|
吉林省翻譯公司關鍵字：between collective ownership, but also the foreign relations of capitalism , but ultimately it is socialism, a socialist society. " That is, two types of market-based, and the main direction is different, suffered social constraints are qualitatively different. Socialist market economy should be beneficial to the socialist people-oriented, common prosperity, and fully mobilize the enthusiasm of the masses, concentrating power and unity to achieve reform, development and stability advantages, in particular, to play a unique political advantage of socialism. If only the "socialist" as an insignificant phrase, it would inevitably fall into the capitalist market economy in the old basket, let go and accelerate polarization. Comrade Jiang Zemin when he said, for the "market economy" in front of the "socialist" words, it was "considered to be redundant, always feel a little dislike, uncomfortable," which "is not surprising, because they used to seeing Western market economies, but also hope that China engage in that way according to them. "Is this some of our inner world of scholars to pursue it? I think we should consciously draw a line.
Furthermore, some scholars innuendo, said Mr. Liu Guoguang is hard, "nostalgia planned economic system." In fact, Mr. Liu was demonstrated earlier system of socialist commodity economy is one of the two cornerstones of China's reform, the author of "What is the socialist market economy" this masterpiece. Now he further stressed that the socialist market economy must be combined, is a kind of order out of chaos theory, a clear-cut defense of Chinese Marxism.
Eliminate the negative impact of neo-liberalism can only deepen the reform to ensure the correct directionSome scholars ridiculed eliminate the negative impact of neo-liberalism is the "neo-liberalism as a basket, what are installed inside," that this is negative, interference reform. It is interesting that some people are now in the hands of the "reform" has become a basket, what is really inside stuff are installed. Talk about reform in many countries, in fact, China's reform and Western countries as well as other types of the country's reform fundamentally different meanings. As early as the eve of the Soviet Union, Comrade Jiang Zemin pointed out: "To draw the concept of two kinds of reform and opening up, that the four cardinal principles of the reform and opening up, with the essentially bourgeois liberalization advocates of capitalist 'reform and opening up' the fundamental the boundaries. "The important point, not out of date today. China's reform is defined as "the socialist system of self-improvement" rather than privatization transformation to capitalism. By some scholars regarded as "mainstream" of neo-liberalism (especially the "Washington Consensus"), the "reform" is that the purpose of privatization, liberalization and free access to international capital in order to "reform" in the name so that the socialist public loss of a dominant position, let the market "free" to aggravate the disorder and the polarization, so that loss of economic sovereignty of independent countries. In fact their own country does not practice, but to shape the Russian, East European countries, Latin America's "reform" model, as well as whom caused disaster.
Take "ownership reform" is, indeed we have to borrow the Western terms, but have different meanings. Mr. He Wei said is right: you can not clear the privatization of property rights = = Coase theory. But he also suggested that "owned"; Mr. Wu Jinglian more clearly stated: the state-owned economy "withdraw from the field of competition," "hopes non-governmental economic development", and strongly support Kornai, "as soon as possible to eliminate state ownership" of advocated. In essence, is privatization. Central has long criticized the "owned" was, but insist on state-owned economy "advance and retreat," "thus promising an orderly retreat." It now appears that "property rights" over-generalization of this concept can also be counted as a "basket" and what "rights" can be installed inside. And loaded into the most genuine privatization, the formula for the
|