The real property supply side reform policy has not come yet 唐山师范学院专接本

The market supply side reform policy has not come true the sina finance opinion leader (WeChat public kopleader) columnist Zhang Peng from the first-tier cities prices continue to rise, the property market differentiation extreme expansion of the results, to accurately grasp the rhythm of demand management is very difficult, real estate cycle fluctuations not only effectively but also be ironed the stage of amplification, to further accelerate the real estate cycle peak arrival. The market supply side reform policy has not come true thanks to the economic downturn "gave", by deepening the reform of the "East", "supply side reforms" become a popular word China, more complete expression is in the moderate expansion of aggregate demand to strengthen the supply side structural reform". The author believes that although the economy includes two aspects: the total demand and supply management, but because of the long-term demand side stimulus path dependence, and the supply side reforms difficult step, in reality, "a modest expansion of aggregate demand and supply side structural reforms, there are still many difficult to be compatible with both contradictions and gaps. Here as an example, a. In order to real estate "to stock" has reduced Shoufu and deed tax, business tax, but first-tier cities continue to cause prices soaring, the property market differentiation pattern of extreme expansion. In essence, the real estate inventory new deal or by Keynes’s demand for macroeconomic regulation and control of the impact of demand. Down payment and deed tax and business tax can be reduced or improved, which belong to technical structural macro control, but not the supply side structural reform in the field of real estate. Instead, for real estate "go to inventory", the overall promotion of property tax, improve the land "trick, clap, hang" system and so on, really belong to the content of the reform of the supply, had to be forced to continue to shelve. In this sense, "the moderate expansion of aggregate demand to strengthen the supply side structural reform" is perfect although the statements in the text, the ideal state is generally accepted, but there might exist a serious paradox, the Keynes doctrine and the doctrine of supply theory can coexist in the decision of the government but in the mind, the specific operation and cannot be freely, very easy to care for this and lose that distortion. From the price first-tier cities continue to rise, the property market differentiation extreme expansion of the results, an accurate grasp of the rhythm of demand management is very difficult, real estate cycle fluctuations instead of effective smoothing, but also by the stage of amplification, to further accelerate the real estate cycle peak arrival. Some people may ask, Shanghai has property tax pilot, not belong to the supply side structural reform? And recently, the implementation of the idea of further optimizing the structure of land and housing supply is not a further structural reform of the supply side Unfortunately, this is an unexpected and belated supply side reform, which has been washed away by the high prices brought by the Keynes doctrine, which not only failed to curb the excessive rise of housing prices, but also affected the long-term potential growth rate of the economy. From the American experience, in the 80s of the last century, President Reagan of the United States took the supply school as the theoretical foundation and promoted the supply side growth as the goal, adopted a series of proven and fruitful economic policies which were proved afterwards.

真正的楼市供给侧改革政策还没来   文 新浪财经意见领袖(微信公众号kopleader)专栏作家 张鹏   从一线城市房价继续暴涨、楼市分化极端扩大化的结果来看,准确把握需求管理的节奏非常困难,房地产大周期的波动非但没有有效熨平,反而又被阶段性放大,进一步加速了房地产大周期见顶的到来。 真正的楼市供给侧改革政策还没来   拜经济下行“所赐”,借深化改革“东风”,“供给侧改革”成为当下中国一个热门词汇,更为完整的表述是“在适度扩大总需求时着力加强供给侧结构性改革”。笔者认为,尽管经济包括总需求和总供给两个方面的管理,但由于长期需求侧刺激的路径依赖,以及供给侧改革难以一步到位,在现实中“适度扩大总需求”与“供给侧结构性改革”仍有诸多难以兼容兼顾的矛盾和脱节之处。这里试举一例,抛砖引玉。   国家为了房地产“去库存”先后降低了首付和契税、营业税,却导致一线城市房价继续飙涨,楼市分化格局极端扩大化。从本质上来说,房地产去库存新政还是受凯恩斯主义需求刺激影响的宏观调控。首付和契税以及营业税属于可以降低也可以提高,属于技术性的结构性宏观调控,而并不属于房地产领域的供给侧结构性改革。反倒是为了房地产“去库存”,全面推广房产税、完善土地“招拍挂”制度等真正属于供给改革的内容只得被迫继续搁置。   从这个意义上说,“在适度扩大总需求时着力加强供给侧结构性改革” 尽管在文字表述很完美,也是大家普遍接受的理想状态,但这里很可能存在一个严重的悖论,凯恩斯主义和供给主义理论上可以在政府决策的头脑里并存,但在具体操作上无法并用自如,非常容易顾此失彼扭曲变形。从一线城市房价继续暴涨、楼市分化极端扩大化的结果来看,准确把握需求管理的节奏非常困难,房地产大周期的波动非但没有有效熨平,反而又被阶段性放大,进一步加速了房地产大周期见顶的到来。   也许有人会问,上海已经有房产税试点了,不就属于供给侧结构性改革?并且最近还发布了关于进一步优化土地和住房供应结构的实施意见,这不就是进一步的供给侧结构性改革?很遗憾,这是失焦且迟到的供给侧改革,已经被凯恩斯主义刺激带来的高房价对冲掉了,不仅抑制房价过快上涨的目的没达到,也影响了经济的长期潜在增长率。   从美国经验来看,上个世纪八十年代美国里根总统执政时期,均以供应学派作为理论基础,以推动供给面增长为目标,采取了一系列被事后证明富有远见和卓有成效的经济政策和措施。为什么里根还有后来的克林顿敢于采取以供给面增长为目标的供给侧改革去影响和创造需求,而不是同时“适度”搞些凯恩斯主义的需求管理,这表明他们对于供给主义的经济政策已经非常熟悉和自信,扬弃是比较彻底的扬弃,实际运用起来也比较纯粹到位。   2016年是中国“十三五”规划的开局之年,全面建成小康社会的难度前所未有,以供给侧增长为目标、出真招、实招的供给侧结构性改革无论从哪一个方面来看说都是关键和不可或缺的。而以供给侧结构性改革为名、行需求侧刺激之实,是尤其值得警惕的,一旦两者的步骤和力度不同,对于经济的短期增长率和长期潜在增长率的影响很有可能完全相反,这将无益于引领和走出新常态。   (本文作者介绍:供职于阳光私募行业,清华MBA校友。)   本文为作者独家授权新浪财经使用,请勿转载。所发表言论不代表本站观点。相关的主题文章: