论文部分内容阅读
不管人们各自从什么样的角度出发引起争论,事实已经很明显地摆在那儿:在“开放”的问题上,对内的步伐显然赶不上对外。尤其是不久前出台的一个引资方案,不仅恢复了前两年原本已打算收回的对外资的某些税收优惠政策,而且前所未有地几乎放开了所有的经济领域,其中最令人瞩目的是金融业与保险业对外资的进一步开放,对“外国金融机构可申请在中国任何地方设立金融机构”这样的表述许多人都感到“惊讶”——我们对外开放的勇气和魄力看来确已今非昔比。 毫无疑问,对外开放是中国的正确选择。但正像有人所说,“我们既然正确地选择了对外开放,则对内的加速市场化就是不可或缺的配套部署”。然而现实却是,我们对自己土生土长的民间经济的确缺乏像对“老外”一样的“全方位开放”的勇气和力度。比如,虽然我们已表示允许外国金融机构在中国任何地方申请设立金融机构,但同时却坚持不许国内民间资本涉足金融领域;外资企业进口用于技术改造的自用设备可以免税,国内企业却享受不到同样待遇。 可是,有一点毕竟很耐人寻味:我们在某些领域不能对民间资本开放好像是因为那是“非国有资本”,然而,所谓的“外资”又是什么呢? 此番对外开放的领域,多是过去所谓的“敏感领域”,即非竞争性的、由国家垄断的,而这些领域还同时具?
However controversial the issue is, people are obviously starting to argue about the issue. On the issue of “opening up,” it is clear that the pace of internalization can not keep up with the external world. In particular, the introduction of a foreign investment program not long ago not only restored certain preferential tax policies for foreign investment that it had intended to recall in the previous two years but also liberalized almost all areas of the economy as never before. One of the most remarkable was the financial Many people in the industry and insurance industry are even more open to foreign investment and are “surprised” at the statement that “foreign financial institutions can apply to set up financial institutions in any part of China.” It seems that the courage and courage we have been opening up to the outside world does not appear to have changed so far Xi than. There is no doubt that opening to the outside world is the correct choice for China. However, as some people have said, “Since we have correctly chosen to open to the outside world, it is an indispensable supportive deployment for accelerating internalization.” However, the reality is that we truly lack the courage and strength of “all-round opening up” to our own native-born private economy. For example, although we have already said that allowing foreign financial institutions to apply for the establishment of financial institutions anywhere in China, at the same time they insisted that domestic private capital should not be involved in the financial sector; that foreign-funded enterprises import their own equipment for technological transformations as tax-exempt and domestic enterprises can not enjoy The same treatment. However, one thing is very intriguing: after all, we can not open up to private capital in some areas because it seems to be “non-state-owned capital.” However, what are the so-called “foreign funds”? This time, In the past, the so-called “sensitive areas”, that is, noncompetitive, monopolized by the state, and at the same time are these areas?