www射-国产免费一级-欧美福利-亚洲成人福利-成人一区在线观看-亚州成人

   
  home feedback about us  
   
CHINAGATE.OPINION.Macro economy    
Agriculture  
Education&HR  
Energy  
Environment  
Finance  
Legislation  
Macro economy  
Population  
Private economy  
SOEs  
Sci-Tech  
Social security  
Telecom  
Trade  
Transportation  
Rural development  
Urban development  
     
     
 
 
Law to protect public interests from monopoly


2006-07-13
China Daily

The Standing Committee of the National People's Congress is currently discussing the draft anti-monopoly law. In the view of this author, this is a landmark event in the country's economic life, although some people think otherwise.

Some simply dismiss the draft law as beyond the ken of ordinary Chinese people, who are preoccupied with issues such as employment and incomes. Others regard it as merely a "luxury," arguing that, as China's market economy remains in its infancy, it will backfire if handled improperly. Others believe the law will deal a telling blow to large State-owned enterprises that dominate their respective sectors, and, therefore, pave the way for large-scale privatization.

These voices represent different interest groups and reflect how divided public opinion is on such economic issues.

The draft law, regarded by many as an "economic constitution," is important because its influence would not only greatly assist the building of a market economic infrastructure, it would also help chart the future direction of China's economic reforms. And it is pretty safe to say that the draft anti-monopoly law is a vitally important measure to assure the Chinese economy's sustainable development.

The law directly concerns the people's livelihoods. It is not, as some would argue, an abstract concept.

To begin with, the law would help create an economic climate favouring fair competition, one which would offer small and medium-sized enterprises space in which to survive and expand. Once these enterprises, of which there are millions, feel secure and start to invest massively in technological upgrading and expansion, they will be able to hire large numbers of workers. This, in turn, would help largely ease employment pressures, a chronic problem for decision makers.

From a different perspective, the monopoly on resources, technology and information is currently translating into a price monopoly. Such a monopoly is nothing but the most direct encroachment upon public interests.

Examples abound  telecommunication firms imposing two-way charges on mobile phone users in defiance of customers' complaints; banks levying consultation fees on clients requesting information; real estate developers turning a deaf ear to protests over soaring property prices, and coal, oil and electricity firms taking no heed of the State's macro-economic regulation.

All this threatens to deteriorate the living standards of people in the middle and low-income brackets, while also widening the already serious wealth gap.

In the absence of certain price controls in the general context that competition is protected, people's livelihoods are hardly guaranteed. In contrast, monopolies are able to continuously improve the incomes and welfare of their staff, enjoying very low competition costs.

Media reports reveal that the annual income of middle-level managerial personnel in a petroleum company, for example, stands between 250,000-350,000 yuan (US$31,250-US$43,750), enormously high by the Chinese standard. The annual salary of the governor of a State-owned commercial bank was 1.3 million yuan (US$162,500) last year and could hit 2 million (US$250,000) this year, in sharp contrast to the barely more than 1,000 yuan (US$125) monthly income of the average labourer in Chinese cities.

This kind of high pay, however, does no good to these monopolies in the long run. Reaping fat profits without being competitive only serves to wear down the vitality and creativity of these monopolies players, setting up hidden traps for their future development.

For those who worry that the anti-monopoly law would pave the way for privatization, the following facts may serve as a sobering agent.

About 140 billion yuan (US$17.5 billion) worth of costs was saved in the nation's power-generating sector last year. But at the same time, an additional burden of 160 billion yuan (US$20 billion) was imposed on electricity consumers as a result of power price hikes.

Large State-owned petrol firms keep raising their prices, using international oil price hikes as an excuse. But they never include the low costs of oil extraction on Chinese oilfields into their cost calculation.

Should all these indecent deeds be justified simply because these enterprises are "State-owned?"

When State monopolies turn the power of public wealth distribution into their own exclusive right to do what they like with this money, they cannot be said to be "State-owned" at all. Instead, they are actually "privately owned" by these specific groups of people. Some media comments say that the public no longer stand this type of behaviour by these monopolies. This could not be closer to the truth.

Such monopolies are actually examples of non-market economic behaviour buttressed by government power. We may as well call them "administrative monopolies."

Monopolies arising from government involvement in the economic life are a necessary economic phenomenon in the course of the nation's shift from a planned to a market economy. This kind of monopoly played a positive role in promoting the reform of the old economic set-up, which started in the late 1970s.

But these "administrative monopolies" have now started to hamper the progress of the market economy and the standardization of market behaviour, as so many profound changes have already taken place in the economy. In view of all of this, the anti-monopoly law will help untangle government power and market rights, and is also an effort at clearly defining the boundaries of government power.

The process in which the anti-monopoly law is conceived, drafted, revised, enacted and implemented is also an opportunity for central and local governments to re-examine their relationships with economic activities, understand more profoundly the relationship between public power and public demand and also effectively bring an end to the government overstepping its limits in social and economic affairs.

The author Qin Xiaoying is a researcher with the China Foundation for International and Strategic Studies.

 
 
     
  print  
     
  go to forum  
     
     
 
home feedback about us  
  Produced by m.orobotics.cn. All Rights Reserved
E-mail: webmaster@chinagate.com.cn
主站蜘蛛池模板: tom影院亚洲国产 | 日韩精品中文字幕视频一区 | 欧美一级做一级爱a做片性 欧美一欧美一级毛片 | 久久亚洲精品中文字幕 | 欧美一区二区三区在线观看免费 | 久久成人午夜 | 精品视频h| 在线欧美国产 | 国产精品久久久久久久专区 | 麻豆69堂免费视频 | 欧美三级在线看 | 成人亚洲在线 | 日韩中文字幕在线观看视频 | 精品免费国产 | 一级成人毛片 | 91视频综合网 | 亚洲午夜18| 九九99re在线视频精品免费 | 国产伦精一区二区三区视频 | 日韩美女网站 | 欧美成人高清手机在线视频 | 久久精品全国免费观看国产 | 99在线在线视频免费视频观看 | 国产一级做a爰片在线看免费 | 毛片免费在线观看网址 | 久久99爰这里有精品国产 | 精品在线免费视频 | 久草黄视频 | www色午夜 | a国产片 | 日韩欧美在线视频一区二区 | 日a在线| 精品国产区一区二区三区在线观看 | 国产精品伦理久久久久 | 在线亚洲欧美日韩 | 国产精品久久久久久久久久影院 | 性欧美videos高清精品 | 在线精品视频播放 | 国产a一级 | 免费观看欧美一级毛片 | 91伊人影院|