Analysis of the fate of private enterprises after the Third Plenary Session

On the eve of the Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee, Premier Li Keqiang invited a group of private entrepreneurs to discuss in Zhongnanhai, emphasizing that “for private entrepreneurs, the government not only trusts but also relies on it”. In conjunction with a series of reform measures recently promoted by Premier Li, some friends believe that the new wave of reforms is just around the corner and the opportunities for private enterprises are coming again.

I have no doubt that Premier Li’s sincerity in protecting the private economy, just as I have never doubted the determination of the former prime minister to control housing prices. Of course, a policy declares that it must be placed in the context of the country's development direction in order to better understand it. China's current major political trend is more and more like the so-called "political left and right" line: on the one hand, it strengthens party leadership, strictly controls public opinion and restricts political and civil rights, and on the other hand deepens market-oriented reforms and expands private economic rights.

I have long been interested in politics and have no urge to choose a position. Purely in the sense of feasibility, what I want to discuss is: From a global perspective, is there a country that has long adhered to the political left and right route and has achieved economic success? If so, what kind of situation will private entrepreneurs face in this economic form?

Look at the first question first. The answer is "Yes!", although there are very few. During the transition period, several countries in Latin America had tried the “strongman regime + market economy”. The most famous one was probably Pinochet of Chile. The dictator overthrew the socialist line of former President Allende. Implemented a market economy. Of course, Pinochet eventually ended up being bad, that was a story. Some countries and regions in Asia can also be considered successful cases, such as Hong Kong, which has long been under the colonial dictatorship. One of the most dazzling stars may be Singapore, which is also seen by many Chinese.

The countries and regions that have succeeded in the right-wing route on the right, in my opinion, have some obvious characteristics. For example, they are almost all economically successful in the state of the colony or a certain degree of vassal state. And their sovereign or controlling countries are old-fashioned, highly democratized market economies. For example, Pinochet of Chile is backed by the United States; during the Korean military regime, there was a long-term garrison in the United States; and Hong Kong was ruled by the British for a hundred years. Although the local regimes in these places are authoritarian, their behind-the-scenes controllers are still a traditionally rich democracy in the market. On the contrary, those powerful political states that have taken the so-called independent and independent route, such as Cuba, which is also a Latin American country, and Venezuela today, have a low level of marketization and a serious setback in economic development.

Singapore may be the only one of its kind that maintains a high degree of political independence. Although Singapore had a long history of colonization before the independence of Britain, even English was one of its official languages. After the 1990s, the US military was allowed to use its base. However, when the Singapore economy took off in the 1960s and 1980s, it was Mr. Lee Kuan Yew. Under the rule, it has not only achieved a long-term ruling party, but also adhered to Singapore’s independent interests. Perhaps, therefore, Mr. Lee Kuan Yew has many admirers in China who hope that China can also follow the path of Singapore.

So what are the characteristics of the Singapore model? One is the high degree of extroversion of the economy. The Singapore economy took off and benefited from being one of the most important ports in the Asia Pacific region, which led to the development of an international trade and financial centre. Therefore, Singapore may not be a vassal of politics. It is economically at least in its infancy, but it is highly dependent on foreign capital and foreign businessmen. Singapore has established a system of rule of law that conforms to international norms. The initial motivation is probably to meet the needs of foreign and foreign investors.

After the take-off phase, Singapore’s local economic strength has greatly increased. However, this kind of enhancement is not balanced, and state-owned enterprises and state-owned affiliates have an overwhelming advantage. IMF researchers have counted Singapore's local listed companies, which are 10 times the average size of private companies. The state-owned asset management group Temasek-controlled enterprises once accounted for about half of the total market value of the constituent stocks of the SGX. In terms of profit margin and stock price performance, state-owned and state-owned affiliates have completely overwhelmed private enterprises (private enterprises). It can be said that the performance of Singapore's private companies is totally disproportionate to Singapore's economic development and per capita income levels in the world. In fact, the largest private company in Singapore's listed companies may be a real estate group established by mainland Chinese in Singapore, and its business entity is still in mainland China.

To sum up, it is that the countries and regions that have been administratively left and right in the world to date have either become vassals or colonies of Western veteran market countries or rely heavily on state-owned enterprises and foreign capital for local private enterprises. Leave less room for development. In other words, these three goals—political left and right, independence, and the development of a local private economy—cannot be achieved at the same time. Is there any profound reason or law here? I am not a political scientist and I dare not make a conclusion. Just to point out this phenomenon for everyone.

Aluminium Profiles for Triple Sliding Door

Features of aluminum frame decoration:

1. Wide application range: applicable to machine frame, support, door, industrial automation equipment, factory and office workbench, shelf, container, ladder, aluminium door frame etc.

2. Convenient construction: it is modular and multifunctional, and can quickly frame the ideal mechanical equipment without complex design and processing.

3. Beautiful and practical appearance: light weight and high stiffness, simple and beautiful appearance without paint.

4. Strong expandability: unique T-shape and groove design. When installing components, nuts and bolts can be installed at any position without dismantling profiles. The refitting equipment is simple and fast.

Purpose of frame decorative aluminum:

1. Mechanical frame structure and connection of various parts;

2. Workbench, industrial assembly line and conveyor belt;

3. Small automatic equipment and non-standard electromechanical equipment;

4. Industrial inspection and detection and safety protection system;

5. Electronic and auto parts assembly line;

6. Chemical, pharmaceutical, medical, food cleaning and other equipment;

7. Commercial exhibition, outdoor advertising and stage setting,hanging door frame,aluminium glass door,hanging door rail,hanging door track, aluminium patio doors;

8. Industrial fence, protective cover and various frames;

Aluminium Profiles For Triple Sliding Door,Triple Sliding Doors,Frame Less Aluminum Profiles,Aluminum Frame For Glass

GuangDong XinCheng Material CO.,LTD , https://www.xin-alu.com