Zhang Weiying: Most of China's industrial policies fail

Moderator Guanjing: In the aftermath of the financial crisis, we have heard you talk about completely following the Vienna School of Free market economics. In fact, in the 08, 09, including 10, we see the Chinese government in the face of the global financial crisis, there are a lot of big moves, such as 4 trillion, such as the top ten industrial revitalization plan, but by this year, everyone is discussing that the side effects of these policies may be concentrated in 10.　　For example, inflation, such as the soaring value of assets, such a specific phenomenon in China, how do you think? Zhang Weiying: In fact, this is also a global phenomenon, now this I think the wrong experience summed up it is a number of theoretical basis. This theory is based on the Keynesian economics that developed in the 30 's and the Keynesian policy recommendations that, according to Keynesian economics, the operation of the market is going to go wrong and must rely on external forces to correct him. On the other hand, politicians, including government policymakers, are good excuses for interfering with the market, and of course they think so. Because sometimes you like to accept what kind of theory is related to your own internal needs. For example, the government generally likes to control resources, if there is a problem in this market, the government will use more resources to rescue it, which in effect gives the government more power, especially when we see that the government is often short-sighted in its view of the problems, because under the western democratic politics, the term of office is limited, under our oriental system,　　Although we are not elected, we now have a government mandate, as we have heard this administration, which may not be the same as in the past. At this time, they prefer to use a short-term stimulus policy to address the like the economic flute, the increase in unemployment and so on, but he did not see that the economy itself is a regular, short-term use of such a strong stimulus policy, with such a fierce drug, it will naturally have its consequences, on the one hand, For example, it caused the system to distort, the stimulus policy is to send the money through the government channel, the government money is more through the Chinese words is the state-owned system it sent down. This means that by increasing the supply of money and increasing credit, a large amount of social resources will be absorbed into the state sector from the non-state sector, thus causing a distortion of the entire economic system. In the west, it's like the United States, a large amount of money is also issued through the government, then the government is only issued to a part, he thought that the important institutions to save it, so that the economic behavior of the main body, its excessive dependence on the government, over time as we call the big and not fall, is that it as long as its own bigger Problems, there will always be someone to help him, is the government.　　It's like saying that your business has lost hundreds of thousands of, or even millions of, nobody cares about you, but you lose tens of billions of and the government will save you soon. A small hole to make a big hole, it will have a continuous negative impact on the operation of the economy. There is also a very important effect that we are nowCould not be seen. But it's inflation-related, inflation is just a performance, and excessive investment undermines the balance between the present and the future.　　So it will eventually cause new economic flute.　　Moderator Guanjing: Many people say that in the two years since the financial crisis, the status of Free-market economists has fallen, is that right? Zhang Weiying: We can think of the East Asian financial crisis that took place 12 years ago, when the experience was right and why the Asian financial crisis, because Asian governments were too strong in economic intervention, and Asian companies were too close to the government. In this way, the resulting financial crisis. So after that, how do we reduce the government's intervention, let the enterprise more independent responsibility. Why we start from 98 large-scale state-owned enterprise restructuring, even by 2003, the state-owned bank restructuring, in fact, from the Asian financial crisis summed up the lessons. So Asia has long been thought to intervene in a region where the economy is too strong. The source of the financial crisis is the United States, the United States is considered to be the most market-oriented one of the largest economy. The problem in Asia is certainly the dominant power problem, and that is the government. And the United States has a problem, it must also play a leading role of the power problem, that is the market.　　So the two summaries are completely different.　　But I think this time, if we boil down to the failure of the market, to avoid and even deliberately conceal the responsibility of government policymakers in this regard, I think it is very irresponsible. But I have to say that the problem is easy to end, in particular, we see a very famous scholar who is a staunch Keynesian, including Krugman, who has just won a Nobel Prize two days ago, as well as Professor Stiggs, who we talked to yesterday, who are very firm Keynesians,　　Stiggs often cite Chinese examples.　　Moderator Guanjing: Which paragraph of the example? Zhang Weiying: Like, China has a lot of state-owned enterprises, the Chinese government to formulate industrial policies, the economic intervention is much. He sees this as a reason for China's success. So he often uses the Chinese example, the ownership is not important, the competition is important. But competition is important, this is no problem, but he said that ownership is not important, there is a lack of theoretical basis. I'm talking about Chinese stories that are often misread and misunderstood. China's success in the past 30 years has not been due to the government's intervention, because of state-owned dominance, but rather to the lack of government intervention. State-owned enterprises are getting smaller, as entrepreneurs have more freedom to do their own thing, which is the key to China's success. Perhaps these Keynesian theorists would have praised China's industrial policy, but the people we live in China, you know that these industrial policies fail in most cases, and it's impossible to assume that government officials are far more impartial than entrepreneurs, and that he can better judge the future. Our human history proves that the mostThe spirit of the industry, these people, for the future to see more accurate. And any entrepreneur, a mistake in judging the future, is bound to be punished, that is, if you make a mistake, you must lose money, and you may end up bankrupt. But government officials, he made a mistake, he can not take this responsibility, he can not go bankrupt, and he has the right to speak, he has the resources, as I said earlier, his mistake first is someone else's mistake, he will not admit that he is wrong, the entrepreneur he can not evade his responsibility.