淘客熙熙

主题:【原创】从建国初薄一波犯错误谈起 -- hwd99

共:💬91 🌺727 🌵33
分页树展主题 · 全看首页 上页
/ 7
下页 末页
          • 家园 邓搞经济的本领一塌糊涂

            邓搞经济的眼光, 差不多就是一个狡谲的农民. 他的主要思想, 就是卖油卖矿有水快流, 不搞科研大肆进口生产线. 生产线后来也算了, 直接卖苦力.

            文革后期周病重, 邓复出主持工作. 搞出来一个《十年规划纲要》. 这是洋跃进的纲要. 滥采狂抽, 差点就把大庆给弄断气了.

            逮捕四人帮后, 邓再次复出. 开始不顾实际情况的疯狂的采购计划. 要在几年内买800亿的成套生产线. 1978年签约22个大型成套项目, 完全超出能力. 花了几十亿搞个宝钢, 选址错误被迫停工赔款.

            碰得头破血流之后, 觉得国家没有外汇, 就开始大搞后患无穷的三来一补, 给与外资超国民待遇. 提高市场导向的地位没错, 可是过犹不及. 甚至让军队都投入市场乱搞? WTF

            我觉得如果换陈云, 八十年代的经济会更好, 也不会给国家留下无穷后患.

            • 家园 宝钢选址可不算错误

              宝钢的地址,从今天的眼光,非常的好。

              贴近铁矿石、煤炭的海运航线,贴近数量巨大的最终用户。

              如果宝钢选址错误,今天曹妃甸,填海造地出来的钢铁基地,不是更叫错误?

              宝钢唯一的失误,我猜测是:港口太浅,因为离城市太近的污染问题,或者预留的地块太小了。

              • 家园 不知道了吧?宝钢的错误在于给倭寇忽悠了,

                结果建成后只能用高品位铁矿,也就是倭寇做大股东的

                澳洲铁矿。

                这事当时闹挺大,直接责任人是胡乱帮,

                最后是矮子拍板。

                还有,不知道的事不要想当然。

                • 家园 高品位铁矿=低能源消耗

                  中国有大量的低品质铁矿,低品质铁矿在炼钢前要做提纯处理,需要消耗大量的能源。

                  如果不进口高品质铁矿,而是使用本国的低品质铁矿,产出同样的钢铁,必然要扩大能源的进口。

                  中国铁矿和能源(石油、煤炭)都需要大量进口。进口高品位铁矿,实际上减少了能源的进口,其实分散了风险。

                  我本人有一个猜想,进口铁矿石的定价及运费,其实是跟能源(煤炭)的价格挂钩的。国内煤炭价格下跌,必然导致进口铁矿石价格的下跌。因为进口铁矿石要想卖得出去,其成本必然要低于国内低品质铁矿提纯后的成本。

                  国内最近两年要开建的大型钢铁项目,鞍钢的鲅鱼圈项目,首钢的曹妃甸项目,湛江项目,广西的北仑港项目,都建在沿海,港口与钢厂一体化建设,便于使用进口的原材料。这些项目,都与日本人没啥关系,但最终决策的时候,全部都采用了沿海港口+进口原料的规划。

                  黑宝钢选址错误,应该这么黑:宝钢不应该建在上海,而应该建在宁波或舟山,(在忽略掉人才储备差异的情况下),自然条件比上海更优越。

              • 家园 冬天长江水位低的时候,海水倒灌,水源就成大问题
              • 家园 地质沉降和用水

                这是我看别人总结的: 宝钢地质条件差, 沉降严重. 上海本来用水就紧张, 宝钢大量用水, 会导致地下水位下降, 沉降更严重. 宝钢港口不是深水港, 需要转运.

                如果宝钢选址考虑稍远一点的地方, 港口可以更好, 用水可以不是问题, 地质条件可以不是问题.

            • 家园 邓是买办,甚至有可能是共济会的棋子

              是留过洋的,陈是本土的,与毛一样,更注重中国的实际情况.

              邓不是共济会的棋子,就无法说明为什么一定要中国完全加入到美国人的一连倒政策,当时俄国还没有倒下.

    • 家园 顶。关键是要能控制外资,为我所用,而不是相反。

      在华外资主要目的是利用中国廉价到极点的劳力,无保护到极点的环境,腐败到极点的官场,得到极不公平的暴利,同时废掉中国本土同行。苹果,三星利用中国成为世界龙头企业,本国经济支柱。中国从中得到的远远少于应得的。如同100块的东西,只卖了1块,应该可以提价并获取技术。中国对生产链低段的垄断本应使中国有操纵影响世界经济和产业的能力,在与外资的较量中不应处于弱势。 神奇的是,因为买办和内斗,这种垄断并没有给中国多少好处,甚至相反。

    • 家园 世界上奋发的民族

      大多数是自然资源不足,甚至自认为没有多余资源的,比如荷兰,英国,北欧,日本,韩国,甚至印度。所以不得不开发脑资源。

      中国在过去30年里,付出了极大的有形代价,但确实换回了比较明显的回报,就是国民生产力对于世界市场“近垄断”的地位,国家和人民财富增长,而最主要的是头脑开放,毫无执念,欢迎一切好的新的思想和点子。

      煤已经用掉了,矿已经用掉了,这是没法挽回的事,要做的,是珍稀换回来的东西,在这个基础上,团结一致,持续发展领先。没有付出那些代价,中国今天能年产600万大学生?你以为这个世界上,人家都会让着你,提携你?

      至于你说:“经过30年发展,我们与南朝鲜的消费水平有了数量级的差别”,我是去过韩国的,我认为这不是事实。况且韩国是世界上唯一一个,首都有外国驻军的国家;唯一一个,首都圈在几千门远程火炮射程以内的国家。这个国家不是不奋发,但是怂的地方也真是多。

      当年美国弱的时候,看见英国还不是低头哈腰,优惠外资?

      通宝推:乱翻书nn,小楼,
      • 家园 谢了。人是最主要的,

        没有之一。fride说过财富是人的劳动创造出来的,深深表示认同。

        送花成功。有效送花赞扬。恭喜:你意外获得 8 铢钱。1通宝=16铢

        作者,声望:1;铢钱:0。你,乐善:1;铢钱:7。本帖花:1

      • 家园 请你谈谈美国是怎样优惠外资的?

        建议你读读迈克尔 赫德森著的《American's protectionist takeoff: economy theory and politics 1815-1914》,在这本书中,作者指出,美国的经济政策执行的是保护主义,拒绝外国直接投资,保护国内市场和民族工业,更不用说,优惠外资了。

        • 家园 关于美国早期对欧洲的依赖

          1,13个殖民地时期:英国的重商主义政策,早期是建立美洲殖民地的关键基础,后期对于殖民地人民弊大于利了,人民才谋求独立(而且受到法国不惜代价的支持)。

          2,1812战争前,美国小心翼翼,根本不敢得罪英国。英国欺负到头上来,美国不敢还手,于是“自残”,对英国禁运,禁止美国的棉花和布匹出口给英国,希望英国服软。

          这个局面的形成,是由于美国一穷二白,什么都要靠欧洲------从法律,文化,工业产品等等几乎所有领域。由于欧洲国家,尤其是英国严密禁止先进的手工业和工业技术流入美国,美国是靠暗暗招收懂得航海,制桶,开设风车(水车)磨坊的工匠这种方法,偷偷山寨。

          3, 美国社会的发展,非常依赖欧洲的资金。安德鲁-杰克逊总统在1830年代同“第二银行”的殊死斗争,就是因为这家实力雄厚的超级银行(股本加存款是美国政府年度开支的2倍以上,你以今天的数据来比拟一下),总股本700多万美元中,1/4以上是属于383个外国人(欧洲资本),其余的属于最富裕的美国人。你要注意,这些美国世家豪门的富N代,虽然有美国国籍,都是在欧洲游学成人后,才回美国打理家族事业,可以说是大半个欧洲人,很不情愿住在美国这个乡下。直到二战前,美国人在欧洲是被普遍瞧不起的。

          美国这个国家,自己没有根,人都是欧洲杂七杂八漂来的。在早期,这个国家根本没有民族工业的内生性幼苗,欧洲的政府严禁工业技术输美,美国就挖人,走私机器,山寨,从欧洲民间偷偷获得。只要懂点技术,肯投奔延安的移民,一律欢迎,以前在欧洲有任何案底,逃兵犯罪之类,毫不过问。这比你说的优惠外资,情形如何?好歹这30年,中国还没有变成西方各类罪犯的天堂吧?

          我看,这是最赤裸裸,最没有底线的“优惠外资(外脑)”了,比起来,邓爷爷肯定是有骨气多了。

          这种情形,不是美国一家。在澳洲,夸口说祖上来得多么早的老英裔,不用问,祖爷爷是强奸犯,刺字发配来的。

          4, 大约从1864年开始,美国着力推行“门罗主义”,宣称“西半球的自主性”,美洲是美洲人的美洲,欧洲国家不可以再进入南北美洲搞殖民。这一政策,符合英美两国的利益,阻挡了法俄对于美洲的垂涎。但美国自己完全无力执行,是靠英国海军封锁欧洲到美洲的航路,支撑了“门罗主义”达50年之久。这50年里,英国同美国的关系,大约就是今天美国同日本的关系,或者美国同加拿大的关系。直到一战前,美国长期不修武备,只保持小规模的陆军,海军也是慢慢增强,就是这一结盟的直接产物。你是不是认为这样还不算对英国低头哈腰?日本的首相没有给美国总统磕头就证明日本没有低头哈腰是吧?

          5, 世界上任何一本书,你全信就一定有副作用。一户人家现在大富大贵了,会承认祖上要过饭吗?

          通宝推:东方射日,乱翻书nn,赵沐浴,西瓜子,金口玉言,leqian,parishg,
          • 家园 这里补一点资料

            《美国:19世纪的“山寨”大国 野心比中国大得多》这篇文章,原文见于FP(Foreign Policy),《译言-精选》网站把这篇文章翻译为中文,目前国内多家网站有转载。

            这里我把原文转贴一下,因为FP的网站要注册才能阅读,有些河友会嫌麻烦。

            We Were Pirates, Too

            The ship carrying Francis Cabot Lowell and his family home from England in the summer of 1812 was intercepted by a British war squadron, which held the passengers and crew for some days at the British base at Halifax, Canada. Lowell's baggage was subject to several intensive searches, for his captors had been warned that he may have stolen designs for power textile weaving machinery, a serious crime in England. Lowell, indeed, had done just that -- but, aware of the risk, had committed the designs to memory.

            The British rarely accorded outsiders the privilege of touring their cotton plants. But Lowell was a leading Boston merchant who imported a great deal of British cloth and had solid relations with his British counterparts. One can imagine him on one of his tours, feigning languid disinterest even as he diligently filed away details on gearing and loom speeds. By the gentlemanly codes of the day, it seems dishonorable.

            Today, it's China that is the rising power, and the United States that is the hegemon wary of the young upstart. To China, the United States appears much as Great Britain did to Americans two centuries ago. The U.S. Navy is an intrusive presence on its coasts, while U.S. support for Taiwan parallels British sympathies for southern separatists. Most threatening for Beijing is the appeal of America's raucous democracy for China's rising masses.

            The Chinese today are as determined as 19th-century Americans were to achieve economic parity with their rival, and like early Americans, will steal all the technology they can. The important difference is that modern documentation standards make theft much more rewarding. Any drawings Lowell purloined would have been mostly dimensionless and only approximately accurate. (He was fortunate that Paul Moody, the genius mechanic who designed and built his plants, was also a skilled weaver.) In the mid 19th century, Americans were also desperate to replicate Britain's famed Sheffield steel, by common consent the world's finest. But the best Sheffield craftsmen the United States could buy failed to replicate it. (The key, which even the British had not guessed, was the local clay used in the heating vessels.)

            Today, Chinese espionage is widely assumed to have targeted virtually all big American technology companies. A long list of firms, including Apple, Boeing, Dow Chemical, Dupont, Ford, Motorola, Northrup Grumman, and General Motors, have pursued successful criminal actions against Chinese moles and other agents.

            Back in 1812, finished cotton textiles dominated British exports, accounting for about half of all trade revenues, the fruit of a half century of progress in mechanized mass production. Proportionate to GDP, the industry was about three times the size of the entire U.S. automobile sector today. High-speed textile manufacture was a highly advanced technology for its era, and Great Britain was as sensitive about sharing it as the United States is with advanced software and microprocessor breakthroughs. The British parliament legislated severe sanctions for transferring trade secrets, even prohibiting the emigration of skilled textile workers or machinists.

            But the Americans had no respect for British intellectual property protections. They had fought for independence to escape the mother country's suffocating economic restrictions. In their eyes, British technology barriers were a pseudo-colonial ploy to force the United States to serve as a ready source of raw materials and as a captive market for low-end manufactures. While the first U.S. patent act, in 1790, specified that "any person or persons" could file a patent, it was changed in 1793 to make clear that only U.S. citizens could claim U.S. patent protection.

            China's modern trade and patent regimes are similarly tilted against outsiders. "Use" patents are freely awarded for Chinese versions of Western inventions. High-value chips are denied import licenses unless companies allow the "inspection" of their source code. Western partners willingly make Faustian bargains to contribute crown jewel technologies for the sake of immediate contracts. German companies that once supplied mag lev technology to their Chinese high-speed rail partners now find themselves shut out by newly born Chinese competitors. Last summer, GE made a similar deal involving its highly valuable, and militarily sensitive, avionics technology.

            If anything, the early Americans were even more brazen about their ambitions. Entrepreneurs advertised openly for skilled British operatives who were willing to risk arrest and imprisonment for sneaking machine designs out of the country. Tench Coxe, Alexander Hamilton's deputy at Treasury, created a system of bounties to entice sellers of trade secrets, and sent an agent to steal machine drawings, but he was arrested. While skilled operatives were happy to take U.S. bounties, few of them actually knew how to build the machines or how to run a cotton plant.

            The breakthrough came in the person of Samuel Slater. As a young farm boy, he served as an indentured apprentice to Jedidiah Strutt, one of the early developers of industrial-scale powered cotton spinning. As Strutt came to appreciate Slater's great talents, he employed him as an assistant in constructing and starting up new plants. (In his signed indenture, Slater promised to "faithfully ... serve [Strutt's] Secrets.")

            Worried about his future in England, Slater made the jump to the United States when he was 21, bringing an unusually deep background in mechanized spinning. Emigrating under an assumed name, he answered an ad from Moses Brown, a leading Providence merchant, who had been badly stung by ersatz British spinning machinery. Brown was sufficiently impressed by Slater to finance a factory partnership, and over the next 15 years, Slater, Brown, their partners, and the many people they trained created a powered thread-making empire that stretched throughout New England and down into the Middle Atlantic states. Former president Andrew Jackson called Slater "The Father of the American Industrial Revolution," the Brits called him "Slater the Traitor."

            The development implications were profound, for Slater and Lowell together jump-started American mass-production manufacturing, the essential ingredient in its startling 19th-century growth. The United States' present-day high technology could have much the same implications for China. There is no point appealing to Chinese ethics -- in the great game of nations, ethics don't enter into the conversation. Had Americans invented a magic telescope into British factories, they surely would have used it. A more appropriate response is to apply what some have called "innovation mercantilism": If Lowell had been reincarnated as an American consultant today, he could have told the multinationals to keep all Chinese out of their factories, no matter how friendly they seemed.

            中文译文:

            外链出处

            在1812年的夏天,载着商人弗朗西斯·卡伯特·洛厄尔及他家人的客轮被英国海军的一个中队拦截下,而所有船员及乘客被临时关押在了加拿大哈利法克斯的英军基地。拘留洛厄尔的人员被告知他有盗窃动力纺织机械设计图案——在英格兰而言是十分严重的犯罪行为——的嫌疑,亦将他的行李彻底搜查了多遍。洛厄尔确实犯下了这则设计盗窃罪,不过谨慎的他早已将蓝图印入了脑海。

            英国甚少应允外国人士参观本土的棉花加工设备。然而,洛厄尔是当时波斯顿英制布料进口商业的主角,因此跟众多英籍商人打下了扎实的人际关系。可以想象,洛厄尔是怎样在参观工厂时边装出意兴阑珊的样子,边详细地观察与谨记齿轮的造设和织布机的速度种种细节。在那个绅士的年代,美国从英国偷窃技术兴许是不名誉的做法。在今天,中国就是这个突发崛起的后进者,而美国却成为了防范抵制技术外流的霸权。对于中国而言,如今美国所挑起的角色同两百年前的英国毫无两样。今朝今日,美国海军咫尺中国边境的巡艇制造了无形的压力,况且美国力挺台湾酷似当年英国支持南部联邦的局面。最中央威胁最大的,则是美国针对中国政治现状喊起的民主口号。

            。。。。。。

            原文链接:

            外链出处

            • 家园 I put similar post before.

              America was pretty primitive in its early years.

              So Chinese back in China do not know that??? Piracy case was true. Without that guy, there was no textile machinery in America.

              Americans chose to copy/spy and be their own masters and FINALLY COME BACK TO COMPETE AGAINST EUROPEANS.

              But Canadians chose to be a raw material supplier for ever to the English empire.

              Two different strategies.

分页树展主题 · 全看首页 上页
/ 7
下页 末页


有趣有益,互惠互利;开阔视野,博采众长。
虚拟的网络,真实的人。天南地北客,相逢皆朋友

Copyright © cchere 西西河