On Development of China in 30 Years

This topic comes from a lunch talk days ago with a visiting scholar from China and a colleague in our department, who is quite ignored on the Chinese issues. Though under most conditions, the discussions about China that covers the riskiness of the banking system, unfairness of educational resources, the bribery among the official servants and governmental departments, can easily reach a consistent conclusion, this time we are facing dispersion. Such dispersion, however, can mean the ignorance of knowledge on fundamental theories of accounting and finance, the reality of Chinese society, and, of course, so-called ‘face’ that is widely seen in Chinese cultures (面子:笔者注). To avoid some unnecessary troubles, this article only summarizes the viewpoint of mine.

This article investigates the development of China in past thirty years and its related issues on the social well-beings. However, it is far from adequate for an unbiased and justified discussion as the limitation of contextualization applies. The limitation also partly explains why I write this blog in English rather than in Chinese. Because I do not want to trigger the censorship from that ancient country, though the censoring system can have little impact on my blog given its highly limited readers coverage.

  1. The Role of Government and The Development of Economy in General

    The very first question refers to the development of China in past 30 years in fundamental. This is the most prestigious part of the recent Chinese history that should be discussed than any other ones. As, in the past thirty years, China has transferred itself from a less developed country into a comparatively developed star. People becomes richer than they used to be, and the living styles has been changed a lot. The government and academicians accompanied starts to bury themselves in such results, and they assert, they have created a puzzled that to be solved by the whole economic world, namely, how and why the Chinese economy boomed in past thirty years and what can be implied? However, to my understanding, the development of Chinese economy is quite simple. That is the concentration of resources and great sacrifice on social well-beings and fairness.

    The prolonged understatement of currency rate and good controls on the foreign currencies transfer for past thirty days ensures the benefit of cheap labor and limited import transactions. Given a balance sheet that the asset sides always exceeds its liability side, the firm can boom up rapidly with a fast increase on net assets. Such booming up can even accelerate when the distribution of earning is controlled. Indeed, if India follows a similar way of governing, there would be a second China in Asia. However, after hundreds of years governed by the United kingdom, their philosophy has been changed. That is, the government can be extremely hard to imitate such a method like his Chinese neighbor adopts, as is suggested by an article on Economist. The only difficulty that traps numerous economist in US and Europe is that, how can the public accept such concentration and where the public monitoring is. In general, they just cannot believe in their eyes.

    Evidence can be easily shown regarding this issue if you readers want some. A good example that confirms my argument comes from the difference on size and profitability between the state-owned firms and entities of other ownership. The most profitable industries, including the telecommunication service providers, electricity and water supplies, petrol and gas, mass media, publication houses, etc are all state-owned that form a chain of monopolies in reality. In fact, such controlling avoids the market competition and the public requirements on optimization, which in turn, ensures good income for the country for the investments on infrastructure. However, by doing so, it enlarges the differences between state-owned firms and others, and strengthens the voting power of government in the market, and eventually, induces some other issues.

  2. The Consequence of Governmental Controlling: Social Disorders

    The strengthening of voting power of governments in markets can lead to good rent-seeking motivations and can result in a widespread of corruptions. The corruption can partly be explained by a social basis on personal connections rather than that of rule-in-law principles as in US and Europe. However, I prefer an alternative explanation on the lack of public monitoring. Given a central role of government in resource allocation and distribution, the public monitoring can alleviate the rent-seeking motivation in this process and secure the fundamental fairness, which is the main responsibility of Congress in most countries of the world. However, the Congress of China failed to control this.

    Such failure on monitoring results in a social fashion in China: Guanxi (Relationship) Economy. The worship on money and power eventually exceeds the merit of being honesty and diligent. Namely, if you want to be successful in China, an easy approach is to find the right person.The rent-seeking on governmental officers and the fashion of bribery in daily lives in fact promotes the popularity of entrance exams for civil servants. In a developed country, this is rare to see. An intriguing point underlying its popularity is its motivation. Because it is actually not reasonable for a great amount of graduates, holding a master’s and PhD diploma, to pursue a position that can indeed be fulfilled by a trained secretary, except for a fabulous temptation from Satan.

    The offer from Satan, however, is a package comprised of various benefits: priorities on cheap housing that should be for low-incomers, special treatment on medical care system that is designed for all the public, VIP treatment for kid’s education from the schools that are established by the tax income from the public, perks and bribery that is created from the dominant role of government in market, etc. In addition, they are rewarded an outstanding pension plan that is unavailable to other public except for employees in state-owned firms and government-sponsored departments. Regarding this, there forms a mainstream of conflicts in Chinese society: the officials and privileged groups versus the rest.

    The conflicts between the privileged groups and the rest are manifested in not only the population of such exams takers, but also popularity of immigration. Students without good family background and very little hope of being employed in state-owned firms and governmental-sponsored departments tend to seek opportunities of studying overseas. The scholarship and sponsorship overseas in fact provides students from a poor family but hold very good academic recordings an outstanding chance of developing their own careers, and provides a substituting mechanism for this group that has long been overlooked. A survey conducted by the Chinese government shows the returning rate of students studying overseas with high ranking on academia is only approximately 10% in past thirty years. I suppose, the unfairness existed and fear from the privileged groups should contribute much to this result. The escaping of such excellent students, especially those with PhD degrees and good contribution to their own fields, however, withdraws the potentials of the developing of Chinese society, and thus, ruins its perspective.

  3. The Governmental Role and Risk Control of Banks

    The dominant role of government in the market, though ensures the short term profit by securing the monopoly role of state-owned firms in key industries, also leads to some potential risks in banking sectors. The banking system in China takes two layers that consist of national and regional banks. They are both charted and supervised by China’s Bank Regulatory Commission, a group that is formally independent of but implicitly holds a good relation with the central bank and government.

    The banks are all highly staked by the government no matter which type the ownership is. Due to the restriction on banking business, banks in China in fact earns highest both fee and interest income comparing to their counter-parties in other countries. However, it is also their links to the government that their risk management strategy is under challenge.There is a strong regulatory requirement that prevents the banks in China to operate risky transaction including high volume of derivatives and structured products, but their high dependence on fee income and interest spreads generally compensates this drawback.

    Given the stringent auditing policy for firms in China that seeks IPO opportunity, which involves both strict benchmark on their performance and bribery implicitly acknowledged, firms in China, no matter its size, are totally bank loan dependent. That is, loan from banks performs central role in Chinese markets. Given the conclusion stated above on the central role of Chinese government, the governmental decision can have a strong impact on banks’ loan contribution. Reasonably, firms with governmental background can have an easier access to the bank funding than others. That explains why the Ministry of Railway in China can have a 5,000 billion RMB loans with particularly low quality, but private firms with good performance can only receive funding through underground banking systems.

    The conflicts between the risk controls and the governmental impacts eventually raises the riskiness of banks’ asset portfolio in part, and the concentration on land business forms the other. Given the land are allocated by the government, who takes the ultimate ownership, the transfer of utility rights of lands form a central item of governmental income, not only for central government, but also for local ones. The demand and supply of the utility rights, eventually boosts the price of landing, enlarging the governmental income and the cost for housing companies, finally creates a high level of housing price, comparing with the GDP per person and the average income.

    The governmental controlling and their pursing the profit from land leasing result in the housing bubble that is similar to the United States before the crisis in 2007. Though the existence of high demand in houses, the bubble can hardly stay long with its great dispersion from average income. Thus, assuming the depreciation of house pricing in the future, the default risk and prepayment issues can be apparent, and the value of collateral is dropping down, the capital adequacy ratio set by Basel Accords can vapor in a dramatically fast manner and soon the banks, no matter whom they are, can face a short of funding. The SHIBOR rates can boost due to such demand, and finally, the financial stability of the whole country is threatened.

    I am not sure about the percentage that the loans take in banks’ asset side of the balance sheet in China but it can apparently exceeds 60%, the average of US banks. This implies a very high leverage and a good potential catalyst for death when the market depreciates. The strong power of United States eventually saved up his banking system after bailing out several of its largest banks but I do suspect if the Chinese government can be powerful enough to pay the bill when such disaster eventually comes. If the answer is no, the proposed financial crisis raised from a crash of the banking system can then turn itself into the sovereign debt crisis as what the Europeans are now suffering. Though the probability of such happening can be low according to the current situation, but the consequence can be disastrous.

  4. Remarks and Contribution

    Above all, though China has experienced its dramatic development since the 1980s as the starting of its open-door policy, some drawbacks remains. I assert that such drawbacks are induced by a unique social structure and can induce some unsolved issues on interest of conflicts among different social classes. The conflicts, however, further leads to numerous social issues that threaten the stability and future development opportunities.

    This article also provides an answer to a question on why the economic growth in China maintains a high percentage by suggesting the central role that the government play in this market. The economic growth of China in past thirty years in fact is a substitution of loss on social well-beings for the public by the artificial intervene on the process of allocating and distributing the resources.

    This article also anticipates that such intervene can result in a reduction on risk controlling efficiency for banks and thus harm the economic system in return.This article is also consistent to the recent discussion from the media that refer to the worries from the West on China’s being the third polar of the world. I would like to say that it is still too early to worry about this issue as China is still at its very early stage on development. It can only be a powerful country in reality when the internal conflicts can be reasonably solved and the fairness secured. Considering its political structure and uniqueness of contextualization, reaching this target means a long way to go.

This article is based on an academic analysis on the Chinese economy and does not represent any official point of view from or related to Chinese government. I personally maintain all the copyrights on this article. Please let me know if you want to re-post that somewhere else.

Taxation in China: A Serious Topic

在百忙的工作中写这个博客,其实是来自于太傻论坛上的一个讨论。在这个讨论中,大家就中国和英国的税制问题展开了激烈的争论,其中有经济学博士,有在英国工作多年但在国内家境不错的朋友,也有很多像我这样的国内的Loser。可以说在这个方面,我们各抒己见,有了个很好的讨论。但是,我很清楚,这类问题,尤其是如下我今日所做的回复,恐怕很容易被和谐。所以我决定加以修改,刊登在此,供以后备查。

中国的税制一直是个非常热门的话题。在学术界,这类问题引起了财政学,会计学和经济学等不同领域的学者的讨论。显然,这里我不会对此类研究做任何回顾。而我要说的是中国的一些特色。当然,为了方便大家的阅读。我会再次尽可能淡化所有的专业知识。但是这种淡化在带来更好的可读性的同时,也有可能引起更多的误解。所以特此声明:笔者不对此讨论所有文字表达的任何引申含义和本意负责。此讨论仅限于学术范畴。

中国的税制,简单来说,是非常模糊且“不足为外人道也”。正如很多人所言,你看不到的问题并不代表它不存在。相反,让我们看得更清楚英国的税制,却给了我们一个更好的印象:他们的政府有着更好的透明度。我们暂且不论这个制度是否合理,但是我们至少部分保有了知情权。而在中国,你能保证每个人都真正的了解税率?诚然,个税起征点是提高了,但是那个仅仅是针对工资而言。对于一般的劳务收入,起征点并没有增加,而且第一档税率就是20%。事实上,这个补充条款就有很多人并不了解。

而更重要的问题则是:我们在中国需要哪些税?先撇开工资里面代扣代缴的个人所得税和相关的税费,我们来看下日常消费。英国的增值税率是20%,而中国是17%(不考虑其他税收优惠情况)。英国的增值税在我看来,其实包含了中国的增值税和消费税两部分。我不是很熟悉英国税法,错误的请指正。英国似乎没有单独的消费税。营业税有没有我也不清楚了。但是可以说明一点就是英国的关税税率远远低于中国的水平。尽管我们说假如WTO要逐步实现0关税,暂时我还没看到任何的动作。相反,我倒是看到了海关的种种敛财举动。我真不知道对于这些行为是该庆祝还是该哀叹?

中国的税制,问题就在于其不平衡,或者说并没有起到保护中低收入者的作用。为什么要说去保护中低收入人群?这是因为无论在哪个社会环境下,中国、香港、台湾乃至欧美,这部分人往往占了大部分。他们的稳定与否其实决定了社会的稳定。我们知道,中国的偷税漏税是非常严重的,我们会发现很多高收入人群并没有尽到纳税义务,这里的手段多种多样,不提也罢。而在去掉个税这一个拯救社会公平性的同时,我们却看到富人和穷人在购物时同等纳税的权利(不考虑海外购入)。这时候你觉得还是一个公平的策略么?而这个问题最突出的地方恐怕就是现今的房地产市场了。

而引起大家不满的,其实并不仅仅是这里的制度原因,而更是包括了其背后的监管职能。在一个机构既当裁判员又当运动员的情况下,我们很难保证真正的中立。事实上,我们这些纳税的钱都去了哪里?都去了官员的腰包,去了官员的子女那里,满足了自己下半身的需求,也满足了其他的欲望。我不否认政府在公共建设上的作用,事实上台湾的“过度民主”也让我们看到了政府混乱的可怕。然而,政府机构工作人员的蛮横无理,办事效率低下,公共设施建设质量堪忧,社会动荡因素日积月累,这就是一个机构应该给我们纳税人的合理的答卷?

诚然,英国的制度也未必完美。过高的福利给政府的财政带来了无穷的压力。以至于独立报天天就在骂政府玩。先不论骂政府的这种言论的公开透明的宣传制度,我们却看到英国政府是真的努力在改变这一切。当然,我在英国没多久,感受不深。只是,我在这里真的不会被要求去找“相关部门”解决,也不会告诉我说这个问题我们“正在考虑,会加以时日”解决。或许你会说是个Loser,但是我要说,在天朝,如果没有背景和关系,也不是既得利益团体,要去办事真的是难如登天。不过,政府只希望你当P民,没事给我们党找那么多事干嘛?我们不需要你有信仰,有独立思考。你唯一需要考虑的就是钱!钱!钱!

中国的税收有一大部分去了哪里?其实是去了公务开支。大家看看最近的报道就会知道,而我依然记得多年前的审计风暴,审计人员为了防止打击报复,直接躲进了央行的发行库。要知道,这是一个政府部门啊?!却搞得跟黑帮一样。台湾的一个立法委员有句话说得好(我不喜欢台湾制度,但是话本身没错),那就是,政府是跟公民站在一边的。政府的职责是为民谋利。而我们现在看到的是什么?土地转让,公务员的高工资,公务员子女的高待遇。这些不是于民谋利,而是于民争利啊!

正如最优秀的学者总是愿意接受各类批评和挑战,我也希望我们的媒体被允许发出更多的不同声音。事实上,思想被禁锢往往不仅培养了人们不加思考的逆反心理,也同时限制了我们的科研能力和水平。为什么这么说?当一个研究人员没有了独立思考能力的时候,这个时间点往往也预示了他生涯的结束。而这种能力的来源则是教育!政府和人们不是都希望我们早日培养出自己的诺贝尔奖么?那么,就从学会思考和接受批评开始吧!

Government Versus Public: Friends or Enemies?

如果说赖昌星的回国和郭美美的漂亮车车还不足以吸引大家的眼球的话,温州高铁的事故可以说是让大家接触了一次真正的爱的教育。或许大多数人不会认可1959年的“自然灾害”是人祸;或许没有受过教育的大众并不能理解“希望工程”为什么并没有改变他们子女没有接受教育的命运;或许我们也还在怀念赖老哥为了平抑中国的油价所作出的卓越贡献,这次的事故和铁道部的操蛋应对却让我们深深地震撼了。

尽管本人一向对专家的100%保证嗤之以鼻,尽管我也对国内的很多政府官员和高校行政人员没有什么好感,尽管我也对食堂那些欺上瞒下的混帐东西深恶痛绝,甚至于我对那些除了钱脑子里啥都没有的暴发户不屑一顾,而这次铁道部的快速反应和”积极应对“却让我这个在天朝混了二十多年,接受了除博士阶段所有教育的人傻了眼。要知道,如果政府部门对于所有的突发事件都能有如此的反应速度,中国早已不国了。

其实我估计在中国,是个人都应该多少坐过火车。火车工作人员的冷漠,火车站的管理混乱,火车的一票难求,以及铁道部的一些脑残规定(比如至今不能网上购票,不能支持信用卡)都让我们对这个部门没啥好感。但是就我而言,我始终坚信,尽管这是一个熟透了烂掉的苹果,但是它始终是一只苹果,在关键的时候,它总会有一些苹果的特质。然而,我发现,我这次真的错了。

且不说闪电是否真的可以把火车干趴下,也不说通讯系统和电脑故障,更不用说是不是因为司机和调度员同时脑子抽筋,或者干脆说这帮混帐们都他妈是临时工,在一切调查都没开始前就要求就地掩埋并毁灭证据,恐怕这事儿也就他们铁道部干的出来。这时候,即使是一个大字不识的庄稼汉也应该能预见到其中可能的问题了。当过孩子和父母的都会知道,当孩子的试卷总是不愿意拿出来的时候,大家其实都预见到了考试的悲剧。而当孩子当众撕掉试卷,那后果只能是脱裤子屁股开花。为什么?在孩子没有神经搭错的情况下,考得一塌糊涂只能是唯一的解释。而一顿狠揍绝对是这个结果最好的”奖励“。

可惜我们的铁道部童鞋就做了一件如此这帮的”建党伟业“。在一切事件都还都还没有定论,当一切原因都还没有调查清楚,当失踪者的尸体还没有找到的时候,铁道部却要求掩埋车体,尽快恢复通车。这些行为已然引起了广大的群众不满,于是网上”骂声一片“。然而当拆解过程中发现小伊伊的时候,人们的怒火再也无法压制了。被拜金欲压抑了十多年的爱心终于在天安门那晚的枪声之后再次被燃起,高潮来临了!

其实我们常说,干一番事业就如同做人,需要行得正,方能站得直。而于政府,这也是一样的。为什么各国政府(天朝除外)都会如此重视反腐倡廉?因为政府是代表着广大的纳税人的,他需要体现纳税人的利益。这就像一家公司,当总经理不顾股东们的反对大肆敛财的时候,这家公司也就接近了崩溃的边缘。

或许很多人还在骂为什么那么多华人要远走高飞?为什么他们就不念旧情却愿意在大洋彼岸当一辈子二等公民?而更让人无法理解的是为什么高官子女都在海外?其实这都不难理解。我父母老跟我开玩笑说老毛有一句名言,那就是“知识越多就越反动”。其实我以前一直没懂这句话。而现在我懂了。因为知识往往会给人以宽广的眼界和独特的视角,这回让我们看到更多的问题和阴暗面。显然,这不是一个独裁者和专政政府所喜欢的。

共和国六十年,风风雨雨,荣辱与共。走过了多少的坎坷和险阻,也迈过了多少的河流和山坡。但是,我们需要知道,为人者,不可以金钱为唯一的目标。我们需要关注的还有爱和人性。“破四旧”毁灭了一代中国人心中所应该有的道德和底线,同时也葬送了下一代人所应该具有的传统教育和人文关怀。其实世界上有很多的官二代和富二代,但是唯有中国大陆的官二代和富二代们是最不学无术和不招人待见的。或许有人说,这是仇富心理在作怪,但是我认为更好的解释是“父母,永远是孩子最重要的老师!”

愿车祸中地下的人们场面,希望你们的鲜血可以给那些官员们撕开一丝良心的光芒!

Junjun's Home