Tax Reduction For Textile And Garment Enterprises Is To Enhance Competitiveness And Break Through The Breakthrough Of High Prices.

The same brand clothing, the United States sells 39.9 dollars, China sells 799 yuan; 500 thousand yuan BMW, the United States marked 21 thousand U. S. dollars......

A comparison of durable consumer goods between China and the United States will find that many goods in China are more expensive than the United States.

What is more puzzling is that many of the US "

Some experts believe that this is due to the high tax burden of domestic enterprises.

Others say that the high cost of logistics in China has led to a surge in commodity prices.

These two statements actually refer to one thing: the operating costs of Chinese enterprises are relatively high.

Is this a fact, but is that why?

China and the United States are like people sitting at the ends of a seesaw.

All along, China has been busy with production, and the United States has been busy spending, resulting in a long-term surplus in China and a deficit in the United States every year.

One dollar, one dollar.

In order to earn US dollars, China has invested heavily, from the government to the private sector. Almost all the funds revolve around investment. The ultimate result is that pulling the economy depends on continuous investment and making investment without investment so as to ensure the economic operation.

And the United States is keen to spend money, so borrow money until it ends.

The result of the Sino US model is too much money (high foreign exchange reserves) and too little money.

What does this have to do with the price of the two countries? In simple terms, too much money is prone to inflationary, and it is not in the hands of the residents.

Since reform and opening up, China has experienced four rounds of inflation in 1988, 1994, 2007 and 2010, and the US CPI has hardly changed much during this period.

The shift is reflected in the inevitable gap between the two countries in terms of commodity prices.

It seems that too much money does not seem to be a good thing.

In fact, money is not a problem. The problem is that money can not be spent.

But the situation is changing.

After the financial crisis, the United States had to reduce consumption and began to shift to production and attracting investment in order to increase employment.

It is evident from our current "500 thousand dollar family emigration" advertisement.

The United States decided to be self reliant, which is not good news for the "world factory".

But it is an opportunity for China's economy.

When external demand declined, the government launched an urgent policy to stimulate domestic demand.

Although the so-called stimulating domestic demand is still dominated by investment, it further promotes inflation.

But as time goes on, the government has seen that it is difficult to achieve sustained economic growth by investment alone.

Opinions on how to expand consumption are numerous.

The Ministry of Commerce believes that consumption should be kept at home and should be reduced.

The labor department believes that it is necessary to increase incomes by allowing residents to spend money in their hands.

It will be argued that increasing income will undoubtedly increase the burden on enterprises and help to control prices.

Such a cycle of controversy, caught in a big circle, no end.

As long as interest is difficult to pfer to consumers, "expanding consumption" will be empty talk.

However, in my view, to make Chinese commodity prices converge with the United States or to match the level of Chinese consumers' income, we need to open the first gap in the debate on the preceding cycle, and it should be a suitable entry point for reducing the burden of enterprises.

Because in the full competition, enterprises will pfer profits to consumers, so as to enhance their competitiveness.