【新唐人2012年9月21日讯】美国《外交政策》杂志9月11号发表“为什么中国永远不会有华尔街”文章，内容指出，中国股市本质上不是企业所有权交换的地方，只是投机的场所。公司的股票只有小部分可以自由交易，控制权永远掌握在国家手中。在这样的市场上，未来能不能募到大量的资本，取决于和政府之间的关系，而不是创新的眼光。
专家指出，“国有企业”是中共一党专制政权的输血机器，因此当局无论如何都不愿意放开自由市场经济。
文章说，中国股市并非真正意义的股市。它以“国家”取代“市场”力量，排除了股市最基本的“定价”功能，把它变成了“投机”场所。而中国股票的价值，是市场流动性和投资者各种预期的反应，这些预期受政府政策以及对政府干预、补贴、刺激的最新谣言和猜测所驱动。对于投资者而言，有关企业战略的信心、产品创新或是公司治理的品质，却摆放在第二位，他们首先考虑的是政府想要怎么样。
文章说，北京实际上将非国有企业从股票市场上排除了出去，并要求国有企业的所有权“绝对控制在国家手里”，国家占至少51%的股份。由此，股市始终几乎是国家及所有企业的专属领地。这意味着一个公司的股票只有小部分可以自由交易，这一制度安排的负面影响远远超出了股市本身。
广州经济评论家巩胜利指出，这造成国家成为贸易的主体。
广州经济评论家 巩胜利：“作为一个国家整体和私营企业来竞争，这环境可想而知。环境乱套了，这个国家的贸易怎么往前走？ 在跟全世界各个国家做生意当中，这个环境没有办法公正，也没有办法让其他国家做外贸的公平的来竞争。”
巩胜利指出，国家企业垄断了资本和资源，国家资本只提供给国有企业，私营企业和集体企业的资本链都断掉了，让私营企业难以生存。比如“中国移动”公司占据中国移动电信80%以上资源。
文章说，如果要真正改革市场，国家必须从中退出。中国必须向国内的私营企业和外国投资者开放，允许国企的私有化，使用更加成熟的控制方式，允许公司股份的全面流通。但是巩胜利指出，中共当局一定不愿意这样做，因为它的一党专制政权将会受到冲击。
巩胜利：“国有企业给一党独裁的政权提供了相当的利润。他这个利润是来自老百姓的，老百姓在高成本的前提下，交出更高的花费来买这些东西。比如水电煤气。还有一个，中国共产党，占有这个国家的运行成本，可能比政府的更高。比如党委，宣传部，统战部。”
巩胜利认为，中共花在党内的钱，是法制社会里不被允许的花费，相对而言，维持中国共产党运行的成本非常可观，因此，中共政权不会放弃国家垄断的那些所谓国营企业。
《外交政策》文章也提到，允许真正的私有化，等同于将广阔的经济收益送给外国人，而政府将会失去对国内的控制。对于不计一切代价要维持统治的人来说，这是不可能发生的，如果真的发生了，我们反倒会非常惊讶。
采访编辑/秦雪 后制/萧宇
Without a Wall Street, CCP’s Dictatorship Economically Supported by Monopoly of State-Owned Companies
On September 11th, U.S. based Foreign Policy magazine
published an article titled “Why there will never be a Wall Street in China”.
The article wrote that, the Chinese stock market is
essentially a place for speculation rather than for exchanging ownership of enterprises.
Only a small fraction of shares can be traded freely while
it is always the CCP authority which has absolute power over each company.
In such a market, whether a company can collect a great
quantity of money depends on its relationship with the government rather than on its creative foresight.
Expert s remarked that, state-owned companies are
blood transfusion machines to economically support the CCP’s regime;
Therefore a free market will never be fully opened in China.
Foreign Policy’s article remarked that the Chinese
stock market is not a real “stock market”.
In China, governmental power replaces a free market
as the ultimate power in the stock market,
which invalidates its fundamental function of “price regulation”
and makes it only a place of speculation.
The price of Chinese stock depends on its liquidity in
the market and investors’ anticipations of various changes.
Those anticipations are basically influenced by new policies and
any rumor about possible interference, allowance and stimulus by the government.
To investors, their confidence in company strategy, product
innovation and quality of management is only secondary.
They always first take into account what the CCP
authority plans to do.
The article wrote that, in fact Beijing had excluded all
non-state-owned companies from the Chinese stock market.
The CCP authority also requires that any state-owned
company must be under absolute control of the government,
which should hold at least 51% of the shares.
Therefore, the stock market is almost exclusively occupied
by the government and its subordinate companies.
This means that only a small fraction of shares are subject
to free trade.
The negative effect of such a system far exceeds
any function of the stock market itself.
Guangzhou Economic commentator Gong Shengli
pointed out that,
such a system mandates that the government acts as
the main body of the trade market.
(Gong Shengli):”It is easy to imagine how bad the
environment is when the state as a whole body competes with private enterprises.
With such an unhealthy economic environment,
how can the trade market of this country prosper?
It is impossible to fairly trade in the global market,
and it is also impossible for foreign companies to compete fairly in such a market.”
Gong Shengli remarked that, state-owned companies
have monopolized capital and resources, and national capital is only available to state-owned companies;
thus the capital chains for private and collectively owned
companies have been cut which makes it difficult for them to survive.
As an example, China Mobile has occupied more than 80%
of it’s resources for the mobile telecommunication industry.
Foreign Policy’s article suggested that, the government
has to retreat from the market to initialize a real reform;
China has to open its market to Chinese private companies
and foreign investors,
enable privatization of state-owned companies and develop
a more mature control model for stock circulation.
However, Gong Shengli believes that the CCP authority
is not willing to do so as such reform can be a strike against its regime.
(Gong Shengli): ”State-owned companies have produced
considerable profits for the regime.
Those profits are essentially seized from ordinary
Chinese people, who have to pay more for living costs such as water supply, electricity and gas.
Furthermore, the cost of serving the CCP’s
political agencies such as party committees,
propaganda departments and United Front agencies can be
even higher than the cost of managing the government itself.”
Gong Shengli remarked that, the way the CCP spends
tax revenues on itself is not permitted in any lawful state.
Since the cost of running the CCP is very high,
it will not give up it’s monopoly of state owned companies.
Foreign Policy’s article also mentioned that, enabling real
privatization is equivalent to giving away numerous economic profits to foreigners;
the government will also lose its control over
the domestic economy.
For rulers who try to maintain their governance at any cost,
this will never happen; we will be surprised if this ever becomes reality.
