Lu Chenguang: Sing A Different Tune With Lang Xianping

Many of Lang Xianping's articles are good.

But what I don't like is that he despises the skills of the Chinese in his bones.

The Americans won the race? I didn't see it.

I think winning is still a minority.

Goldman Sachs won futures and lost other businesses.

Otherwise, how do we want the government to inject capital?

Why can't we copy the bottom? Recently, the state reserves recently made a good job of picking up copper and oil. The author did 7-8 years of American petroleum futures, and felt that it was better to do than domestic futures. There was nothing to be afraid of. Oil has manipulative factors, but there are also reasons for supply and demand.

It can not be explained by conspiracy.

In October last year, the US economic crisis worsened and the US dollar strengthened. This is another conspiracy of the United States, which Lang Xianping has made a great profit.

In fact, the strength of the US dollar is mainly due to the reason of exchange rate, namely, the contraction of money, and the return of money from high exchange rate currencies to low interest currencies; neither is it a conspiracy, nor is it because some people think it is better because the US economy is better.

At that time, the yen was stronger. How to explain?

Mr. Lang underestimated the ability of Chinese people.

In the past, he said that China could not produce entrepreneurs.

Now most Chinese enterprises are better than American companies. How can we explain? Mr. Lang is very contradictory. He despises Chinese entrepreneurs and is eager to curry favor with Chinese entrepreneurs.

Therefore, the famous argument was put forward: the government policy is skewed to the state-owned monopoly enterprises, resulting in the private manufacturing industry being too cold, which makes the industrial capital flow to the investment market.

If private enterprises are treated unfairly in the competition with state monopoly enterprises, and I call for fairness, I agree with them.

But it is also the fault of the government to pfer the funds from the manufacturing industry to the investment industry. I do not agree.

I think this shift is inevitable and is the result of technological progress and overcapacity.

Only by shifting, can China become more independent of exports.

In addition, the manufacturing industry has been seriously overloaded. How can it be said that it is too cold? Since American demand is not enough, China's exports are even more difficult. How can it be too cold for Chinese manufacturing? Is this not more contradictory?

Another reason for Mr. Lang's rejection of the bottom is that the US economic crisis is seriously beyond imagination.

Even so, what's so terrible about buying resources and buying technology instead of buying dollars to buy US debt? What's so terrible about buying stocks in China and other countries?

The stock market has recently made a big profit.

A shares and Hongkong's many H-shares have risen 2 times, pushing up doubling and Citigroup's 3 times.

Copper futures doubled and oil futures rose 30%.

In fact, China's stock market, including Hongkong, bottomed out in October 27th last year, and the H-share index has risen nearly 1 times.

The US stock market also rose by 1/4 from its lows in March 6th.

Is it too smart to say "do not copy the bottom"? {page_break}

About whether or not to copy the bottom, about private enterprises and exchange rate issues, I wrote a short essay, and Lang Xianping sing a different tune.

Now I see Lang Xianping's article "using war to solve the financial crisis?"

He wrote, "actually, I was educated when I was studying in the United States.

At that time, the teacher told me how he saved the American economy. He said the unemployed population in the United States was very, very serious.

So the US government asked a few workers to dig a hole and fill it up before filling it in.

He said that because the workers were digging holes, he was hungry to buy bread, and the bakery was closed, and he wanted to buy bread.

What do we do in the hole? Lang Xianping deliberately said nothing.

Roosevelt was an environmentalist and a forest enthusiast.

Digging holes is for planting trees.

After putting holes in the hole, Lang Xianping deliberately stopped talking.

Lang Xianping also wrote: "let's see what the American economy is like.

The unemployment rate in the United States around 1930 was 16%. 10 years later, before the Second World War, the unemployment rate increased to 17%.

He wanted to show that Roosevelt's new deal did not work.

Lang Xiansheng again pulled Roosevelt's unemployment rate down in 1933.

The data I see is that the unemployment rate reached 1/4. at that time.

I admit that war can promote more technological development.

However, the solution to the economic crisis is mainly to overdraw the future, not by developing technology, nor by fighting.

The government came to borrow money from the bank (the fed printed money) and distributed it to the unemployed people, so that they could plant trees, build infrastructure and engage in technology so that the economy would turn around.

The Chinese government should learn from Roosevelt. He should spend money to let the peasants return to the countryside to beautify the mountains and rivers, so that they can better stimulate domestic demand.