Dominate the Country

Year 205 of the New Han Calendar and 1979 of the Western Calendar. Professor Li Sen, an economics professor at Lingnan University in Guangzhou, China, has won this year’s Blue Mercury Economics Award—the most prestigious award on earth to date. The news spread to Europe, and many people complained about Professor Modigliani in France. Because Professor Modigliani once said something "approximately" in the past.

This reminds me of the winner of the Blue Mercury Medical Award four years ago - Professor Tu Youyou from Huatuo Medical University in China. That year, Professor Tu not only won the Blue Mercury Medical Award, but also won the Baicao, the highest award in the Chinese medical community. Award in recognition of her research on artemisinin, which has made important contributions to the development of China's pharmaceutical industry and the benefit of human health. At that time, many European scholars, including many European chemists, claimed that they had "already discovered" the artemisinin contained in Artemisia annua.

The invention of artemisinin has absolutely nothing to do with traditional Chinese medicine. It was the modern chemical research and purification process initiated by the West that allowed artemisinin to flourish.

They also joked, "Using a vivid metaphor to describe the relationship between artemisinin and traditional Chinese medicine: a large group of scientists walked into a house left by their ancestors, rummaged through the boxes and cabinets to try to find what they wanted, and finally found the A treasure was found in the garbage pile behind the house. Later, there was evidence that the treasure did not belong to the owner, but was accidentally left by a tenant and discarded by the owner. "

Professor Tu donated all the bonuses she received that year to charitable organizations. She herself collected and published these "long-discovered" posts into a joke collection, making another huge profit.

The Blue Mercury 1979 was awarded to Professor Li Sen, which originally had obvious reflections on the economic crisis. As we all know, Professor Li Sen has a great influence in China's economic circles, and also has a considerable influence on the discussion of fiscal policy and monetary policy. In the debate with monetarism and the rational expectations school, he insists on state intervention in the economy.

And who was Modigliani?

Isn’t Modigliani’s economic plan of low human rights and low-cost exports to earn Chinese dollars the initiator of this economic crisis? It is really a funny thing in the world to reflect on the award and the instigator is aggrieved.

What is the “standard of truth” in economics?

Isn’t it just that within the circle it is the recognition of the world’s economists (the so-called recognition), and in society it is the public’s recognition of the explanation of interests? Leeson made two important contributions to economic theory:

One is the “life cycle” theory of household savings;

This hypothesis is based on the theory of consumer behavior and proposes that people consume to maximize their lifetime utility.

The second is the company’s capital cost theorem;

This theorem puts forward new insights into the analysis of the relationship between capital structure and capital cost under uncertain conditions, and develops investment decision-making theory on this basis.

These two contributions are closely related to each other. Both illustrate the need for household wealth management, and both can be seen as separate parts of Leeson's broader study of the role of financial markets. It has been widely recognized by the world economics community, which is enough! As for whether Modigliani once said similar statements, what does it matter?

Professor Li Sen’s paper did not cite Modigliani at all, so I wonder how Professor Li Sen’s award could have any normal relationship with Modigliani?

There are quite a few antique literati in Europe who have this kind of "retro" vanity. When they see any inventions and creations in the East, they dig out a sentence or two from traditional ancient books or the trash heap of celebrities and idols. , "Our ancestors invented xx thousands of years ago, and created xx...", trying to put gold on their own faces. The implication is that Europe was good enough in ancient times, Greece and Rome were great enough, but modern times have messed up because "the monk with a crooked mouth recited the wrong scriptures"; Chinese culture that studied the East is European culture, and Europe insists on it Self-civilization will surely dominate the world again, and then call it nation and patriotism.

The records of ancient Greece and Rome are as numerous as the stars in the sky. They must be taken out of context, and new creative ideas must be invented to prove that they were not "invented" by the Chinese, and to prove that the civilization of ancient Greece was earlier than the civilization of China. Rome was even more powerful than China during the Han and Tang Dynasties. Does this make sense?

There are many so-called traditional scholars and historians in Europe today. They cannot imitate China's rigorous and realistic style of study, but they are very good at studying the rigorous and realistic style of studying classics in books. Discussing issues is not about simplifying the logic of problem interpretation, gaining public recognition, and gaining social recognition, but in a sophistical way to draw a specious 'equivalent sign' between oneself and honor...

Take this matter as an example. If it were citing "accepted academic theories" obtained by both parties, it would be considered one of the bases; but this is not the case. Does it mean that the words and phrases in an unrelated classic are the same as those in your academic paper? Does it mean that your academic paper is plagiarized? How ridiculous this is.

The author is not a judge of the Blue Mercury Awards. I don’t know whether Modigliani has actually been nominated, or whether Modigliani will win an award in the coming years. The author just wants to ask these Modigliani supporters, even if Modigliani really wins the award, does that mean that "development advantages with low human rights" can be promoted throughout Europe and France, and the government is regarded as selling out the interests of voters? Competing for profit to deprive workers of compensation and reduce transaction costs?

The author does not mind the abuse from Modigliani’s supporters, but I sincerely hope that the author has really misunderstood Professor Modigliani’s original intention.

But the author would like to ask Professor Modigliani and his supporters to use more concise "economics" to answer our question, where are the interests of the French people?

In recent years, France's economy has been developing at a high rate of seven percentage points per year. However, the advantage of France's rapid economic development lies not in a more "free" market or a more "welfare" country, but in a more restrictive government. The French government uses the "advantage" of "low human rights" to artificially lower the prices of the four major factors (manpower, land, capital and non-renewable resources), and "reduces transaction costs" by not allowing bargaining, restricting or even canceling many transaction rights. By rejecting democracy, suppressing participation, ignoring ideas, despising faith, despising justice, and stimulating material desires, the energy of the public is concentrated on the mirage-like impulse of pure wealth seeking, thus showing that it is extremely rare in both the Eastern world and Western allied countries. The amazing competitiveness shocked even China.

However, in the era of globalization that is gradually approaching, the crisis caused by the French government's internal high pressure is alleviated by the increase in external resources (capital inflows, commodity exports), and at the same time, the crisis is diluted to the outside through globalization: the power of the French government They have suppressed their own internal conflicts and maintained stable development on the surface, but Made in France has intensified the internal conflicts of other countries. French goods flooded the world like a river, and capital from all over the world, especially Chinese capital, also poured in like a tide. France. It not only forced countless countries to lower their welfare levels, but also forced Eastern countries to re-erect trade barriers against France.

If the whole of Europe learns from France's approach, with such a large population and such a large economy, as its role as a global commodity supplier and capital absorber becomes increasingly prominent in the future, once something goes wrong, it may be worse than the Chinese stock market in the 1920s. The collapse would have a greater global impact. And by that time, France, as the largest trading country in Europe with increasingly close economic relations with China, the huge fluctuations can easily shake the entire France to pieces...

…

"Boss, this is the article from the 17th. It's pretty well written."

"Well, it's okay. It's a bit confusing. The term 'low human rights' is a good one and can be used well. Remember to give him a third prize."

"Boss, this article hasn't appeared in the newspaper yet?" What's more important is that it hasn't aroused public opinion or social topics.

"It's really popular, so I'll give him the first prize." The boss looked excited, "Just one word can cause a big mess for the French government."

The boss was very happy. He had a premonition of how big a sensation this word would cause in the ideological and cultural circles of France. He had a premonition of how big a sensation this word would cause among the younger generation in France. This was simply a gift from God. What a credit. As long as he can cause trouble to the French government, he has made a meritorious deed. "We must focus on promoting this in the future."

"Low human rights" is very tempting.