Bye, Bowstring Alley
Today marks the final day of the rental contract for the house in Beijing's Bowstring Alley, a place I left several months ago. The house holds significant sentimental value as my wife had renovated it approximately seven years ago. Despite having no savings at the time, she managed to borrow money from her siblings and parents, dedicating months of effort and a total of 60,000 RMB to transform the house into a beautiful space. Bowstring Alley itself is located just a few hundred meters away from the Forbidden City and a few kilometers from the Middle South Sea.
One intriguing resident who used to live in this alley was Mr. Li, the chairman's doctor. He gained fame for writing a book about his experiences living alongside the chairman. Unfortunately, Mr. Li's departure from his homeland ended in tragedy, as he sadly passed away shortly after completing his first book.
"what makes a person leave his homeland?" I asked the question to ChatGPT and its answer is given below:
"There are several factors that can lead a person to leave their homeland. Here are some possible reasons:
Economic opportunities: Economic reasons are one of the main drivers for people leaving their homeland. Sometimes, individuals may be unable to find suitable job opportunities or receive adequate salaries in their own country, and they may choose to seek better economic prospects and living standards in other countries.
Political persecution: Political persecution is another significant reason that prompts people to leave their homeland. In some countries, governments may persecute specific groups or individuals, restrict freedom of speech, religion, or political liberties. Such persecution may force people to leave their country in order to protect their safety and freedom.
War and conflict: War and conflict are major factors that drive people to leave their homeland. Wars can result in widespread destruction, violence, and humanitarian crises, compelling individuals to leave their homes and seek safety and refuge elsewhere.
Education and academic opportunities: Some people leave their homeland to pursue better education and academic opportunities. They may choose to study in schools or universities in other countries to gain broader knowledge and access better educational resources.
Family and personal reasons: Family and personal reasons can also lead people to leave their homeland. For example, an individual may choose to leave their hometown for family reunification, pursuing romantic relationships, or seeking personal growth.
It's important to note that the reasons for leaving one's homeland can vary from person to person. Some individuals may have a single reason, while others may be influenced by multiple factors. Additionally, leaving one's homeland is a complex personal decision that involves various personal considerations and trade-offs."
Later it gave seveal general examples:
"Here are some more general examples of people leaving their homeland:
During World War II, many Jewish individuals fled their homelands in Europe and sought refuge in countries like the United States, Canada, and South American nations to escape persecution and the Holocaust.
In recent times, there has been a significant influx of Pakistani and Indian migrants moving to Arabic countries such as the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. These individuals often seek better employment opportunities, higher wages, and improved living standards.
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, many Russians migrated to various countries around the world. Some sought economic opportunities in Western Europe and the United States, while others relocated to neighboring countries or former Soviet republics for cultural or family ties.
These examples highlight historical and contemporary instances of individuals leaving their homelands due to a variety of reasons, such as seeking safety during times of conflict or persecution, pursuing economic prospects in foreign countries, or exploring cultural and family connections."
"Here are some additional general examples of people leaving their homeland:
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, millions of Europeans migrated to the United States, Canada, Australia, and South America in search of better economic opportunities and a chance for a new beginning. This wave of migration included individuals from countries such as Ireland, Italy, Germany, and Poland.
In the 1950s and 1960s, many people from former colonies in Africa and Asia moved to European countries, particularly the United Kingdom, France, and the Netherlands, seeking employment and a higher standard of living.
In recent years, there has been an increase in the number of Venezuelans leaving their country due to political and economic turmoil. Many have migrated to neighboring countries such as Colombia, Peru, and Ecuador, as well as other nations in the region, in search of stability, work opportunities, and access to basic necessities.
The Syrian refugee crisis, which began in 2011 due to the civil war, has led millions of Syrians to flee their homeland and seek refuge in neighboring countries such as Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan, as well as European nations. These individuals are escaping violence, destruction, and the collapse of basic services in their home country.
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, thousands of Vietnamese refugees fled their homeland following the Vietnam War. Many sought asylum in countries such as the United States, Canada, Australia, and France, escaping political persecution and the aftermath of the conflict. "
The above explanations have thoroughly answered my queries. It is a natural thing for people to move from one place to another for survival. However, to some extent, I still feel that something is missing. What is it? Events and worsening conditions can surely trigger migration, but before that, the falling expectations of a country should also be considered. When we consider the stock market, we all know that there is a β factor. If the market is good, the stock will perform well because it fluctuates with the market. The same principle applies to individuals and countries. Will the country be good? If it is not supposed to be, then people should think about moving.
During the 1990s, the whole world was focusing on China. After several years of reform and openness, the world saw China's determination to change and a promising future ahead. My family also started a shop in the 1990s. Under diligent management, the conditions gradually improved throughout the 2000s. After China joined the WTO in 2003, Chinese small manufacturers, especially those in Zhejiang Province, experienced significant growth. This positive momentum deeply influenced the mindset of the Chinese people, fostering the belief that "things will get better."
University of Nottingham Ningbo Campus, which was inaugurated by the President in 2006. Initially, a majority of its graduates pursued further studies overseas and joined foreign-owned enterprises in China. During my undergraduate years in 2012, Premier Wen visited the school and expressed the hope that students would keep their homeland in mind while having a global perspective to contribute to China's globalization efforts.
In 2013, the President announced the Belt and Road Initiative. I still vividly remember the immense hope and optimism surrounding this initiative, even though there were no concrete plans or actions in place at that time. Following my graduation, I joined a Chinese construction firm in 2015, becoming part of the force driving global expansion. Over time, the plan became clearer, with State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) building the platform and assisting Chinese privately-owned enterprises (POEs) to participate in it. The majority of SOEs operate in the infrastructure industry, while most POEs are engaged in manufacturing and exporting.
In 2015, I was sent to Pakistan as an expatriate. When I left in 2018, my career aspiration was still to become a charismatic global manager in a Chinese firm. At that time, China was experiencing its prime time, and there was a prevailing belief that China and its people were among the wealthiest in the world. Billions of dollars were being invested in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and other regions. Chinese individuals were actively purchasing education, luxury goods, and services from around the world. The "eastern sun" was rising.
The outcome of global expansion is often presented by officials in a positive light, while disregarding the negative aspects. Taking the example of Pakistan, a country that has received support from China for several decades, we can compare a country to a seed. If the seed is of good quality, it will thrive even in difficult circumstances. However, if the seed is of poor quality, it will eventually perish, despite receiving ample resources. If a country has a strong foundation, good governance, and sustainable policies, external support can contribute to its growth and development even in challenging circumstances. However, if there are underlying issues such as corruption, weak institutions, or ineffective governance, external aid may not lead to sustainable progress and can even exacerbate existing problems.
In the case of China's free loans to Pakistan, while the loans may have provided temporary relief and sustained the country's functioning, they may have also perpetuated a cycle of dependency and allowed corrupt politicians to maintain their power. The lack of transparency and accountability in such arrangements can undermine the long-term interests of the country and its citizens. It is not uncommon for complex stories to emerge behind large-scale projects and international agreements, including allegations of bribery, questionable deals, and hidden interests. It is conceivable that more high-ranking Chinese officials will eventually break free from the system and escape its control. As time goes on, more stories beyond the mainstream narrative may come to light.
Even towards the end of 2021, I was pursuing my MBA degree and still had some confidence in the country. However, the following year changed everything. Totalitarianism showed little concern for the welfare of its people; it cared only about maintaining its power. Many individuals believed that it was reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution, prompting them to question the direction in which we were heading.
Compared to the rest of the world, we have chosen a completely independent path, leading us to be isolated from global engagement. While it might be true that there are different approaches to achieving prosperity, are there any fundamental principles that we should adhere to? For instance, should we value the rights of individuals and establish checks and balances within the governance system? From my experience in the construction industry over the past several years, I have learned that a successful project requires collaboration between engineers and consultants. It involves both building and verifying, with one side dedicated to construction and the other side focused on quality control and oversight. Besides, throughout the world, over thousands of years of development, people's rights have been increasingly protected by laws and societal structures. Criticism of the government has become commonplace in the modern world.
I have had no contact with high-level officials, but recent personal experiences have prompted me to reflect on these matters. One such experience was my visit to an old town called Jiming Posthouse at the beginning of 2023. The virus had recently impacted everyone, and very few visitors were coming to this tourist site. Many aspects of the site were abandoned, even though people still lived there. They seemed to lack the motivation to improve their deteriorating living conditions. Their existence relied solely on waiting and seeking assistance from the Communist Party, which had constructed the most beautiful house in the old town for its own use. What has led to this situation? It appears that entrepreneurs are hesitant to invest, possibly due to a lack of confidence in the protection of their personal assets. When leaders repeatedly retract and release policies based on their own judgments, it erodes people's faith in justice and rules, significantly undermining governance efficiency.
The second experience involves my wife's pregnancy. She registered at the Dong Cheng District Maternal and Child Health Hospital and encountered doctors with varying levels of dedication to their profession and ethical responsibilities. Some doctors fulfilled their duties admirably, prioritizing patient care. However, others displayed little interest in patients and were more concerned about pleasing leaders and avoiding complaints. When we arrived in Shenzhen, we received exceptional service at the public hospital, surpassing our expectations. The level of care, facilities, and overall environment were comfortable. China is economically divided into two parts, with the South outperforming the North. This discrepancy can be attributed to the market reforms that have taken place in Shenzhen. The lack of respect for natural market rules and limited developmental opportunities for the people contribute to this disparity.
The third experience involves applying for heat supply for my house. Since I didn't anticipate using the house during the upcoming winter, I requested a heat stop. The staff from the heat company inspected the house and presented only one solution: completely revamping the heat supply system from the bottom to the top, which would require significant structural modifications. I declined their proposal and suggested a minor modification that I was willing to pay for, but my request went unheard. It seems that customer opinions are disregarded because customers are seen as insignificant. This situation arises from a lack of respect for people's rights under the regime.
The last but certainly not the least, diversity is a concept that I learned about a decade ago and continue to deepen my understanding of. Diversity goes beyond the notion of human rights and equality; it is crucial for the overall well-being of society. Embracing different values in a society allows individuals to have their own choices and preferences. Each value system can coexist, respect one another, and engage in healthy competition to achieve greater heights and progress. In many ways, diversity has proven beneficial for the development of Chinese cities.
In the northern part of China, there is only one dominant center, Beijing, which often exhibits a rigid and lifeless environment, comparable to a steel plate. However, in the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta regions, there are multiple centers that thrive with diversity. These regions are characterized by a multitude of people who embrace different values, and as a result, they organically work towards a common prosperity. The presence of various perspectives, ideas, and approaches fuels innovation and dynamic growth in these areas.
We have indeed entered a new era where the dynamics of global power and economic influence are shifting. ASEAN countries are on the rise, Mexico is experiencing a promising period, and India has become the world's most populous nation, reminding us of the stories of the previous largest population country. In the Middle East, countries are fiercely competing with each other for their place in the global landscape.
If we examine the recent economic data, it becomes evident that China stands at a crossroads. Some have been predicting for years that China's manufacturing would migrate elsewhere, and the current unemployment rate in China may be a harsh reality check. While China may be too big to fall, its people may endure prolonged suffering.
What can be done? The rough advice for the governing regime is to stop pretending to be good and instead focus on practical measures to improve people's lives. An important aspect to consider is the government's ability to provide attractive living conditions and social services to its population. Many countries around the world have failed to provide decent social services, presenting an opportunity for China, as a monopoly in providing such services, to create an inviting living environment and attract people from other nations. This approach could address both the challenges of an aging population and overall development. However, foreigners are not currently considering China as their preferred destination, with many choosing Southeast Asia instead.
For individuals, it is essential to reduce reliance on country-specific knowledge and instead focus on accumulating professional expertise that empowers them to thrive in different countries. If you find that your current country does not suit your needs, you can have the option to seek a better life elsewhere. In recent years, we have witnessed countries breaking down, with labor's wages barely supporting basic survival. By staying in such circumstances, you not only waste your own potential but also hinder progress for the rest of the world. As the saying goes, "A tree that does not move dies, but people who keep moving stay alive." Ultimately, it is challenging to predict where the winds of change will lead.
Having worked on Chinese globalization, I have observed that many Chinese people are engaged in this business. However, engaging in globalization solely to meet the demands of nationalism and belittle others does not align with the true spirit of globalization. It is important to recognize that genuine globalization requires more than just economic expansion or promoting national interests. It necessitates a deeper understanding and appreciation of diverse cultures, perspectives, and values.
To truly achieve globalization, it is essential for individuals to spend time in other countries, interact with people from different backgrounds, and immerse themselves in diverse environments. This allows for a broader perspective and a more comprehensive understanding of the world. By embracing global experiences, individuals can develop empathy, cultural sensitivity, and the ability to collaborate with people from various backgrounds, thus transcend the limitations of being "blind to the world." This enables them to contribute positively to global conversations, understand the aspirations and concerns of others, and ultimately earn the respect of people from different regions, including those in Hong Kong.
After all these years, China remains China, and the world remains the world. The walls between them may even seem higher now. While China's renaissance may hold significance for its leaders, the normal Chinese people might need to think about what is truly matter for them. The path forward for ordinary people may be long, arduous, and filled with crises.
lnbc880n1pjqm7xgsp522ggspm3ewn3zutn9x5up0vjh0vlxgwawyuf6yr4p7psstq6an0qpp5gfyuj77fuarljlflagpcjkkusaaduhqdq8dp2c47jx3g6p6ulpkqdq5g9kxy7fqd9h8vmmfvdjsxqzjccqpjrzjq0y2htc5v6hja5ly74ltgy7y0386za75dpvnxcsdlhr3wayhjh07qzavygqqpjqqqqqqqqlgqqqqqqgq9q9qyysgqym0h4vyunnxtq46uhnscuatz0xl8wrgv5z6295u4gvfqm73jnlasydp75wqm2jy78yywnyxtctz50hhjs46epkmluarjhvguqeszzcgpwt62xa
记者：你认为他开了这么多的会，对金融危机控制得怎么样？
许成钢：我从基本上怀疑他们有没有能力做基本判断，就是我刚才讲到的这些问题。原因是这样，因为很多有能力的人已经下台了，就是他最近大清洗，里边大量的人，尤其是金融界，他清洗金融界清洗得最厉害。中国在经济方面能力比较强的人是比较集中在金融界的，但是他清洗金融界是清洗得最厉害的，所以它基本上把能干的人都搞光了。然后其他还在的人，即便是有能力，还敢说话吗？就像我这样说话还不抓监狱里去了。你不敢说话，你怎么解决问题？因为解决经济问题有点像医生看病吧，你得先告诉你这病是什么，然后你不让说，说了你就是变成了敌对分子了。那没有人说，你就根本不能诊断，不能诊断怎么治病呢？
记者：能不能解释一下刚才你说假定中国不出现金融财政危机，中国为什么出现金融财政危机的可能性这么高？中共二十大二中全会的公报里都说，要“守住不发生系统性风险的底线”。是什么原因导致有这么大的可能性呢？
许成钢：实际上在中央财办里头，在国务院里头，他们早就知道，这都不是新问题。有一个重要的信号，在网上稍微一查就能看到。一个非常重要的信号就是政治局在过去几年里开过好几次金融稳定会议。这什么意思？政治局为什么要讨论金融稳定？金融稳定什么意思？金融稳定就是怕金融危机。政治局要专门开会讨论金融稳定，这是好几年了，这个问题早就在那儿，就是他们担心这个要出问题。
金融稳定的问题出在哪儿？就出在他们的这个杠杆率特别高。就是金融稳定还是不稳定最简单的一个指标就是杠杆率。就是说你借的钱占你的GDP的比例是多少。那么这个数字有不同的来源，有不同的计算方式，那么我要引用的这个来源，都是国际间的来源，我要引用的来源是百分之300%，就是说中国借的钱，总债占中国GDP的比例是300%，我这个数字还是2019年的，更新的数字没有。那么300%金融界的人很多会说，这数字很高，但也不意味着会金融危机。这个讲法抽象地讲是对的。比如说日本，时不时也就是会是这样，西方国家，发达的资本主义国家，达到这个数字是会发生的。
但是我现在要强调的是，简单的看这个数字是不对的。为什么呢？因为这个债会不会触发金融危机，你要看那个债的性质。你要看这个债是不是导致整体的一系列的资不抵债、要破产。就是，如果你不导致就没事儿。也会导致那就有事儿。你要看债的性质。什么样的债是危险的，什么样的债是不危险的，这就是关键。什么债不危险呢？长期债券不危险。所以当你简单的就看这个杠杆率，如果这杠杆率的主体是长期债券，这没事情的，不是说真的没事儿，就是说没有安全的问题，没有稳定的问题，没这个事儿，只是说将来的人要来还钱，这个事儿在这儿呢，就是说你老人欠了钱，让年轻人还，这个事儿在这儿呢。但是，如果你的债全是短期债，这个债是马上就要到期，你必须得还，你不还就要破产，那就是问题了。
那中国的债就是这性质的。中国的这个债里边很少是长期债。而且，中国的债比这个问题还严重。中国的债非常大量的，就是主体，根本就不是债券。中国的债的主体是抵押贷款。抵押贷款是最坏的性质的、最危险的性质的欠的债。2008年的全球金融危机，触发它的都是抵押贷款，就是房债、房贷，抵押贷款。中国的这么大数字的欠的债，里边的主体是各种各样的抵押贷款，其中包括土地，房产的抵押贷款，也包括以股票作为抵押物获得的抵押贷款，所以所有的房地产和股票拿来抵押的。
为什么抵押贷款危险呢？原因是因为抵押贷款是一个动态的借贷。什么意思呢？因为你抵押进去的是这个市场上能有价钱的，就是市场上有个波动价钱的一个物品，比如说房子、土地、股票，那么这些东西呢？当经济好的时候会涨价，那你就更安全了。所以经济越好你越安全。但是当经济不好的时候就掉价，价往下掉，价往下掉的时候你就不安全了呀，因为你的抵押贷款都是银行的资产负债表里的资产。所以当你的抵押贷款的抵押价随着经济下行，当抵押价自个儿下行的时候，你就把银行的资产负债表给搞坏了呀。所以你银行的资产负债表都搞坏了，银行就要破产的呀。当你一系列的银行破产，你就金融危机了呀。什么是金融危机？金融危机就是银行一个跟一个破产了。这就是中国的问题。中国面对一个非常非常危险的状态。所以当这个东西要来的时候，你怎么抵御？
那最后你就剩下很少几个手段。一个手段就是由于政府把市场都控制了，所以一个手段是政府可以冻结市场。为什么政府冻结市场可以避免这个呢？因为，这是个连锁反应，就是当你的市场不好的时候，你这个房地产价就往下降，房地产价往下降的时候，你那个资产负债表的价值就缩水，银行就危险了。但是如果你强制市场不允许价钱往下降，强制它不降，那你就看不到了，你把这问题就演掩盖了。但你怎么强制他不降呢？当没人买的时候，它一定只能降啊。所以实际上你就让市场没人买房子了。因为所有人都认为这房子不值钱，所有人都认为他不值钱，然后你还不让它降，你不让降谁也不买，所以就没有人买房子，那么表面上这个房地产价没有下降，实际上这个市场已经没有了。那市场没有了反过来的结果是什么？反过来你GDP就没有增长了呀，你没有经济活动了，你内需不足。就是你把市场冻结，内需就没有了呀。内需意味着得有人买呀。你把市场一冻结，谁买呀？你冻结了，意味着不让人买。所以呢，其实他面对的是这个金融稳定和经济增长之间的深刻的内在矛盾。就是你图什么？如果你图经济增长，你得把市场放开，你把市场放开，中国今天已经酝酿好了这个金融危机的条件，你怎么办？
还有另一个方案，就是用这个通货膨胀的方式来支持银行。意思就是你靠大量印钞票把银行顶起来，银行不是缩水了、就要破产吗？我注资注资，你哪儿来的钱呢？印。用这法儿你能把金融危机顶过去，但是换来了通货膨胀，它可以是非常大的规模的。这通货膨胀轻了可以百分之十几、二十几、三十几，重了就可以到控制不住了。就是通货膨胀真的上来、快起来以后也是循环性的，就控制不住了。所以非常危险。无论他弄哪个法儿都非常危险，他面对着非常危险的情况。
记者：美国主流财经媒体都看好2023年中国的经济发展。不管中国经济是恢复还是扩张，从全球经济来看，增长5%都是很高的数字。你如何展望中国今年的经济增长？你认为中国有可能再次成为全球经济增长的引擎？
许成钢：假定没有任何意外，很大的假定，包括战争带来的后果，包括中国现在的金融和财政都面临着金融危机财政危机的风险很大，没有人可以有把握中国不爆发金融危机。假定不爆发，假定战争也不会有太大的影响，假定一切都顺利，在这个很强的假定下，由于去年中国的经济是下降的，所以在这个去年经济下降的基础上恢复是很容易的。在去年经济下降的背景下，如果有4%、5%的增长，其实是个恢复，这个可能性不是很小。但是这个并不意味着它变成了长远有一个5%的增长的趋势，不是这样的。只是因为去年是负增长，在去年负增长的背景下，它在恢复的时候可以相对的看上去好，但是这是个暂时的，这是个波动，这个稍微高一点是个波动。
房地产泡沫不是破不破而是何时破的问题
然后关于房地产，那就是完全另外一个事情了。关于房地产呢？首先刚才我们讲到了，由于所有的土地都是政府的，因此，政府是想尽了各种的办法利用土地来获得最大的金钱收入，那么这样子的事情已经搞了20好几年了，超过四分之一个世纪。那么在这20好几年里，中国制造起来的一个极其巨大的房地产泡沫。可以看看统计数字，就是中国的房地产的总价值相当于美国的全国的房地产的总价值，加上欧盟的、全体欧盟国家的房地产总价值，相当于这个数。当他的房地产总价值是这样子的水平的时候，那我们就知道这是彻底的是一个错误状态，是个极其巨大的泡沫。
那么回到基本面来是什么样子呢？就是中国除了一线二线城市以外，三线四线城市大量的都是空置房，大量的是烂尾的工程。这就是中国的房地产的现状。而中国的人口的主体在三、四线城市，不在一、二线城市。那么反过来就是说，中国的房地产行业作为整体是一个泡沫，这个泡沫已经到了破的时候了，下面的问题只是具体怎么破，就是实际上这个2022年大量的这个房地产公司资不抵债就已经看到了。由于中国政府使用各种各样的办法来试图避免这个泡沫破裂，所以这东西还拖在那儿。那么在这个情况下，他去鼓吹推动房地产，这实际上是根本是不可能的，因为他已经是供给过剩、需求不足。
那么另外一个长远的中国房地产的黯淡景色是由中国的人口决定的，中国人口现在在下降。就是世界上不存在一个房地产市场可以在人口下降的时候上升的，只要人口下降房地产市场就跟着下降。所以呢，房地产市场整体上是一定下降。而且它下降之前首先的一个重大问题是破灭，这个泡沫要破灭，怎么破灭。所以首先碰到的是这个问题。然后，中国的房地产和它的相关的各个行业连在一起，占GDP三分之一。这个行业一定是增长是负的，没有可能是正增长的，只能是负的，所以政府要想让问题小一点儿，他唯一可以想的办法是怎么样减少泡沫破裂的时候的冲击，他唯一要想的问题是这，而不存在可能性，就是想靠这个推动房地产市场把中国的经济给拉起来，这是一个完全，这个是乌托邦，是个梦想，是一个梦，房产梦。
记者：你能不能评价一下习近平在处理这些问题上面的一些做法，中共二十大前你曾经说过，清零政策一时半会儿不会变，但是实际上它说变就变了，似乎又把经济发展放到首位了。之前习近平打压房地产，说房子是用来住的，不是用来炒的，但现在又出台了许多宽松的借贷政策，炒房又成了政府鼓励的事情；之前他打压民营经济，但现在他又说，他一贯支持民企。你怎么评价习近平经济政策上的“烙烧饼“现象？
首先他结束清零政策我不认为是因为经济原因。因为我们可以看得很清楚，是白纸运动以后。各方面来的消息告诉我们，实际上清零政策已经全面失败了。他们知道，实际上疫情已经蔓延了，清零已经没用了。然后，一方面是疫情已经蔓延，已经管不住了，另一方面，由于全面动态清零造成的白纸运动，造成社会不稳定，它必须面对。
所以当严重的社会不稳定的冲击来的时候他怎么办？那他就只剩两个办法。一个是坚持这个动态清零，同时严厉镇压社会不稳定。另一个办法就是我们看到的。所以在这两个之间选了后者。为什么选后者？原因非常简单，是因为首先这个社会不稳定的时候，都有谁出头了，由于他的监控手段非常非常完整，所以他事后可以把这些人再抓了去，所以他不需要当时镇压。但是，另一个更重要的就是实际动态清零已经失败。既然已经失败，坚持那个已经没价值了。所以这不是因为经济原因。这是我的我的判断。
然后再回来看经济方面，那么就像我刚才讲的，就是官方的统计数字说它GDP增长3%，如果是增长3%，他其实就不错了，那就不需要慌，那就相当好，那就一点都不需要慌。实际情况不是。我非常的有把握，就是这个我们唯一没有把握的就是到底它是下降多少，这个没有把握，是下降5%？还是下降10%？还是下降15%？不知道。就是他是肯定是下降的，所以他很慌。
那么在这个很慌的情况下，你刚才讲的这些话呢，实际上就是由于他面对着非常严峻的考验，就是经济已经出现了严重的问题了，那么他就讲了这些话。但是他讲的这些话呢，没有用的。为什么没有用呢？因为首先第一条关于民企。其实他讲这些话和他已经做的事儿是互相矛盾的。
就是如果他真的想要告诉民营企业家们，他是支持民企的，那简单极了，就给他们安全。就是现在的企业家们普遍人心惶惶，非常害怕，因为他们没有安全，财产没有安全，甚至人身都没有安全。比如说一个具体的例子，孙大午，被他们非常重的判刑关在监狱里，为什么不可以把孙大午放出来？如果你想告诉他们你是这个支持民企的，你自己出来宣布给孙大午翻案，说我就是支持民企，你也可以给自个儿找个台阶，说虽然孙大午犯了错误——其实孙大午没有犯任何错误，所以可以找个台阶下，虽然他犯了错误，但是他作为企业家功劳很大，所以我们支持民营企业，你可以把他放了你。多几个这样的例子，你多做一点实际的事情，才告诉人们你是真正支持民企的。就是它的实际的事情，不是这样的。所以讲这个话和他做的事情自相矛盾。
供给侧：国进民退决定增长难以加快
在供给侧还有两个特别大的问题。第一个最大的问题就是这几年打压民企。实际上国退民进现象十好几年了，它本身在供给侧上牵制中国的经济增长，就是中国经济增长很难再发展快了，就是由过去的国进民退就已经决定了。
最近这几年大规模猛打击民企，用这个非常狠的办法打击。那就已经决定了，这就不是一般的下降。因为中国的真正的经济增长力量全靠的民企，你把民企给打了，那一定中国的经济增长就打下去了。
第二部分就是国企。他们打民企其实是想要撑国企，是指望中国的经济增长靠国企。这是个不可能的事儿。为什么呢？因为国企面对一个非常严重的制度带来的基本问题，就是国企面对的问题在经济学里叫“软预算约束”。这是全世界的国企都面对的相同问题。苏联、东欧为什么垮了呢？就是因为他改革的时候不允许国内发展民企，他只改革国企，但是国企全都面对这软预算约束问题，最后就把他们拖垮了。
软预算约束问题指的是，由于它是国有的，因此，当这个国有企业资不抵债的时候不会破产。这个民企资不抵债他就要破产，因为没有人管你。而破产是市场经济里的非常重要的淘汰机制。国企没有这个淘汰机制。他的问题就不仅仅是说最坏的国企，他的问题就蔓延到了所有的国企。因为所有的国企发现他不用害怕资不抵债。他不用害怕，因为你只要资不抵债了，就有人来救你。那么所有的国企就胆子很大，他就敢借钱。这就是为什么中国的这个杠杆率这么高。这个高杠杆率也压不下去，它基本集中在国有企业上，因为民企借钱，银行不借给他的，所以就是中国的这个高杠杆率，弄得中国的金融很危险，都是他们弄的，就是国企弄的。
而且国企的概念还要放宽一点。因为中国，不仅仅是叫做企业的那个部分叫国企，中国的所有的地方政府，他的行为也跟国企是一样的。所以，这些地方政府都胆子很大，拿了土地做抵押，都去借钱，借很多很多钱，那么他们都是严重的软预算约束，就是大量的国企和地方政府实际上已经资不抵债了，还有很多的就要资不抵债了。然后资不抵债的也都不破产，然后都靠中央政府、中央金融机构来想办法来补贴他们。以前不是有个词叫做“僵尸企业“，资不抵债的国有企业就是典型的僵尸企业，就是只剩尸体了，不活了，但是，你看他还花钱。这个你要是民企，他就死了，就不是僵尸企业，它就没有了。但是他是国企，他还花钱。所以呢，一面打这个民企，一面去膨胀这个国企，那么你自己的这个制度的机制决定了你的供给侧，就这个没有办法支持你的经济增长。所以我大概齐的就是这么概要一下，无论是需求侧还是供给侧都决定了中国作为发展趋势是一路向下。那么这个作为这个短期的波动，由于这个疫情刚过，非常有可能会有所恢复，但是恢复了以后，就仍然大趋势就再回到整体的一路向下的趋势。
记者：需求不足是中共二十大二中全会公报里也强调的深层次问题。按照你的讲法，很简单的解决办法就是给老百姓发钱不就行了吗？比方说疫情期间，全世界多数国家都给老百姓发钱了，中国没有。那为什么一方面承认内需不足另一方面又不采取这个简单发钱刺激内需的办法呢？
许成钢：实际上这就关系到制度了。为什么中国的家庭收入占GDP的比例是世界上最低的国家之一？原因就是中国的制度。因为中国的制度决定了，首先国有的部门非常大，然后经济制高点全部都国家控制了。虽然中国的民企产出占GDP的大头，但大量利润是被国企拿走了。就是他把这个民企的利润压得很低了，他把利润大量拿走，怎么拿走的呢？他就靠的是，因为他是上游，就是经济制高点，它控制了一个是金融一个是上游，就是靠金融和上游，他把钱都拿走了。所以你看中国的上市企业，最赚钱的全是金融，金融100%都是国有的。你看美国，上市企业最赚钱的都是高科技，中国都是金融，就是靠垄断，靠国家垄断金融把钱给挤出去了。
还有就是国家拿走大量钱的手段是土地。因为中国所有的土地都是国家所有。所以，这就使得中国的地方政府可以利用它，每一个地方政府就是当地的唯一的地主，任何其他人都不是，各级的政府就是靠卖地和租地。所谓的卖也不是真的卖给你了，卖给你的是个租期，比如说70年50年。所以各级政府是靠土地来支撑，财政相当一大部分收入来自土地。所以金融土地就已经占了好些了，然后再加上他控制的上游，然后层层地再加上非常高的各种税和费。中国有企业家到了美国来做生意，然后就发现，美国人都说税高，他说在美国的税比中国低太多了，就是税和费啊，比中国低太多了。所以各个途径一起来，就决定了最后能分到普通人家里、变成家庭收入的那个比例就很低了。
回到刚才的问题，为什么中国政府不能够在这上去想点办法呢？如果认真去看，当他们提内需不足的时候，从来没有提过收入问题。他只说内需不足，只说刺激内需，从来没说过收入不足，从来都没有说过。他根本就避开这个问题。其实呢，内需不足的根本是因为收入的原因，是因为家庭收入的原因，他们根本就避开这个问题，不提这个问题。而这个问题，正好就是因为这个制度造成的，就是在中国的经济快速发展的这些年里，从90年代初一直到最近不久前几年，每一年中国居民家庭收入占GDP的比例都在下降，逐年下降。就是随着GDP的高速增长，随着中国经济体的快速膨胀，中国居民分的那个饼的份儿，每年都小一点儿，每年都小一点儿，直到最近这几年才稳定下来。就是没有再继续向下去了，因为再向下去就吃不消了。所以我们看到的内需不足是长期积累下来的，这个问题我都说了十年了，这根本不是个新现象。
还有一个就是绝对贫困人口。大家都熟悉，李克强总理两年前提到过，中国有6亿人每个月的收入是1000人民币。我想强调的是，他虽然看上去准确，实际还是使人误解了更严重的问题。实际更严重的问题是那个数字是1000和以下，关键在这儿，就是大量的人是以下。
仔细看一下数据来源，实际上中国有5亿4000万人——如果没记错——实际上生活在绝对贫困线以下。绝对贫困线怎么定义呢？就是每人每天3美元。这是个常用的普通定义。中国经常会说他的贫困人口只有几千万了，他那个定义是每人每天1块2毛几。
所以这两个原因决定了你没有需求，当然经济就没办法增长。因为你只要生产一多了就过剩了。
记者：是什么原因造成中国经济的下行趋势？
许成钢：中国经济的下行实际上无论是供给侧还是需求侧都是下行的。首先来看需求侧。中国的内需不足根本不是个新问题。中国的内需不足是从来就存在的问题。而中国的内需不足它背后的原因，这才是关键。背后的原因是因为居民收入占GDP的比例太过低，这是第一。
第二，就是中国的贫困人口。我说的是在绝对贫困线之下的贫困人口太过大。太大的贫困人口人群，加上整体上家庭收入占GDP比例太过低，这两个原因放在任何国家都一定内需不足。
中国曾经这个内需不足的问题，显得对中国的经济增长没有太大限制，是因为中国的出口。但是现在，中国作为世界上最大的出口国，然后是第二大经济体，在这个背景下还想靠单纯的出口来拉动（经济），这个可能性没有了。再加上更重要的是中国这些年里国际关系搞坏了，跟所有的发达国家都把国际关系搞坏。因此，大量的发达国家现在都在忙着寻找供给链的其他的来源，忙着从中国脱身，就加重了中国的出口困难，当出口碰到困难的时候，内需不足的问题立刻就成了当务之急了。其实中国从来就内需不足，可不是今天。
记者：你能不能举些与此结论相关的具体数据。
许成钢：首先一点，就是中国官方的数字从来是不可靠的。所以，单纯去看中国的官方数字，一定会犯特别大的错误。无论任何人，无论是国际组织，包括国际基金组织（IMF）、世界银行，也包括华尔街的投行，任何人单纯依赖中国的官方数字，一定会做非常重大的错误判断。
在2019年，在布鲁金斯学会（Brookings）的刊物上有一篇非常认真的论文，是一篇非常认真的对于中国经济增长的分析。他们使用的就是中国的这个微观数据，就是企业水平的数据，然后重新来构建中国的GDP的增长速度。
我来概要一下他的结论，第一，中国经济早在07年以来，就是大趋势一路向下；第二，每一年官方公布的数字都比实际的GDP增长速度高上去大概2%。当官方说它的数字是5%的时候，实际数字大概就是3%。就是说到底中国的经济增长速度是什么，经过他们重新核算后，就是这个数字你需要再减2%。来看2022年中国经济增长速度是多少。官方的数字是3%，如果按这个减去2就是1%的样子。
实际上还有另外一个办法来核算，就是看经济基本面的实际数字，比如全国的高速公路上的物流的统计数。这在正常情况下，人们过去已经做过研究发现，全国高速公路上物流的统计数字，和中国GDP的增长速度，之间的相关性大概有99%。这是一个重要的背景，或者作为一个方法论。2022年期间中国的高速公路的物流的统计数字和2021年比是下降百分之十几，所以是负的增长率，是负的，根本就不是正的。那么它的这个负当然是波动的了，它的波动的区间大体上是在12%，负的12%到负的18%之间。
所以按最好的算，也是负12%，因为在疫情期间到处都封闭，所以这个物流当然是大幅度下降，所以你可能还可以再给一些其他的各种各样的办法去校正，但是无论怎么弄数字是负的。所以我说，官方的统计数字一定不能作为真正的依据的数字，那就是个参考数，你在多大程度上可以信他，实际上是你一定需要有其他的渠道再收集数据来跟他做对比，然后再来做判断。结论性的意见非常简单，就是说情况是相当的不好。
至于你刚才引用的那个指数(制造业采购经理人指数PMI)，它不是个实现了的东西，而是经理人回答问卷时的感觉，在相当大程度上我认为是可以相信的。为什么呢？因为去年的情况坏透了。如果我们相信去年的实际情况是负增长，那么人们认为今年不是负增长，那当然就是非常大的上升。比如说如果从负的3%变成正的3%，那就是很大很大的增长了。如果所有人都认为，疫情带来的萎缩要结束了，那当然你看上去就是一个扩张的，指数就显示出扩张，但是这个含义并不是真正的经济扩张，而是经济复苏。就是说从这个疫情带来的严重的经济衰退变成复苏。而疫情带来的经济衰退呢，官方统计数字没有如实报告，这就是我的判断。
记者：了解中国经济的真实情况无论对记者、投资人还是学者从来就是一项挑战。最近，一方面中国政府公布的制造业的采购经理人数据显示了中国经济10年来的最快扩张，让西方媒体为此欢呼雀跃。但看看民间对微观经济的观察，甚至中共二中全会公报，都承认中国经济实际上依然困难重重。你认为应该怎么观察和评估中国的经济现状？
许成钢：这是个大问题。中国的经济整体上是呈下行趋势已经十多年了，就是实际上已经遇到了非常严重的问题。最近这几年，问题远比过去更严重了。疫情导致的经济下行，人们认为这是一个外来因素，那么这个外来力量拿掉以后严重的下降可能会略有恢复。所以，有一个小的波动是可以预料的，就是说比起2022年，2023年可能会有所恢复。但是，长远的整体的经济下行的趋势应该是个总趋势，是不会改变的。除非它的制度有基本变化，因为它这个整体的经济下行的趋势是由它的经济制度带来的。而经济制度带来的好几个方面的问题，没有一个问题得到解决的。所有的问题，要么就是没有变化，要么就是变得更坏。
美国之音记者对斯坦福大学中国经济与制度研究中心资深研究员、英国帝国大学客座教授许成钢的采访实录