全球“占领运动”继续进行,已有超过80个国家的上千个城市曾参与。示威主要反对“金融霸权”、社会不公等等,“反对资本主义”也是一大诉求,特别是在香港等地。此外,各地还有各自不同的诉求,包括反对核电、财政紧缩等等。
这20多年来,世界发生了翻天覆地的变化。随着冷战的结束,资本主义蓬勃并跨国发展。简单的说,大量累积的剩余资本面对实体经济发展瓶颈,便流入虚拟经济,造成金融资本到处流窜(热钱泛滥),并滋生匪夷所思的金融衍生产品,导致资产泡沫化、粮食等原产品价格高涨、金融风险失控等严重问题。另一方面,资本主义对不断扩张的内在要求,加上短期政治利益的驱使,使到各国政府无度开支、大量举债,掩盖危机、预支繁荣。结果,市场供需和资源配置受到扭曲、经济周期被人为缩短、景气大起大落、贫富差距扩大、通货膨胀。此外,由于生产自动化、产业外移、经济转型、官商勾结等因素,再加上某些国家政府经济管理不当,导致就业增长不足,刚踏入社会的年轻人首当其冲,失业问题严重。
另外,在不同国家里还有不同的具体情况。在奉行放任自流资本主义的美国,华尔街金融寡头、能源军火大亨及政治游说集团支配了政治,影响了国家财富分配。一方面,金融寡头可以大玩金钱游戏赚尽快钱,搞砸了市场后却由政府动用公帑来收拾残局,让全球平民来买单,等到经营状况好转又大分花红。另一方面,富人通过不公平的税制和节漏税手段来避免缴税,使中产阶级承受重压,国家财源也难以承担国民医疗保健等福利开支。
在奉行朋党资本主义(严格的说,是朋党资本主义与国家资本主义的混合体)的马来西亚,又是另一番境况。政府通过巧立名目的“私营化”计划,让朋党垄断公用事业和其他不少行业,培养寻租的沃土。此外,政府财政连年赤字,通过不断给臃肿不堪的公务员大军调薪、向特定平民群体输送利益等等,一方面巩固政治支持,另一方面人为“提高”国民收入,刺激国内需求,并大征“铸币税”(seigniorage; 又称通胀税inflation tax),藉以减轻债务负担。朋党资本主义(又称权贵资本主义)是最坏的一种资本主义,具有资本主义的剥削本质,却无资本主义应有的效率。在这个制度下,劳动阶级被分化,社会严重不公。
富国与穷国之间的贫富矛盾,并不像一些诉诸狭隘国族主义的发展中国家政客所说的那么简单,只是富国在剥削穷国。事实上,无论富国或穷国,都存在大部分下层阶级人士(“占领华尔街”示威者所说的“99%”)被小部分上层阶级分子(“1%”)剥削的现象;国家之间又往往存在富国资本家勾结穷国权贵剥削或迫害穷国下层人士的勾当(例如关丹稀土厂计划)。很明显的,当今世界的社会不公已日益接近不可忍受的地步,“占领运动”的出现显然并非偶然。一方面,各国内部贫富差距不断扩大;另一方面,“共产国家”集团瓦解了才不过20年左右,很多人的心中仍有阴影,加上“第三条道路”仍然模糊不清,而北欧模式也不是轻易可复制的;所以,前路依然茫茫。“占领运动”的出现激励人心,只是因立场、动机不尽一致而具有很大的内部张力,是一场长期(可能是断断续续的)而艰苦的斗争。至少在目前,我们还看不到像20世纪上半叶那种“全世界劳动人民团结起来”的气势。
“占领华尔街” |
这场运动标榜“没人组织、没有领袖”,所以诉求也是五花八门的,包括反财政紧缩(在希腊等国)、反种族主义、反战、反共和党(在美国)、反地产霸权(在香港)等,比较突出的是反金融霸权、反资本主义及反社会不公。诉求多了,相互间不免会有矛盾,譬如反财政紧缩和反资本主义之间。与财政紧缩相反的是财政宽松,后者正是典型的资本主义短期行为,而且是全球各地今天所出现的经济金融问题的主要祸根之一。(民众在政府当初大手大脚地先花未来钱时是不是笑嘻嘻地照单全收,现在出事了才来悔恨?如果今天政府继续采取宽松政策,国家财政能支撑吗?不只是南欧国家要反省,马来西亚政府和民众也应该以此为鉴。)如果诉求不能整合,作为一场国内政治运动,它是不可能成功的,作为一场国际运动就更不必说了。
“占领运动”参与者自称代表“99%”的人口,作为一种口号无可厚非,却不可当真。譬如,在虚拟经济高度发展的今天,金融业从业人员为数众多,未必都能站在那“99%”的群众当中;马来西亚大部分公务员在政府连年改善待遇后,已成为既得利益集团,也未必能跟普通劳动阶级站在同一阵线。
“占领中环” |
再举个例子,高喊“反资本主义”者未必都真心反对资本主义,一方面是因为其反对姿态可能只是一时的个人境况使然,另一方面是无孔不入的资本主义已在大多数人的血液中流动。一个示威者可能早上才去排队抢购资本主义代表作“爱疯4S”,晚上就去“占领华尔街”。有些大学生则是背负了贷学金债务,加上就业前途一片暗淡,对现有体制感到反感,而前来参与的。冷眼亲眼所见,一些在60年代热血沸腾地参与“社阵”街头斗争的无产阶级青年,后来晋身资本家行列就换上了资本主义嘴脸。小学时代有个同学因家境贫寒,开口闭口“共产主义”,家里摆满了红色书刊,经常收听马共地下广播,成年后却往资本主义执政集团华基政党里钻营,终于晋身某党校高层,左倾思想就成了不欲回首的个人历史。这些人对资本主义并无深刻反思,左倾充其量只是一时的“政治幼稚病”或一时的“酷”。
资本主义也通过提供少许向上流动性,分化了劳动阶级。例如,出身贫寒的乔布斯在美国通过个人努力,不但获得事业成功,还成为资本主义教父级人马。一个卖面小贩在马来西亚也可以借助政府宽松的外劳政策,雇用几名外劳代掌分档,而成为小资本家。大多数劳动人民会觉得改变体制太难,不如通过个人的努力或钻营往上爬,以期有朝一日晋身资产阶级,扭转被剥削的命运。于是乎,有人身兼数职、“跳飞机”,也有人“傍大腕”(或“大款”)、“捞偏门”、买头衔等等,只求不在资本主义浪潮中没顶,而不思改变游戏规则。或许资本主义的特性正符合贪婪、自私、短视的人性弱点,使它在人类社会中历久不衰。
在体制层面,世界上已没有纯资本主义或纯社会主义经济,只有混合经济。所以,今天的问题不是“姓资或姓社”,而是“偏资或偏社”,分别被笼统地称为资本主义制度和社会主义制度。制度里属于资本主义那部分代表竞争与效率,属于社会主义那部分就代表平衡与公正。由于两种制度已变成你中有我、我中有你,要摈弃任何一方都不容易。平心而论,资本主义也不是一无是处,至少它能够通过竞争提高效率,不妨作为一种“必要之恶”加以利用。所以,理性的选择不应该是打倒资本主义,而是控制资本主义。换句话说,就是减少政治经济制度中的资本主义成分,并相对增加社会主义成分,建立社会主义市场经济(但不是中国那一套披着“社会主义市场经济”外衣的资本主义计划经济),以社会主义为体、资本主义为用,力求打破资本主义下“繁荣与萧条交替”(boom-and-bust cycle) 的怪圈。各国内部的具体做法应包括增加高收入阶级和企业的税务(如“占领华尔街”运动所提出的向富人征收“巴菲特税”)、向金融投机活动征税、对奢侈品和高档住宅抽重税、减轻低收入阶级税负、给财政赤字设限、增加公共产品与服务的供应和补贴、由国家资助社会服务以弥补企业投资降低所造成的就业缺口、由国家出资建设社会安全网等等。值得一提的是,有一种迷思以为“国有化”(或公有制)就属于社会主义。前苏联号称“社会主义”国家,却被许多社会主义者揭发为实行国家资本主义制度,简言之就是国家取代资本家成了劳动阶级的剥削者。在资本主义的芸芸定义中,就有一条把它解释为“一种由资本积累支配的制度,不论法律上的所有权”。再看看今天的马来西亚和中国,国有和国营企业多如牛毛,却与社会主义无关,只是权贵垄断市场,通过国家资本主义剥削普罗大众的寻租工具。
基于集会的松散形态和集会者的多元诉求,有舆论将“占领运动”称为“民主嘉年华”,参与者为乌合之众,不寄予厚望。如果“占领运动”要改变给外界的刻板印象,抗议出一个成果,而不只是为集会而集会,就得思考下一步要怎么走。冷眼认为他们应该组织起来,选出一些代表,进行全球串联协调,寻求最大公约数,集合力量向国际组织诉求、向各国朝野政党施压,争取落实上述国内政策。这一点很重要,因为在当今世界,如果只有个别国家政府在压力下提高企业税务,资金就会流向其他国家,这样就解决不了问题。在国际治理方面,不妨提出实施“托宾税”以抑制货币投机活动、限制大宗商品投机、严格管制离岸避税天堂等等,以降低资本主义的祸害。(凡事都有代价,如果这些国内国际改革都能落实的话,经济成长率必然被拉低;不过,比起更公平的社会、更平稳的经济、更合理的政治、更受保护的资源环境和物种等等,这点代价不算什么。输家只有资本家和贪官污吏,赢家是“99%”的人!)当然,还得对既得利益集团和富人进行教育,让他们明白社会公正、经济稳定对自己的益处(如更好的社会治安、更友善的舆论、永续经营的环境等等)。这些事情说起来简单,做起来当然一点儿也不容易,不是10年、8年内能完成的,特别是现在还有一些国家不接受政治压力,包括了巨大的中国。然而,除了朝这一方向努力,人们别无选择。
后记:
人性是贪婪自私的,与资本主义特性一致。拥抱资本主义很容易,只需沉沦、只需纵欲。资本主义就像是一种恶习,在你我的血液中流动着。恶习是难以根除的,只能时时对它保持警惕。以澳洲莱纳斯公司来马设立稀土厂为例,受影响的不只是无产阶级,还包括了小资产阶级和中产阶级,然而后者很可能只是基于保护附近环境的立场而反对稀土厂,对资本主义现象却缺乏醒觉。有位博友就一边赞颂“苹果”的乔布斯,一边鼓吹反稀土厂,似乎没有意识到制造手机需要稀土,也没有意识到“苹果”所包含的资本主义意义。上回我转载《动物繁殖场的贪婪与残酷》一文,目的就是要指出资本主义下的一个恶劣现象(以后还会再分享),与大家共勉之,能少一分资本主义是一分。
写得太好了,受教了~
ReplyDelete现在全世界的问题除了社会贫富差距的拉大,另外的问题就是社会的流动量减低了
以前的人可以通过刻苦耐劳、慢慢打拼,总有一天可以挤上社会金字塔的顶端
但现在在不公平的社会下,向上的空间减少了
越来越高的生活费、永远跟不上通货膨胀的薪金、官商勾结的社会,除非你有后台,否则要往上挤会很难
在日夜苦干的年轻人,却看不到有个美好的未来在前面,反而现在拥有的一切随时会失去掉,社会没有保障,就有了这一次的运动。
打个比方,如果香港首富李嘉诚在今天白手起家,面对今天的事势,用他当年刻苦耐劳的方法,他能否复制当年的成功还是个未知数
深有同感。
ReplyDelete马来西亚被困在价值链的低层,无法提供足够的高收入工作。这是收入面问题。
由于贪污腐败以及朋党资本主义,行业、市场被垄断,加上公共产品与服务素质低下,导致生活费高涨。这是支出面问题。
这个困境已存在多年,于今尤烈。
Hi
ReplyDeleteMy personal thoughts, you can blame the current crisis on Crony capitalism, socialism or fascism. But you cannot blame the crisis on capitalism. If the world economy is function in capitalism (let the market to function), there will be no bail out, no speculation on commodities and currency.
第一、商品和货币投机活动正是当今的资本主义现象之一,你没有理由不懂。
ReplyDelete第二、经济在现实中是不能脱离政治而独立运转的,你说的“拯救行动”就是政府为了收拾资本主义所造成的残局而做出的。
楼上的无名氏:请问你是第一次在我的部落格留言吗?
ReplyDeleteHi
ReplyDeleteYes. This is my first time leave a comment on your blog. I saw your article in Malaysiakini. I have different set of opinion, that's the reason I leave my comments. Hopefully you don't mind.
TW
TW, 本部落格接受匿名者留言,欢迎大家留言!有自己的意见是好的,对错是其次。
ReplyDeleteHi
ReplyDeleteThanks. Here are my thoughts.
Commodities and currency speculation are free market phenomenon. However, they are not necessary a bad thing. Why? For example, for a commodity pricing, not all speculators will have the same outlook at the same time. Some will be bullish but some will be pessimistic on the outlook and they will buy or short(sell) in the market respectively. This action actually correct the pricing to market equilibrium.
So, why right now all assets classes pricing- properties, stocks, commodities and bonds go up at the same time? To answer this question, I think we must look at the fundamental. Yes, you are right, human is greedy. But human is also fearful of loss. It is the fearful of loss that control our greedy behavior. So, if you minimize the fear of loss, you will get all the riskless speculation. The main reason US property market blew up was because the Federal Reserve (central bank) cut interest to record low at 1% to stimulate US economy from recession in 2003. The Bush administration was campaigning home ownership for all Americans through the government linked mortgager- Fannie Mae and Fredic Mac. Thirdly, the Federal Reserve had set a precedent in saving failed financial institution in 1997- saving Long Term Capital from bankruptcy. This had created moral hazard in wall street.
So, what had happened? interest rate down to 1% made money is easy to be borrowed. Government linked mortgagers Fannie Mae Fredic Mac wanted to increase their profits, they started to lowering their loan standards and lending to subprime market (people with lousy credit) and later sold the loans to other financial institutions. Because these two intuitions were government linked, no people would care the soundness of these two FI because anything went wrong the government would come to the rescue (moral hazard).
ReplyDeleteIf the Federal Reserve did not artificially lowered the interest rate compared to the market rate and also created all the moral hazard, all these speculation will be impossible because fearful of loss will control human greedy behavior. And why all asset prices go up at the same time? It is due to the expansionary monetary and fiscal policies adopted by US government indirectly devalue the US dollar. And expansionary monetary and fiscal policies in stimulate the economy from recession is from Keynesian economic theory, it has nothing to do with Capitalism (Keynes didn't believe in free market).
To your point 2. Yes, you are right. Economy couldn't be separated from politics at the present day. However, it is for the people to decide how intrusive the government they want. If the people want a big government that taking care on everybody- provides a lot of public goods and services, give subsides, create layers of regulations, create huge social security (like EPF) safety net and many more. You will expect the consequences such as inflation, high taxation, huge government debt, inefficiencies in government operation and etc.
ReplyDeleteThe current problem we have is originated from the government because it has distorted (artificially manipulating interest rates, moral hazard created, government intervention fiscal policies) the market to function normally. Adding another layer of regulation and government control will not solve the problem but grow the government bigger. Then you will expect the same result with higher inflation, taxation, government debt, inefficiencies in government operation and etc.
Bush once said Wallstreet got drunk. Yes, he was right, Wallstreet got drunk. But the issue is, who liquored them out in the first place? So, at the end of the day, you can say the current crisis we have is because of socialism, cronies capitalism, fascism and other name. But you can't name it is because of capitalism because we haven't even try capitalism. :)
ReplyDeletePS: I will comment on your suggestion when I have some time. :)
各国内部的具体做法应包括增加高收入阶级和企业的税务(如“占领华尔街”运动所提出的向富人征收“巴菲特税”)、向金融投机活动征税、对奢侈品和高档住宅抽重税、减轻低收入阶级税负、给财政赤字设限、增加公共产品与服务的供应和补贴、由国家资助社会服务以弥补企业投资降低所造成的就业缺口、由国家出资建设社会安全网等等。
TW: 谢谢你为我的部落格写了那么长的评语,现回应如下:
ReplyDelete1。首先,我从来没有否定资本主义有它的好处(我说过“资本主义也不是一无是处,至少它能够通过竞争提高效率”,并主张“以社会主义为体、资本主义为用”),你在这里一味强调资本主义的好处搔不到痒处。
2。我的文章主要探讨平衡经济发展与社会公正,解决眼下的社会不公问题。 你则一直在强调资本主义的效率,却没有提出解决问题的方法。打个比方,我谈的是怎样制造一部行驶安稳、安全可靠的车子,你谈的只是怎样制造一部跑得快的车子。资本积累是资本主义的主要内容,如果没有受到限制,只会造成贫者愈贫富者愈富的局面,像今天世界上的普遍现象那样。
3。你说凯恩斯不主张自由市场,没错。问题是,很多时候,政府干预被用在错误的方面,助长了资本主义的恶劣现象,造成了“资本主义为体,社会主义为用”的本末倒置问题。举一个例子,你提到的EPF。EPF就是因政府干预而被用来拯救朋党公司、资助没有效率的企业项目,造成投资缩水、通货膨胀,而累了千千万万的平民百姓。你提到的美国宽松政策导致金融家冒险,也是一例。这些都是国家资本主义现象。
4。你说我可以归咎朋党资本主义,却不可指责资本主义。“白马非马”乎?
5。你说恐惧可以制约人们的贪念。事实上,两者不会同时存在,贪念会一直膨胀,直至恐惧出现为止,所以才会有繁荣与萧条交替的怪圈。投资大师巴菲特有一句名言就从侧面佐证了我的说法:“Be fearful when others are greedy and greedy when others are fearful”。
6。LTCM事件发生在1998年,不是1997。
Hi
ReplyDeletehaha, this is getting more intersting. :)
before I get back to you, is it possible for you the list down what the social injustices that you have in mind?
Thanks
TW, 那你就慢慢想清楚才回应,没有必要在这里预告这个、预告那个,请尊重版主和其他人,不要太自我膨胀。至于社会不公,你去搜索一下便知,别告诉我你不会用google。如果你真心要讨论问题,态度请认真一点儿。
ReplyDeleteHi
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I would like to apologize if I have mentioned anything inappropriate in your blog.
My view is as below:
True Capitalism vs Cronies Capitalism
It is my view that capitalism cannot be equalized to cronies capitalism because two system function in different way (although cronies capitalism contains the word capitalism). In true capitalism, the free market function which companies have to compete with each other in price, products, labor and etc. If the company makes a good investment- produce goods that customers wants, the company gains profits. If the company fails to do that, it may goes bankrupt. Bankruptcy is a normal phenomenon in true capitalism. However, in cronies capitalism, the free market could not work because there is no fair competition in the market. Cronies capitalism arises when government has a huge control in planning the economy such as creating government link or sponsored private corporation (GLC). These type of GLCs usually monopoly the market and prevent other competitors to come in due to favoritism from the government. Due to lacking of competition, these GLCs usually become inefficient and do not perform. In true capitalism, these type of companies already collapse. Like Proton, if not because of the country policy that is shielding it from competition, Proton is already in the history book.
In short, true capitalism means private profit and private losses whereas cronies capitalism means private profit but socialize losses. So, cronies capitalism can even be renamed to cronies socialism.
The boom-bust cycle.
ReplyDeleteIt is my view that the boom-bust cycle is a nature phenomenon. Each industry has good times and bad times. However, if we look at a country economy as a whole, not all industries will have good times and bad times together. Similarly, not all countries will enjoy economic growth at the same time. But what has gone wrong in the world economy is that countries in Asia, Europe and America continent can grow almost the same pace together- boom together and bust together. And worse thing is the boom-bust cycle become much shorter. Why is that so? I believe that this happen is because the boom-bust cycle the world is having now is induced by irresponsible credit expansion by the governments. The fiat monetary system the world is using now allows the governments to print money out from thin air(debt monetizing) and the artificially interest rate manipulation by the central bank.
In a free market and sound money environment, lending interest rates will be determined by the amount of deposits the people save in the bank. Interest rate will increase when the borrower is more than the saver and vice versa. When the interest rate becomes higher, not all companies will want to borrow in high interest rate to increase their production because this business expansion will be not be profitable. Government also could not perpetually run huge budget deficit because there will be no person would lend to the government.
Hence, the boom we had was credit expansionary boom- too much expansionary monetary and fiscal policies by the government. For example, imagine the boom is an artificial high when a person drink a lot of alcohol. In order to have a clear mind again, the person has to vomit out the excessive alcohol in his body. We could not recover the person to a clear-state of mind by making him to drink more alcohol. Right now the free market forces is trying to contract the money supply in the system, which you will see rising in interest rates and collapsing of uncompetitive companies. Rather than letting the free market to correct, the government is doing everything the Keynesian suggested- more stimulus packages regardless of how huge the government debt is, lower the interest rates to stimulate the demand regardless how indebt the society is. And with all the existing government social security program in place, the free market does not even have the chance to clear out the malinvestment once and for all and the day of reckoning is being postponed. That's the reason why the boom-bust cycle become shorter because we are not solving the real problem but rather postponing it.
The increase in Poor-Rich gap and Inflation
ReplyDeleteMy view on the increase in the poor and rich gap is because of inflation. In an inflationary economy, everyone is worse off, that's includes the rich, the middle class and the poor. The only difference is the person who suffers the most is the poor.
I would like to point out that it is not rising prices that cause inflation but rather the rising prices is the side effect of inflation. The root cause of inflation is because of the government and central bank simply increase the money supply without control through its expansionary monetary and expansionary economic policies. Almost all the governments are manipulating its currencies and flooding the system with cheap credits and causing inflation in all asset classes, services and goods.
Government is the problem
ReplyDeleteHence, I would like to point out that all the problems that we are having now- inflation, speculation, cronies capitalism, corruption, increase in poor and rich income inequality and etc is because of the government. Personally I do not think that we can solve these problem by increase taxation on the rich, increase taxation on luxurious goods, increase public goods and service and subsidies, increase social security expenditure by the governments and etc. Reason being is that the root cause of the problem we have now is the government. For example, the Malaysia government is already in gorilla size. If we demand the government to provide more public goods and services, we will easily turn the gorilla size government into a Godzilla size monster. That time we will see more inflation, more cronies capitalism, corruption and increase in income inequality between the rich and poor.
Personal Note: I feel that the people should not occupy the Wallstreet. In fact, they should occupy the White House and the Federal Reserve because both institutions are the main culprits.
ReplyDeleteLastly, I would like to thank you for your past constructive and challenging comments which help me to rethink my position carefully. Thank you.
(link from Government is the problem)
ReplyDeletePersonally, I also do not think the suggestion on suggesting the above policies to be adopted internationally because it is politically impossible to succeed due to every countries have their own economy objectives.
The Solutions
ReplyDeleteMy suggestion on solving the problems (for Malaysia) will be- limited government, true capitalism, and restore the independency of the legal system and the constitutions.
We should limit the power of the government such as government should only be allowed to provides securities such as policemen, firemen and national defense. Government should be forbidden to create any government link or sponsored companies. Government should abolish any form of subsidies, entitlements and keep the law and regulations on businesses to the minimum. A fixed debt limit (cannot be changed whatsoever) should be imposed to prevent the government to borrow perpetually (I agree with you on this suggestion), stop the central bank to artificially to manipulate the interest rates. By doing these, we can keep the government small to reduce the government expenditures and reduce government intervention in the free market. Then we can reduce personal income taxes. In fact, I am more in favor in abolishing personal income taxes and replace by other taxes such as consumption taxes (GST). The reason being is that I do not think it is morally correct to tax people in the fruit of their labor, regardless the person is poor, middle class or rich. I am not sure whether you are in the 1% of the 99%. If you are in the 99%, I would rather you can pay zero income tax so that you can save and invest the money for your retirement. If you are the 1%, I do not think it is right too to tax you with higher taxation. I would prefer to leave the money with you so that you can save the money in bank so that the bank has genuine savings to lend to viable business or invest in business which will resulted in more hiring or produce product that the society wants. If people want to help the poor, they should do it on the society level, which means donate to private charities to maximize the donations channeled to the poor. We should not ask the government to tax the rich more to help the poor because most of the donations will be squandered away by the bureaucrats.
By limiting the government and prevent it to create GLCs, this will reduce the cronies capitalism and prevent private corporation to lobby the government because this small government will have no benefits to give. With a more equal playing ground, companies are allowed to earn a profit by competing with each other to offer products and services that is value for money. Ultimately the consumers will benefit from this business competition. With a smaller government, we can also reduce company taxes. Companies can keep most of it profits and use it to fund its future business expansion. This will help to increase employment or produces goods and services the society wants. If not, the extra cash can be distribute to its shareholders and employees through dividends and bonuses to increase their wealth.
ReplyDeleteFinally, I think people should understand that it is impossible to ask the government to take care of everybody in everything by offering various kind of social security program. Firstly it is costly running by government (layer of bureaucrats which discourage efficiency). Secondly, a lot of social programs are created with a good intention but end up having a lot of unintended consequences such as the EPF system. The EPF system is created to encourage people the save for their retirement and reduce government burden in helping the aging populations. However, this system end up becoming the low cost ATM machine for the government to borrow more to run its unsustainable expenditures and bailing out the failing cronies companies. The more the people demand from the government the much easier for the government to turn into a tyrannical state.
So, what I think the people should demand from the government are:
i) To stay out from the market because government only know how to make economic mistakes.
ii) Restore the independency of the court system and constitution to ensure our basic human rights such as freedom of speech and ensure personal liberty.
TW, 感谢你很用心地回应,很抱歉这么迟才答复。之前可能有点误会,过去的就算了吧!
ReplyDelete你说的那种资本主义只能存在理论上,一种无政府状态中。在现实中,经济制度不能独立于政治而存在,所以有朋党资本主义、国家资本主义、放任自流资本主义等形态,后者最接近你所形容的资本主义。你的观点接近新自由主义和奥地利学派,只是新自由主义也主张政府提供基本教育、基本医疗和基础设施(取代津贴)。
如果你仔细阅读我上面的文章,就知道我没有否定资本主义的好处,我提倡的是较完美地结合资本主义和社会主义。
你说的资本主义的正面效应是事实,但你忽略了负面效应。在你所提出的纯粹资本主义下,资本会不断追求最大的经济效益,社会效益就会受到忽略,资源和环境也会不断受到破坏。比方说,发展商把最好的地段都建了办公大楼、商场、高级住宅等,中下层人士都被挤到边远地带去,甚至无一瓦遮头。更严重的是,掌握生产要素的资本阶级会不断以钱生钱,无产阶级难以向上流动,造成贫者愈贫,富者愈富。资本家积累资本,而资本可以换取政治影响力,最终导致朋党资本主义。举个例子,相对于公务员待遇年年改善,马来西亚还有很多园丘工人只领日薪,每月只靠4、5百块钱苦撑一家几口的生活。如果实行你的资本主义,就不能有最低工资规定,这个社群就永远无法翻身了。
你提出“大政府”的坏处,我完全赞同。(如果你有看过我其他文章的话,就知道我是最强烈反对公务员队伍无度膨胀的。)不过,你有一点误解:“大政府”不一定就是社会主义,而完全可以是资本主义;政府干预不一定就是社会主义,而完全可以是资本主义。马来西亚就是最佳例子:一方面,公务员队伍无度膨胀,政府营运开支不住上涨;另一方面,公共服务质量低下、公共产品供应不足。这其实是国家功能弱化的表现,原因就是国家被分利集团(包括政府领袖、资本家、官僚等)所骑劫,以公共资源自肥。
你说的国内政治问题,我完全认同,也曾在不同的文章里提到。不过,政治问题要以政治手段解决,资本主义解决不了政治问题。你把问题归咎于政府,并没有错,只是忽略了在政府背后那只手。
你说“the increase in the poor and rich gap is because of inflation. In an inflationary economy, everyone is worse off, that's includes the rich, the middle class and the poor. The only difference is the person who suffers the most is the poor.”这句话有点矛盾。通货膨胀就是资产、商品与服务价格总水平相对于通货的上涨,资产阶级掌握资产、商品与服务,其相对财富只涨不跌,无产阶级就刚好相反。举个例子,与通货膨胀相反的是通货紧缩。每当经济下滑或萧条,资本主义世界总是会提起通货紧缩的忧虑,因为它使资本家失去定价能力,影响财富积累;这从反面证明通货膨胀对资本家有利。你说“it is not rising prices that cause inflation but rather the rising prices is the side effect of inflation”,这句话不合逻辑。
你反对货币政策,然而在联储局于1913年成立以前,美国经济和市场就曾在1869、1873、1884、1896、1901和1907年出现大危机。在大多数时候,政府通过利率等货币政策和财政政策影响市场,其背后并非凯恩斯主义思想,而是短期政治利益的驱动和资本家的影响。这一点必须分清楚。
你说“If people want to help the poor, they should do it on the society level, which means donate to private charities to maximize the donations channeled to the poor.” 你忽略了人的尊严,而且授人以鱼不如授人以渔。不过,你说的这种思路倒很常见,国阵和朋党就是这么做的。最近就有10多个资本家通过收购“大马彩”,成立“公益基金”资助非主流教育。也有树桐商一方面大搞官商勾结破坏环境,另一方面大办“慈善”,甚至用公众的善款往自己脸上贴金。一个公正的社会,并不需要有太多慈善事业。
如果按照你的说法去做,经济发展会迅速;如果按照我的说法去做,虽然经济发展不会那么迅速,但国家和世界的整体发展会更平衡、公正、可持续。这是我们之间的根本差异。