Professor of Tsinghua University Li Daokui said at the 2022 Tsinghua Wudaokou Chief Economist Forum that we must fight the epidemic on the one hand and protect the economy on the other.
After the outbreak of the epidemic, consumption has dropped. In order to protect residents' consumption, the best way is to directly provide cash subsidies to the affected people.
Professor Li's suggestion is really good, finally someone dares to speak it out, and he raised his hands to support it. Before
, many experts said rhythmically that everyone sending money is equal to not sending money, so there is no need to send money. This statement is absurd, but I don’t know why many people still agree.
The common people are also actively involved in the fight against the epidemic. During the quarantine, their work was affected and they even lost their jobs. However, their expenditures have not decreased, but have increased. This is a very difficult period for many families.
So give them some cash subsidies, on the one hand to support them to tide over the difficulties, on the other hand to stimulate consumption, after all, consumption is very obvious to stimulate the economy.
In fact, many countries and regions are giving subsidies to ordinary people. In the United States, the money is directly transferred to the bank accounts of ordinary people. The maximum amount per person is 1,200 US dollars. According to the results of the tax return of the previous year, those with an annual income of more than 200,000 US dollars will not get a cent. .
South Korea and Japan are also distributing, the focus is on distribution to parents with children, and distribution to small and micro enterprises damaged during the epidemic, as well as distribution to people in need.
Hong Kong is also issuing, 10,000 vouchers for each person over the age of 18.
It’s hard to say whether sending money directly can stabilize the economy, but it’s definitely more difficult to stabilize if you don’t send money.
Professor Li specifically mentioned that it is very convenient to stabilize future consumption by sending money, so that ordinary people will not have a psychological shadow.
Personally, I think the US method is better. High-income earners don’t need to pay, and low-income earners get paid. In order to prevent the payment from failing, we can now use the personal tax APP to send money to ensure that the money is sent to the head.
In addition, small and micro enterprises really have to think about how to really help them. After all, those loans end up in the pockets of large enterprises. After all, the real problem for small and micro enterprises is not the problem of loans, because even low-interest loans have to be repaid. , It is estimated that if you can't survive it, it will easily go bankrupt.
The main problem of distributing money is to prevent people from defrauding subsidies or even exploiting them layer by layer. How to actually send money to those in need is a big problem.
In this Wudaokou forum, many economists mentioned direct payment! In March, the total retail sales of social consumption fell by 3.5% year-on-year . The data for April has not yet been released. Due to the impact of the epidemic, April will only be greater.
Professor Li said: These low- and middle-income groups should be unswervingly given direct income supplements and cash for them. Why do you do this? First of all, based on humanitarian considerations, China, as a harmonious society, pursues common prosperity, and should give this group of people the most basic care.
But appeals are appeals. It’s hard to say exactly how. Many people have already said that distributing money is diluting the interests of the rich. Discovery money is a means of diluting the expected income of vested interests, and some people will inevitably be strongly opposed .
This is the problem, due to human nature, but I think this contradiction may always exist in the future, so it needs to be resolved.
In the past three years since the epidemic, all people who have fallen into economic difficulties due to the epidemic have not received any assistance, whether it is in daily life, mortgage repayment, or loan deferment, which should not be done.
Because money is only given to those who need it, and they will consume it. If it is given to those who don’t need it, they will not spend it at all, or consume luxury goods, which still cannot stimulate the economy.
Some big Vs swear: Everyone sends money, which means that everyone doesn’t send money. I don't know where the courage comes from. If this is the case, there is no need to stimulate consumption? Don't need to pull economic growth ? People who think like this are truly shameless.
Then everyone gets paid when they go to work, does it really mean that they don’t get paid?
Inclusive release of water is the best, or no release of water, targeted release of water is the worst behavior, tantamount to robbing the poor and helping the rich, those who shout that they can’t send money, and sending money will cause inflation , are the real afflictions Stupid and bad people. If
can find gold, how much do you think is appropriate for each person?