic survival becomes a problem, can this country still develop steadily? Countless facts in history show that it will lead to social collapse. Because the people's income is low, their consumption power is low, and there is a serious surplus of products, it is difficult to increase production development, thus the economy is stagnant. So the country engaged in low exchange rate exports, increased production, and gave away 32 trillion dollars of wealth to hostile countries for free, regardless of the lack of food and clothing for the domestic people, thus achieving the goal of developing the economy?