Chapter 8 Chapter 4 Fatal Internal Injury: China’s Economy Is Too Real

In the previous narration, we have already known the two logics of the country being rich and the country being poor. The first logic is that two hundred years ago, Western countries exchanged our raw materials and agricultural products with industrial products. The huge difference in production efficiency between industrial products and agricultural products is destined to be an unequal trade. This kind of exploitation is the reason why the industrial countries at that time became more and more developed, while we became poorer and poorer. The second logic is that two hundred years later, when we can also produce industrial products, Western countries will no longer work on the products themselves. They will not produce them at all, but only deal in brands, technologies and patents.The same shoes, tagged with their brand, one pair can be exchanged for our hundred pairs.This kind of exploitation is more ferocious and effective than the exploitation two hundred years ago.So you will find that today's developed countries are richer in material than two hundred years ago, and they are richer and stronger.

Does China today understand the second logic? I don't think so. Today's Made in China is still following the logic of two hundred years ago. Made in China is only making products - real material products.If this continues, China will become the largest manufacturing country in the world, but you will find that the more you produce, the richer others (Europe and the United States) will be, while what we get is leftovers. Lang Xianping’s criticism of Made in China hits the mark to a certain extent (I will point out his problem later), he said that China’s manufacturing industry has been reduced to the lowest end of the value chain.

He used the so-called "6+1" theory to illustrate this problem. "6" refers to the six more profitable links in the modern industrial chain: first, product design; second, raw material procurement; third, warehousing and transportation; Fourth, order processing; fifth, wholesale business; sixth, terminal retail.As for "1", of course it refers to the most worthless link in the production of material products. The United States puts the lowest-value manufacturing end (that is, "1") in China.Manufacturing with the lowest value wastes resources and damages the environment.Therefore, the Americans put it all in China, and the six non-manufacturing industries (namely "6") of product design, raw material procurement, warehousing and transportation, order processing, wholesale operation and terminal retail are all in their own hands. "6" is the "soft" production link, and "1" is the "hard" production link.Under the positioning of such a "6+1" industrial chain, China has been reduced to the lowest end of value.

Take the Barbie dolls produced in Zhejiang as an example. The ex-factory price of Barbie dolls is 1 US dollar, but it is 10 US dollars at Wal-Mart in the United States. According to Lang's theory, the extra 9 US dollars are all created by "6".It is obvious that the Barbie doll produced by us can sell for 10 dollars in the market, but we can only get 1 dollar, so Lang laments how sad this is.This is indeed very sad, but Professor Lang did not understand where the sad thing is. First, if the Barbie doll is produced in China, the ex-factory price is $1, but it is sold in the United States for $10. Note that this is sold to Americans, not Chinese.Then we are not sad at all, because we have no loss in this production, we have earned 1 dollar, and Americans can buy it as much as they are willing to spend.In fact, the really sad thing is that Barbie dolls are to be sold in China. The physical entity of Barbie dolls produced by our Chinese factory, the factory took 1 dollar, put the label of Barbie dolls on it, and then sold it at a price of 100 yuan. It was sold to the Chinese, which is the real tragedy. This kind of transaction is actually a kind of exploitation.Think about it, Americans don’t have to do anything, they earn nearly 100 yuan just by putting on a label, and they can buy a lot of cheap goods made in China with this countless 100 yuan: clothes, shoes, hats, Bicycles, washing machines, refrigerators, etc.The essence of this kind of transaction is empty-handed wolves, using the concept of Barbie dolls to take away our huge amount of real material wealth.

Second, let me tell you that only 1 of the "6+1" creates value and wealth, and the other six links do not create any wealth at all.Don't be blindfolded by the appearance of things. A Barbie doll produced by a Chinese factory is one, and it will not become two after tossing about product design, raw material procurement, warehousing and transportation, order processing, wholesale operation and terminal retail. This is the simplest conservation of matter. As for why the price of Barbie dolls has become 10 times after the toss, I tell you that it is not because the six links created a value of 9 dollars, but because the Americans abducted our 9 dollars through brand tricks.

Why do you say that it does not create value but abducts value? It's very simple, after those six links, there won't be any more material wealth in this world, it's just that people in these six links have obtained a total of nine dollars out of thin air. The nine dollars themselves are not wealth, but they can be reborn Go buy more cheap Chinese stuff.Still going back to the logic of the first point, the Americans took away our material wealth for nothing through this trick. In short, only material products are the real wealth and value, but in reality, through brand karate, the United States can make things that are not wealth worth a lot of money in the market, and have a high price, which will take us away. huge material wealth.

When will China's manufacturing get out of the endless cycle of being swept away by people and cheated by people? The only way is to "learn" from the United States and treat others in the same way. You are a brand, and I will become a brand, so that we will be on equal footing and you will not be able to exploit me.For the same quality of shoes, if you are the brand and I am not, you can exchange one pair for ten pairs of mine, and one day I will also make a brand, and you can only exchange one pair of mine for one pair, and you will never be able to make money from me. In short, Chinese manufacturing must stop making those things that were made two hundred years ago. If this continues, they will only be exploited forever, and they will never be able to catch up with developed countries, let alone surpass the United States.

We already know that celebrity entertainment is used today as a tool for developed countries to exploit developing countries.Hollywood blockbusters in the United States are the magic weapon for it to sweep wealth around the world. What about China's entertainment industry? It can only be described by two words: tragedy.To sum up its status quo in one sentence: self-entertainment, there is no defense against the invasion of foreign entertainment products. Take a look at the recent box office results of "Avatar" and "Avatar." How many copies would it take to match the box office of an "Avatar" in China?When the former only had a box office of 90 million, the latter already had a box office of 1.09 billion in the mainland, and the former was only a fraction of the latter.

The celebrity entertainment industry in Mainland China is purely a domestic clown. Not only can it not go to the world, it can't even occupy a place in Asia or even East Asia.Japan and South Korea bombed in turn, and you sing and I come on stage. From the Hong Kong typhoon at the beginning of the reform and opening up to the Korean Wave in recent years, we have not been able to withstand it once. What does the popularity of Korean dramas mean? That's a big outflow of silver. In 2005, before the Korean drama "Sorrowful Love Song" was broadcast, Japan's Fuji TV purchased the Japanese copyright of the series for up to 4 billion won, which can be said to have broken the record for Korean drama copyright fees in recent years. Korean media expected "Sad Love Song" Copyright fees in mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Southeast Asia will be two to three times higher than usual.

The star entertainment industry is a virtual thing, a spiritual thing, and its products can be said to be a thing that can be copied infinitely, and it is a huge profit. Films and CDs of TV dramas and movies, and discs of popular songs can be copied infinitely, and the cost is almost zero. China has a population of 1.3 billion. Which country's entertainment industry can't covet this big piece of fat? Fortunately, piracy is rampant in China now, and the habit of buying legal copies has not yet formed, and very few people go to theaters to watch movies. Otherwise, China's wealth taken away by foreign entertainment industries will be a hundred times, a thousand times what it is now.

You have to know that one of the most lamentable things for foreigners when they come to China is that all kinds of video discs and music CDs are so cheap here. You should know that these things are very valuable to them, and a music album worth hundreds of dollars is very common. Yes, what a precious gift it would be to receive a CD of your favorite singer on your birthday.Therefore, when foreigners come to China, they must buy DVDs and CDs like crazy.Just imagine, if China's intellectual property protection is the same as theirs, we will spend thousands or thousands of yuan to buy a genuine DVD of an American blockbuster or an album of a foreign star, then the foreign entertainment industry will exploit us. How violent it will be.So the current situation in China is a blessing among misfortunes.Then again, this kind of luck actually tells us a greater crisis. If China wants to progress, does it have to continuously promote the protection of intellectual property rights?As the quality of Chinese people continues to improve, will more people go to theaters to watch movies?If one day we can only buy genuine DVDs, and piracy is hit to the point of dying; if one day a large part of us Chinese regard going to the theater to watch movies on weekends as a living habit, then the real disaster will come.Because you will find that all kinds of Chinese entertainment products are not competitive with foreign Hollywood products. Faced with expensive DVDs, people will only buy American blockbusters and albums of American, Japanese, and Korean singers; When Hollywood blockbusters and domestic films are released at the same time, there must be an absolute majority who choose Hollywood blockbusters. We can do a rough calculation on the film alone.Do you know how many movie theaters there are in China and how many screens there are in total?There are only 4097 screens in total, and there are only 4097 screens for a population of 1.3 billion.So how much does the United States have?There are 38,990 screens and they have only 300 million people. We can imagine that with China's urbanization process, assuming that the proportion of people watching movies will continue to increase in 10 years, let's not be too optimistic, let's say it can reach one-tenth of that in the United States, okay?Now 7,000 people in the United States have a screen, then we will have a screen for 70,000 people, that is, there will be a total of nearly 20,000 screens in the country, which means that the number of people watching movies has increased by five times (because the number of screens has increased by five. times), let’s assume that the total box office of movies also increased by five times, so how much was China’s box office revenue in 2009? 6 billion RMB.According to the assumption that after ten years, it will be 30 billion RMB, how much of it will be taken away by foreign films, the answer is more than half.That is to say, ten years later, in the film industry alone, we will be swept away by foreigners with 20 billion yuan of wealth every year.is it scary?very scary. We continue to use the film industry as an example to explain why the Chinese entertainment industry is just a clown who is tossing around in the country, and we speak with real numbers.Let's first look at the export value of China's film industry. In 2009, a total of 22 production units in China sold 45 films (including 34 co-produced films) overseas to 68 countries and regions, a total of 185 films, with a sales revenue of 2.759 billion yuan.Among them, the overseas box office sales revenue was 2.404 billion yuan, and the post-film product revenue was 355 million yuan. The total revenue increased by 231 million yuan compared with 2008. In addition, compared with 2008, there are 3 new production units and 7 new sales to 7 countries and regions. In 2009, the overseas markets of domestic films were still concentrated in the three traditional regions of North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific.Among them, two co-produced films were sold to the United States, with a total box office revenue of 610 million yuan, accounting for 22.11% of the total overseas revenue for the year; a total of 15 domestic films (including 9 co-produced films) were sold to Europe, with a revenue of 406 million yuan RMB 761 million, accounting for 14.72% of the total annual revenue; a total of 8 domestic films (including 6 co-produced films) were sold to Japan, with a revenue of 761 million yuan, accounting for 27.58% of the total annual revenue; a total of 11 co-produced films were sold to South Korea , with a total revenue of 314 million yuan, accounting for 11.38% of the total revenue from overseas markets for the year.Due to the limited subject matter and audience of mainland Chinese films, most of them cannot go abroad at all. Even if they go abroad, the box office results are generally not satisfactory. In 2009, while the box office in mainland China was soaring, the growth rate in overseas markets was still low.From these data, it can be seen that the total overseas sales of the Chinese film industry (about 3 billion RMB) is almost equivalent to 1/10 of the global revenue of a Hollywood blockbuster (for example, "Avatar" is expected to reach the global box office of 3 billion US dollars).Therefore, it is difficult for Chinese films to go abroad successfully. From 2002 to 2009, let’s look at the domestic production of Chinese films. In recent years, the number of domestic films in China has been flooded. As shown in the table below, the total production of Chinese films in 2009 has reached 456, but it is a pity that most of them are shoddy. , of which only 130 were released in theaters.So how do the more than 100 films that have been released face Hollywood blockbusters? In 2009, there were only 18 films (including imported films) with a box office of over 100 million in China, which means that most of the 130 domestic films released were low-grossing films.Then compare the 18 Chinese-produced and imported films with a box office of over 100 million, and you will know how different the two are, as shown in the figure below. Only 7 of the 18 films were imported, with a total box office of nearly 1.8 billion yuan, while the box office of the remaining 11 domestic films was only about 2 billion yuan, which was almost evenly divided. If the box office of "Avatar" in 2010 is also included, the total box office of Avatar reached 1.2 billion yuan, and a single "Avatar" is almost the sum of all the top ten blockbusters in China. Therefore, Chinese films not only cannot go out, but also cannot stop the attacks of others in the country, and the decline that has remained unchanged for decades is out of control.The situation of the film industry reflects the backwardness of the entire Chinese entertainment industry. If it advances, it will lead to a dead end, and if it retreats, it will be powerless to resist.In this way, we can only watch overseas entertainment products sweep our wealth.And as the Chinese people's living expenses in the entertainment industry accelerates, the scale of the overseas entertainment industry's exploitation of China's wealth will also double at an accelerated rate. Sometimes you will find a revolutionary mentor like Lenin quite cute. For example, at that time, he pointed out that imperialism had reached the stage of financial imperialism. He pointedly said that financial plunder is the highest stage of capital export. To be honest, after reading this, I was really impressed. Let me tell you that the revolutionaries of Lenin's generation had many problems, but their views on many major issues were really brilliant. Not only are they not outdated today, but they are more appropriate and more suitable for describing today's international economic situation. For today's big powers, the significance of finance has long gone beyond the original intention of serving the actual economy. Its most significant significance is to go abroad and carry out international exploitation. As for how this kind of exploitation works, it will be described in detail later.Here we just need to understand the truth that for an economy that is open to the outside world, if its finance cannot exploit others, then it can only be exploited by others, and there is no compromise at all. The core of a country's international-oriented finance is the status of its currency in the international monetary system. Then it can talk about the so-called global-oriented financial services industry, establish several international financial centers, and market financial products worldwide. China's financial industry, like the entertainment industry, can only be tossed at home, and it is difficult to take a step abroad.The renminbi is not even a settlement currency in a small area of ​​East Asia, and it is even farther away from an international currency (this is a situation that should not be done). I will talk about the extreme importance of the international status of a country's currency to this country later. For example, if the renminbi can reach the status of the US dollar, then the Chinese will be able to get rich for nothing without working. Because we can print money to go shopping all over the world, don’t think that this is a fantasy. I will tell you later that this is what Americans have been doing. Our stock market and banks are not truly market-oriented, and they are still mainly serving state-owned enterprises today.China's stock market was once questioned as a tool for misappropriating state-owned enterprises, and a place to fool the majority of small and medium-sized investors and wipe out their wealth. The situation in the stock market can best illustrate the tragic status quo of China's finance, which can only fiddle with the wealth of its own people in the country. China's stock market does not even have the most basic financial functions. The stock market was originally intended to raise funds for companies with development prospects. It encourages talented entrepreneurs or inventors to start businesses. Look at why Bill Gates in the United States became a The world's richest man, its Microsoft empire started all relying on the help of the US stock market.Our stock market doesn’t even have the most basic function. It’s all about misappropriating money to fill holes in state-owned enterprises, so it’s hard to encourage national technological innovation. Look at people like Zhang Chaoyang, who have to go to the United States to rely on the stock market mechanism there. Established its own technological enterprise empire. In a word, our stock market does not have its most primitive financial function, but is purely a tool to toss domestic wealth.Not only that, it also often becomes a cash machine for overseas hot money.Every time there is a big ups and downs, I don’t know how these overseas hot money can be calculated so accurately, and they can always come in and out at the right time. Our various financial products, including treasury bonds, needless to say, are all self-produced and sold for self-entertainment.Never heard that we can package our "subprime loan" bonds into financial bonds and sell them all over the world.This kind of good thing can only happen to the Americans, and we are not so lucky. Are there any world-class brands in China today? Maybe there are.Lenovo is not it?Haier isn't it? Isn't TCL too? It's a pity that I want to tell you that Lenovo is an international brand, but it's just your "Lenovo"; Everyone knows these three letters overseas, but they are enough together.We must face a painful reality: 30 years later, we still do not have a truly international brand. The so-called international brand must obtain a general brand reputation in the international scope, and must occupy a considerable market share in similar products.I have the simplest standard for verifying an international brand, that is whether someone in a certain corner of the world is proud of owning it. If people in every corner of the world are proud of owning it, Then this is a world brand, a truly international brand.For example, Nokia mobile phones in Finland and Samsung mobile phones in South Korea. It is not a shame to own them in any corner of the world, so Nokia and Samsung are international brands. Why is Lenovo not an international brand?Simply put my judgment method, who in the world would think that owning a Lenovo notebook is an honorable thing?Will the Americans?Will the Germans?No, why can I say no with such certainty, because even the Chinese don’t feel that owning a Lenovo notebook is a face-saving thing, let alone foreigners?Of course, you can't take IBM as an example. To verify whether Lenovo is an international brand, the easiest way is to go to Zhongguancun to have a look. If Lenovo’s glory in desktop computers has made Lenovo grow stronger, then Lenovo’s performance in notebook computers, especially consumer notebook computers, is no different. It may lead to the decline of Lenovo.Strolling through the Zhongguancun electronic market, you will clearly feel the neglect of Lenovo’s home notebook computers, and you will not feel the courtesy that should be received as the third in the world. With the same configuration, SONY can rely on its brand to be 1,000 yuan more expensive than HP and DELL to win customers. ASUS It can also rely on 1,000 yuan cheaper than HP and other manufacturers to win customers, while the poor Lenovo enjoys the treatment of domestic brands despite its international ranking. The so-called international brands, the intuitive impression is that the same quality is more expensive than domestic manufacturers, because international brands represent the vanity, dignity, and even identity of consumers. Does Lenovo have such a function?Not at all, so it's not yet an international brand. In the same way, Haier and TCL are not yet international brands. Many people in our country may have misunderstood that Haier should have a high international reputation and be a brand recognized by foreigners. These are the illusions formed by watching too much domestic TV.Let's see what Mr. Zhang Ruimin himself said: "... I was at a dinner party in Germany. A gentleman brought his wife. I asked, do you know Haier products? She said yes, and I said our products are of high quality. Okay, she said yes, but I will not buy your products, I will still buy Miller, which is a well-known brand in Germany. I asked why? Our products are not inferior to Miller's in quality, and the price is better. She said that because Miller's products are works of art, she regards Miller's products as works of art. If the impression of works of art is made in the hearts of local consumers, I think it will take a long time, not overnight. .I think the real internationalization of Chinese companies is a long process, and it will take a long time..." Haier's internationalization started from the European and American high-end route, but to this day, Haier's brand is still not recognized by the mainstream.Take the United States as an example. So far, many Americans have misunderstood Haier as a German brand. Thanks to this misunderstanding, if they know that it is a Chinese brand, Haier’s sales in the United States will be even worse.Let’s talk about the data. At present, Haier occupies more than 30% of the U.S. market for refrigerators weighing less than 100 kg, ranking first in the U.S. market, and ranking second in Japan’s mainstream channels for washing machines weighing less than 5 kg.Unfortunately, refrigerators weighing less than 250 kg are the mainstream products in the United States, and washing machines weighing 7-8 kg are the mainstream products in Japan, so Haier has obviously not yet entered the mainstream market, but has only occupied a place in the non-mainstream. TCL's internationalization path is similar to Lenovo's route of acquiring well-known overseas brands. I won't say much about the result. You can see how embarrassing it is just by searching online. In fact, the most professional and sharpest criterion for judging international brands is two words: huge profits.An international brand must be profitable, because it occupies a stable and huge market share, and compared with similar products, its cost price can be sold several times higher. Therefore, to see whether the internationalization of Lenovo, Haier and TCL has succeeded, it is only necessary to see whether they have made huge profits.The latest data that can be found is that in 2007, Haier Group's annual operating income was 118 billion yuan, while its total profit was only 1.8 billion yuan, and the corporate profit rate was only 1.5%.This is of course not a huge profit.As for Lenovo and TCL, there are often news of huge losses this year.Three brands that are very good in the eyes of the Chinese people have all been rejected. So, do we still have international brands?The answer speaks for itself.As I said, brands are huge profits, and international brands are international huge profits.What is international profiteering means that the United States can get rid of China's huge wealth by holding its brand. Therefore, it is a very scary thing for China to have no international brands.We can only watch helplessly as international brands from other countries are sold at extremely expensive prices here, and the vain money flows into the pockets of the great powers like sea water.Brands are a super weapon for international exploitation. The last thing I want to say is that I am not completely desperate on the issue of brands. Although we do not have real international brands, I want to tell you that we already have some embryos of international brands. They are not Lenovo, Haier and TCL. , but our private brands, that is, Huawei, ZTE, BYD, Huaqi and a handful of enterprises with core technologies.As for the reason why we haven't created an international brand in 30 years, and how to kill a bloody road, we will leave it to the next part. Luxury is the most high-end international brand. Due to its uniqueness, I will discuss it separately. Luxury is by no means an ordinary commodity, nor an ordinary international brand. It is the topmost level of commodity fetishism, and it is purely a kind of belief.It is the perverted pursuit of perfection, excellence and luxury. Many people don't understand what luxury is in the modern sense, and there are various definitions when you open the book. In fact, let me tell you that luxury in the contemporary sense is actually very simple. It refers to those well-known luxury brands that can be listed. , perfume, leather goods, etc., each category has a certain luxury brand.Apart from the names listed on this list, everything else is not a luxury. Contemporary luxury goods are by no means equivalent to expensive goods, but specifically refer to these branded, symbolized, extremely expensive goods that are generally recognized by the upper class around the world.As I said earlier, China currently does not even have a single international brand, let alone luxury goods. It is absolutely futile to find Chinese products in the list of international luxury goods. International brands are international windfall profits, while luxury goods are the windfall profits. Especially for a country like China that does not have any luxury brands, the rich in China buy overseas luxury goods in a big way, which in essence means that the whole of China has suffered huge international exploitation, because the money of the rich is also created by the labor of all the people. of. An owner of a small and medium-sized enterprise in the Pearl River Delta went to France to buy luxury goods, the essence of which was to exchange the price-cut products of China's countless cheap labor for symbols of nothingness. In the global economic crisis, China has surpassed the United States to become the world's second largest consumer of luxury goods. With such a growth momentum, it is only a matter of time before China surpasses Japan to become the world's largest consumer of luxury goods, and this day will not come too late . What I want to say is that, apart from satisfying the vanity and showing off of the rich, such things as luxury are harmful to the whole country but not beneficial.Luxury goods will not bring the slightest positive meaning to the progress of the nation. Luxury goods are neither productive nor technological, but ostentatious and profligate. It is stupid cynicism and behavior to boycott foreign goods without choice, but there is one level of foreign goods that must be restricted, and that is imaginary things from abroad.These imaginary things are of no benefit to our country except to take away the wealth of Chinese laborers. Luxury goods are actually a kind of deprivation of relatively "vulgar" countries by "elegant" countries, because such high-value things can deprive other countries of huge wealth overnight. The rich Chinese who buy luxury goods in France with tens of millions of dollars, their wealth is created by Chinese laborers in the final analysis. The real labor products of Chinese laborers are exchanged for such imaginary things as French luxury goods. A small Louis Vuitton bag from the French can be exchanged for the three-year labor fruits of a laborer in the Pearl River Delta of China.This deprivation is quite terrifying. Luxury goods will not bring the slightest positive meaning to the progress of the nation.Luxury goods are neither productive nor technological, but ostentatious and profligate.Chinese people's massive consumption of luxury goods will not bring about any improvement of our country's technological level, nor will it bring about any improvement of our country's economic and industrial structure.However, the market mechanism cannot prevent the rich Chinese from accepting the "exploitation" of France, so the Chinese government needs to do something in this regard. It is useless to levy heavy taxes. The rich don't care about the price when it comes to luxury consumption. The more expensive the more the more they buy. , this aspect depends on coercive measures.Restricting luxury goods is not restricting conspicuous consumption, and the author never agrees with the moral criticism of conspicuous consumption.On the contrary, I have always believed that conspicuous consumption involves only domestic products, and there are great benefits.The wealth in the hands of the rich must be spent or given to the poor (donations) to further drive economic growth and benefit society. However, China's national conditions are that the rich are not enthusiastic enough about philanthropy, so in addition to investment, the rich want to spend their money faster, and buying expensive goods is undoubtedly the best way.The so-called conspicuous consumption refers to items with the same function. The purchase price of the rich is ten, hundreds, or even thousands of times that of the poor. This is called forming a discriminatory comparison with the poor, and the rich get pleasure from it.Although such conspicuous consumption is based to a certain extent on the mental damage of the poor (the poor may suffer from mental pain due to jealousy), this damage is insignificant.At the same time, only such a comparison can inspire people and form a vision of wealth, so that economic and social development can have vitality.Only conspicuous consumption can make the rich spend money faster. If the rich also spend only a few yuan on a meal like ordinary people, then their domestic demand potential is far from being developed.Fortunately, this is not the case for rich Chinese in reality. Hoogewerf Hoogewerf said that an upstart in China is considered a rich man who spends 80 million yuan a year.How much is this a driving force for domestic demand?If it is stupid enough to let the rich save money, they can spend 80 million yuan in any year and month.What we want to oppose is the kind of conspicuous consumption across borders, that is, the purchase of foreign luxury goods.Due to the unique belief logic of luxury goods, all luxury goods can only be born in the Western world (mainly Western Europe, with a small amount in the United States). These luxury-producing countries can safely exploit the wealth of the world without worrying about the emergence of competitors from other regions.On a global scale, luxury goods are their highly monopolized products.Economics tells us that monopoly products can be priced arbitrarily, and the goal is to maximize profits.Therefore, it is not surprising that a small luxury leather bag is priced at more than 100,000 yuan. If they want to, they can set the price at 100 million yuan, and someone will definitely buy it.Luxury is essentially a kind of commodity belief, which embodies people's endless and perverted pursuit of perfection and excellence. Former Minister of Commerce Bo Xilai once pointed out the fact that my country needs 800 million shirts to import an Airbus plane. Although this reality is sad enough, buying foreign large planes is a last resort. , and it is something that benefits all the people of the country.However, if we exchange 10,000 shirts (10 yuan each) for a small luxury leather bag (worth 100,000 yuan), it is a completely different matter.The latter is just to satisfy the short-term and perverted pleasure of a very small number of rich people, and it has no benefit to the country or the people.This kind of exchange is essentially the use of some illusory business concepts (or business ideology) by luxury goods producing countries.This kind of exchange is a high-speed loss of my country's wealth to the outside world; however, no matter how hard the conspicuous consumption involving only domestic products is, the wealth is still circulating within the country, and it expands domestic demand.Therefore, luxury is far from a good thing. Under the financial crisis, China surpassed the United States to become the world's second largest consumer of luxury goods, which is bad news. Having said so much, I can sum it up in one sentence, that is, China's economy is too real. We haven't tried it for 30 years, or we don't know how to play it. We have tried it, but we haven't played tricks and tricks. What I want to say is that if we don't learn to play tricks, then we will never become a developed country, let alone surpass the United States. If we don’t have high-quality virtual industries to fight against them, then the curses from developed countries such as international finance, star entertainment, luxury goods, and international brands will always be firmly attached to us and let them suck us up. blood and powerless. What developed countries export to us are all kinds of high value-added products such as international branded electronic products, machinery equipment, precision instruments, civil aircraft, automobiles and high-end durable consumer goods. The contrast between the import of such high-value-added international brands and our export of cheap goods is terrifying. For example, in the bilateral trade between China and France in 1997, the largest commodity exported by France to China was 24 aircrafts. The price (approximately US$1.21 billion) far exceeds the total value of China’s top ten categories of goods (approximately US$1 billion) exported to France, including clothing, shoes and hats, bags, toys, plastic products, furniture and textile yarns.This is not bad, although the large French aircraft must be profitable, and its price must be an unreasonable monopoly price, but after all, we have obtained a large aircraft that we cannot produce by ourselves. How can this large aircraft still have huge practical value? sex. Worse still are these situations: a Hollywood movie steals 1 billion yuan from China; a small luxury leather bag is bought by the Chinese for 100,000 yuan; U.S. financial products like bonds... The final conclusion is: China must learn to play fake. Through this case, the content of this chapter and the previous content of this book can be connected together.The seemingly perfect "6+1" theory In recent years, there has been a widely circulated "theory" in various media (especially the Internet) to explain the employment difficulties of Chinese college students, that is, "6+1" proposed by Lang Xianping theory.Lang Xianping expounded this theory on many different occasions.他认为，今天的国际不再是产品竞争，而是进入到了一个前所未有的、全新的产业链的竞争阶段。产业链包括七大环节：一是原料与生产，二是产品设计，三是原料采购，四是仓储运输，五是订单处理，六是批发经营，七是零售。在这七个环节中，后面六个环节是需要大量大学生去做的，第一个环节则是基本不需要大学生的，而中国恰恰在国际分工中分到了所谓的“6+1”中的“1”，即生产环节，也就是说中国的主要产业是低端制造（对产品物质形态的制造），这种产业根本不需要大学生，中国在“6+1”中需要大学生的“6”中极度欠缺，所以导致中国大学生就业难。 咋看这一“理论”，似乎无懈可击，完美地解释了中国大学生找不到工作的问题。实际上，郎咸平先生的确找对了门路，可惜的是浅尝辄止，并没有深入下去，这种“6+1”理论的解释只能是肤浅的。Why do you say that? 我们先来看美国大学生就业情况吧。 美国为什么能长期消化大量大学生就业从20世纪末开始一直到今天，十多年的时间，中国大学生就业愈发艰难，无论是量（就业率）还是质（工作的好坏）都每况愈下，而这十多年恰恰是中国经济高速发展，繁荣兴盛的时期。这就是中国大学生就业问题的离奇之处。 美国绝不会出现这种局面，美国只有在遭遇经济萧条时才会出现暂时的大学生就业困难，这种局面往往是几十年才一遇，在大多数时期，美国大学生毕业之后是高枕无忧的。即便是在经济危机和金融海啸之后的今年，美国大学毕业生就业遇到了前所未有的困难，但并未遭遇特别严重的就业寒冬，美国大学和雇主协会在今年4月对850所大学的3.5万名毕业生所作的抽样调查，在申请工作的应届毕业生中有19.7%的学生找到了工作，乍看起来很吓人，其实2008年同一比例是26%，今年与去年相差并不大。从就业的“质”的层面看，2009年应届毕业生的平均起薪是49353美元，几乎与2008年的平均起薪49300美元相同，有一半以上的专业起薪还有不同幅度的上涨，比如，金融专业毕业生的起薪上涨了2.3%，达到49754美元。 这么多专业起薪逆势上涨，说明美国大学毕业生的质在提高，这个事实只能说明美国大学生就业即使有困难，那也是暂时的、局部的、不严重的。 那么，美国为什么能长期吸收那么多的大学生就业呢？ 其实很简单，这是因为美国拥有的是高技术、垄断性、“虚”的产业，这些高技术和虚的产业恰恰就是大量吸收大学生的产业。高技术自不必说，美国的军工、航空、计算机、互联网等都是需要大量大学生的，本国的学生还不够用，还必须在全球范围内吸收优秀人才。 至于“虚”的产业，就是指美国基于综合国力和文化优势，建立的非物质形态的产业，这主要包括“虚拟化”经营的世界级品牌（美国仅经营品牌符号本身，物质产品放到中国大陆来生产）、金融服务业、娱乐产业、少量奢侈品等等，这几样虚的东西，无一不是美国在全球范围内搜刮财富的强大工具，而这些产业，恰恰需要大量大学生来做。 我举一例来说明这个问题。 美国的耐克鞋有30%左右都是中国东莞一家叫做裕元工业的台商企业生产的，假定一双耐克鞋最终售价1000元人民币，裕元工业顶多能拿到100元，中间商（运输、售卖）和品牌所有者（即耐克总公司）各拿450元左右。在这个过程中，美国人把中国人生产的鞋子，贴上一个商标之后又卖给了中国人，赚到的钱又可以回过头来从中国进口五双同质量的鞋子，这就是说中国的裕元工业每为耐克生产一双鞋子（卖给中国人），最终还要再附送五双同等质量的鞋子给美国人穿。 这样的空手套白狼的国家，物质能不极大丰富吗？ 美国本土保留的是产品的品牌塑造和产品设计等“虚”的层面，这些层面恰恰是需要大量大学生来完成的。高技术、垄断性（对全球而言）和“虚”的产业保障了美国大学生的持久高就业率，这就是我的解释。 那么，我的解释与郎咸平的“6+1”理论有什么异同之处呢？ 相同之处在于，二者都看到了“虚”的层面是能吸纳大学生就业的所在，没错，吸收大学生的就是“6+1”的“6”。 不同之处在于，郎咸平只停留在了表面的七个环节，错误地得出今天的国际竞争不再是产品竞争，而是产业链竞争的结论。 要证明郎咸平的错误非常简单，按照他的理论，我们只要发展好“6+1”的“6”就能在国际产业链竞争中取胜，大学生就业问题就能迎刃而解，而实际上，中国在“产品设计、原料采购、仓储运输、订单处理、批发经营、零售”六个环节早就达到了世界一流水准，许多世界品牌的这六个环节都是中国人在做，除了产品设计这一环节可能稍逊，其他五个环节中国人做的非常好。 事实上，问题的关键根本就不在于这六个环节本身，问题仍然在于产品（品牌），国际竞争仍然是产品的竞争，而不是所谓的产业链竞争，你只要创立了世界级的品牌，那六个环节自然而然就运作起来，如果你没有品牌，去搞这六个环节就如同“巧妇难为无米之炊”。也就是说，所谓的六个环节，是围绕一个具有国际竞争力的品牌去运作的，而不是独立存在的，是品牌竞争胜利之后催生了六个环节，而不是靠六个环节本身去竞争。 如果中国创造出一个可以和耐克匹敌的世界级运动品牌产品，那六个环节马上就会运作起来，大学生就业岗位就源源不断。品牌的打造只与六个环节中的“产品设计”有关联，单靠产品设计是打造不出品牌的，品牌打造是一个综合性的庞大工程。所以说，“6”是果，而不是因，把大学生就业难归根于“6”本身是值得商榷的。 “6+1”理论除了肤浅之外，还在于片面，仅仅设计了产业领域的大学生就业，而实际上，政府部门也是吸收大学生就业的关键领域，政府对大学生的需求主要在两个方面：一是维持日常运作，二是开发公共产品（包括国防产品与技术研发、制度设计、法律建设、经济政策研究，等等）。大量的大学生是直接进入政府工作或者为政府打工的，国家战略和方针政策也就成为影响大学生就业的一个重要因素。 因此，我想综合考察中国大学生就业困难的原因，但政治层面只一笔带过： 其一，国家战略，我国改革开放以来一直是低技术发展战略，国家对技术研发和自主创新投资严重不足，这一领域恰好是需要大学生来完成的。 其二，法制化进程。 我国的法制化进程障碍相当大，行政力量依然非常强大，法律“说话”不算，这就导致法律人才的需求大打折扣，如果我们能像美国那样，每一个人都聘请为自己长期服务的私人律师，法律专业的大学生就业将大大增加（增加数十倍、数百倍甚至数千倍），甚至不够用了，其他专业的大学生就会转学法律类。 其三，其他一些短期政府政策。 我们回到经济层面作为探讨的重点，毕竟大学生就业是一个经济问题。 从经济角度看，只有两类产业是“大学生密集型产业”，这就是高技术产业和“虚”的产业，大学生就业难就在于缺少这两种“大学生密集型产业”，而不在于什么“6+1”理论。 从高技术产业看，我们的计算机产业、软件产业、汽车工业、军事工业、航空航天工业没有一个能在世界上占据重要位置，产品在世界范围内销量太小，自然就无法吸收更多的大学生来生产、研发产品。 在这些方面，中国哪怕能在一个领域占据世界市场的较大份额，就能让理工科大学生就业大大改观，韩国都能创造出现代这样的世界品牌，难道中国举全国之力就不能做出一个来吗？ 从“虚”的产业看，我们几乎不拥有世界级的品牌，没有一个奢侈品牌；我们的明星娱乐产业冲不出华人圈；我们的金融业非但不能剥削别人，反而成为国际游资席卷我国财富的工具，所谓的国际金融中心香港也主要靠大陆支撑着。 虚的产业无一例外都是大学生密集型产业。 如果我们有世界级的品牌，我们就可以虚拟化经营，让印度的廉价劳动力为我们生产物质产品，我们只须雇用大量大学生进行技术研发、外观设计、广告宣传（明星代言），须知，韩国三星手机仅仅外观设计团队就聘请了500多名艺术类的大学生，软件和硬件等技术类的大学生更是数量巨大。 如果我们有真正的世界级的金融服务业，我们经济类的毕业生就不必挤破脑袋去外国的投行，我们自己就能消化掉这些毕业生。 如果我们有能走出国门的明星娱乐业，我们就需要大量的文科大学生进行编剧、摄像、表演、导演、营销、宣传、策划，等等，事实是，我们连“韩流”都抵挡不住。我们所谓的去了好莱坞发展的导演和演员，只不过是出口转内销而已，他们只是充当了美国人占领中国市场的好工具。我们的娱乐明星如果只能在华人圈里折腾，那么所能吸纳大学生的数量是相当有限的。 如果我们能有在世界范围内或者至少在亚洲范围内大行于世的软件、网游产品，我们就可以吸收大量的计算机专业的大学生进行软件开发和产品生产。事实上，我们的网游市场被韩国人占据了半壁江山。 纵观所有发达国家，几乎无一例外地在某些虚的产业或高技术产业上在国际范围内占据一席之地，这是他们不存在大学生就业难问题的共同原因。 法国有无数奢侈品和国际品牌，还有飞机，德国也有诸多国际品牌，日本汽车工业世界首屈一指，美国军工、金融服务业、汽车行业也是世界领军，韩国也有三星、现代等国际品牌。 所以中国大学生就业难，不在于“6+1”，不在于高校扩招，也不在于专业不对口，我们的大学生比例还远远低于发达国家，而在于缺乏具有国际竞争力的高技术产业和虚的产业，一句话，我们缺乏“大学生密集型产业”。 要解决中国的大学生就业问题，只有一条路可以走，那就是大力发展“大学生密集型产业”，也就是要在高技术和虚拟产业上在世界范围内杀出若干条血路，日本和韩国都能做到，中国也一定能做到。 须知，日本和韩国乃至中国香港和中国台湾都是依靠大量虚拟产业寄生在中国大陆无数劳动者身上的，我们必须摆脱这样的局面！