Tan Haojun'S Interpretation Of The Source Of Supply Side Problems

Zhou Xiaochuan, governor of the people's Bank of China, said in an interview with reporters that in terms of function, fiscal policy can play a better role in the structural reform of supply side.

He believes that traditionally, monetary policy is mainly on the demand side, and is the management of aggregate demand.

If the total demand management is done properly, it will provide better space for the supply side reform.

Whether in traditional or theoretical terms, the role of monetary policy is mainly reflected in the demand side, and the supply and demand side mainly relies on fiscal policy.

The key is that from the current contradictions and problems in the supply side, whether it is excess capacity, serious inventory, high leverage or high cost, many short boards are closely related to monetary policy, and are closely related to the serious imbalance of credit structure.

If monetary policy is not biased, not a serious structural imbalance in credit supply, the contradiction and problems on the supply side can not be so serious, nor will it exert a great impact on the total social supply and the total social demand.

The same is true. From the perspective of the formation of supply side contradictions over the years, fiscal policy has aggravated the supply side contradiction and the accumulation of problems to some extent, but in general, it is caused by monetary policy, which is brought about by the runaway and imbalance of credit capital investment.

If there is no runaway and failure of money supply,

It is impossible to have such a serious structural contradiction. Capacity, inventory and leverage will not be so serious.

If the supply side structure is neglected in the process of the reform of the supply side structure and the process of problem formation should be neglected, the emphasis should be on more fiscal policies. The structural reform on the supply side will be difficult to break through, and even more reforms, more serious problems and more concentrated concentration will be achieved.

As far as productivity is concerned, since the Central Committee put forward regulation and control of steel, cement, electrolytic aluminum and other industries in 2003, the capacity has not only been compressed for more than 10 years, but on the contrary, there has been a sharp expansion.

In particular, steel production capacity has increased by two times.

In the rapid expansion of steel and other industries, banks undoubtedly played the most important role, and provided a large amount of funds to these industries.

Moreover, banks have also provided a lot of money to the steel trading enterprises which were born with the expansion of the steel industry capacity, which caused a bank debt risk around the steel trade enterprises after the market was saturated.

If banks are scientific, reasonable and precise in providing financial support to the steel industry, can they act in accordance with the laws of the market, will there be such a serious problem of excess capacity in the steel industry? Will cement, electrolytic aluminum, including later construction machinery, ships, photovoltaic and other industries, have problems of over expansion and surge in capacity? Obviously, banks are the most important propellers in overcapacity.

So, what means can finance make use of capacity?

Then look at the real estate inventory problem. From the real estate market liberalization in 2003 to the present, how prices and land prices have skyrocketed. Besides the boost of local governments, the most important promoter is also.

。

These years, I do not know how many developers and speculators are getting rich overnight in the way of "empty handed White Wolf", and the bank that provides financial support for them is the bank.

It is also a continuous flow of capital support from developers to real estate developers to enable developers, real estate developers to boldly stir up speculation and real estate, and finally to price the housing price.

Now, a lot of policies have been put forward from the perspective of finance.

However, if banks continue to give developers and speculators financial support, then going to stock will not become a joke.

As for the high cost of enterprises and short board, they are all related to the behavior of the bank's credit funds, and the excessive emphasis on their own interests by banks, raising the cost of financing, and putting money in places that should not be put into use, which are related to the real economy, especially small and medium-sized enterprises, and the support of the banks to the real estate market and government performance projects.

To solve these problems, it is obvious that there is no way out from fiscal policy.

The most prominent thing is that

Now.

For more than ten years, especially since the outbreak of the financial crisis, including local governments, financing platforms, large state-owned enterprises, and so on, debt is heavy, and one is working for banks.

Why is it not the result of the runaway of bank credit? If banks are not blind, disorderly and irregular in the process of credit capital investment, the problem of leverage may not be so serious, and the impact on the supply side will not be so great.

However, the problem of leverage, the way in which finance can be solved and what channels can be used is a matter of caution.

Therefore, the structural reform of supply side and fiscal policy are incumbent. However, "disaster" is a result of the bank's failure and the failure of monetary policy.

As the saying goes, to solve the bell needs to be tied up with people. The banks are not going to deal with the "disaster" that the banks are rushing down.

Moreover, as far as the current situation is concerned, there is still a problem of disorderly banking in the supply side structural reform.

In recent years, the bank's credit to development enterprises has been increasing. Will it not bring any impact to the inventory? At the same time, continuing to provide financial support to the overcapacity industry will also pose a threat to inventory.

The bank is the main force of the structural reform of the supply side, and the monetary policy is more likely to play a role in the structural reform of the supply side.

The supply side problem stems from finance, and the way out for reform is also naturally in finance.