脚踩西瓜皮的经济政策
(2014-10-13 01:34:30)China’s economic policy follows a random path
Financial Times, 13 Oct. 2014,
咱们中国人是得过且过的高手:
(1) 汇率政策:
脚踩西瓜皮60多年;
前面的50年, 人民币被严重高估, 黑市猖獗, 政府死撑; 后面10年, 政府依然死撑;
(2) 燃油税: 大家还记得吗?
(3) 中国人宁可搞危险的南水北调, 也不愿意大幅提高水价;
(4)
房地产税: 还有下文吗?
China's approach to foreign exchange, like many of the
decisions of the country's public authorities, could best be
described as a banana-skin policy. That is to say: the government
has no policy. It simply keeps doing the same thing for as long as
possible, until it slips, suffers a nasty bruise, picks itself up
and tries something else.
In the early 1980s, a US dollar bought you two renminbi. That
was the fixed rate in the official market, anyway;
the Chinese
currency traded at about five to the dollar in
the black market. Since then, Beijing has been forced by the black
market to adapt, whenever the official rate falls out of line with
the underground exchanges.
To maintain an overvalued exchange rate, China in the
mid-1980s introduced a foreign exchange certificate to ration
foreign currency. Only approved users would receive a ration. But
FECs quickly took on a life of their own; unofficial trading of the
certificate boomed. Black market prices fluctuated
between 60 and 80 per cent of the official
exchange rate. Even at the central bank, where I was working at the
time, staff members had to go to the black market to buy dollars to
pay tuition fees at foreign universities.
A black market for foreign exchange had existed ever since the
1950s. It only dried up in the mid-1990s, when the central bank
drastically reduced the official value of the renminbi. Following
that, FECs became worthless and the central bank stopped issuing
them in 1995.
That Beijing had maintained an overvalued renminbi for half a
century may come as a surprise to westerners who have grown
accustomed to grumbling that an undervalued currency gives Chinese
manufacturers an unfair advantage. Was the central bank
deliberately punishing its own exporters and rewarding foreign
businesses? That might have been the outcome but clearly it was not
China's intention.
The Chinese are masters of muddling through. They are firmly
attached to the status quo, whatever that happens to be. Anyone
accusing China of currency manipulation in the past decade is
ignorant of the five that went before it. The renminbi now trades
30 per cent higher than its 1994 level. This did not happen by
choice. It just happened.
This is not the only instance in which Chinese policy has
followed a random path. A little over a decade ago, Beijing
became alarmed
about air pollution and the country’s
dependence on imported oil. So it tried to introduce a fuel tax to
discourage oil consumption. It was quietly withdrawn after noises
were made about the levy’s impact on farm tractors, as well as
general industry. Since then, no one has talked about the tax,
although oil imports have kept rising and air pollution has
worsened.
When a real
estate crisis took hold three years ago, China
experimented with a property tax in Chongqing and Shanghai. It was
clear from the start that such a measure would test the
government’s political will and administrative sophistication. Sure
enough, the fanfare gave way to quiet forgetfulness.
For decades, water
shortages have been growing challenges for
China. But throughout that time water has been more or less free,
and few people can conceive of having to pay for supplies.
Politicians would rather undertake dangerous
projects such as building river dams and south-to-north diversion
pipelines than increase water tariffs. Clearly, true leadership and
extraordinary statesmen are needed if such
shortsightedness is to be overcome.
Since 1978, China's economy has indeed grown
dramatically, but its governance remains just as
unsophisticated as before. Given the mounting challenges,
banana-skin policies can only result in more painful
slip-ups.
The writer is author of ‘Party Man, Company Man: Is China's State Capitalism Doomed?’
前一篇:西方大学的教授让学生自生自灭?
后一篇:伦敦和香港的房价