论文部分内容阅读
国有股减持争论至今,仍然是扑朔迷离,有人评价说:4000=0,也就是4000多种方案仍不能给减持提供一个相对有益的思路。为什么减持问题难以解答?一是我们可能试图在求解一个本来就无解的问题,二是减持被混杂了太多的不相关的问题。将复杂的事情简单化,可以发现自然之美的原则;将简单的事情复杂化,可以创立一种哲学。现在对减持而言,最需要的是做减法,使得减持从繁琐中回归简洁。既试图将国有资产通过股市卖得一个好价钱,又试图让沪深股市维持稳定,是无法兼得的鱼与熊掌。政府没有让利的义务,股市和股民需要的,也不应是争利益而是立规则。减持必须超越利益之争,重新回到探讨减持规则上来,这就是我们所做的尝试。这样的尝试严格限定了减持仅仅是国有股股东试图转让其股份的行为,因此减持规则本身决不能像被暂停掉的减持办法那样凌驾于证券法和公司法之上;这样的尝试严格限定了减持规则本身决不直接武断地决定价格,必须卑微地将价格让给看不见的手去决定;这样的尝试也严格限定了减持规则本身决不能了断了已上市公司的问题,却不革除新上市和待上市公司可能再度孳生出来的减持问题。希望这种尝试,是有益的从0到1的尝试。
The debate over the reduction of state-owned shares so far is still complicated and confusing. Someone commented that: 4000 = 0, that is, more than 4,000 kinds of proposals still can not provide a relatively beneficial mentality for the reduction. Why is it difficult to answer the question of reduction? One is that we may try to solve a problem that has no solution at all. The other is that the reduction is too complicated and irrelevant. Simplify complex things and discover the principles of beauty in nature; complicate simple things and create a philosophy. What is most needed now for subtraction is subtraction, which makes the reduction of regressions simple and tedious. It is an unmatchable fish and bear's paw both to try to sell state-owned assets at a good price through the stock market and to try to maintain the stability of the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock markets. The government has no duty to profit-sharing. The stock market and investors need it. Nor should it be a matter of competing interests but establishing rules. To reduce the number of shares must surpass the interests of the dispute back to discuss the rules of reduction, this is what we do. Such an attempt to strictly limit the reduction of holdings is merely the attempt of state-owned shareholders to attempt to transfer their shares, and therefore the reduction rule itself should by no means prevail over the securities law and company law in the same manner as the halted reduction; such an attempt is strictly limited The rule of bargaining itself will never directly and arbitrarily determine the price, must be humble price will be given to the invisible hand to decide; such an attempt also strictly limited to the rule of reduction by itself must not cut off the listed company's problem, but not Eradicate the new listing and to be publicly listed companies may again breed reduction issue. Hope this attempt is useful from 0 to 1 attempt.