"Currency war" why is nonsense
------- Questioned Lang Professor
Professor Lang has recently published an article on the Internet, to criticize "currency war" book. The article said that "in 2007 had a best-selling book called" currency war ", you have seen yet? 10 million Do not look, nonsense, and if the financial speculators is that level, we can titter, and my understanding of international financial speculators operate techniques of complex and ambiguous relations between governments, their use of funds is a large is your inconceivable, if like that book written on the point on the level, in order to make money to assassinate the U.S. president, it is third-rate level, people earn money is willing to give him our, ourselves do not know, this is the first-class level, this is truly an international financial speculators. the kind of money to kill, like the book, "Currency War "there's talk, and that is third-rate people. also to kill U.S. President, funny ah, if killing is wrong how. I'm not reading this book, I just turned a bit on the Yaran smile, you know my heart is how to think? I feel sad for the international financial speculators. "
I read these words, Professor Lang felt tremendous surprise! I even suspect that this is not admired in my mind, the nationally renowned for the words of Professor Lang. Well-known "no investigation, no right to speak," but Professor Lang said to myself, "I'm not reading this book, I just turned a bit on the Yaran smile" even cautions readers "Do not look, nonsense", which too arbitrary. Do not look able to conclude that it was all nonsense, is it not nonsense Mody? !
SONG compiled by the soldiers of the "currency war" book, is a friend of mine lent me a reading, the fancy was attracted few pages, so let's granddaughter bought me from the Internet 1.
I read this book, the deep reflections of the justified, saying that the proper way. May be due to my financial, currency is the layman can not see where nonsense. With all you know words, the speaker of innocence, I would like to talk about his own humble opinion, may be nonsense.
A long time, my mind there is a mystery: the overall socialist public ownership is a mistake, can engage in capitalism and privatization of the overall right?
After the test in practice, we have to admit that the overall socialist public ownership is indeed a mistake, it would be wrong in the "full" word. "This world Are the public." The all-inclusive national economy, regardless of size, as large as the lifeline of the national economy, such as banking, mining, railway, civil aviation, military (which should be publicly owned), the small people's daily necessities, and even Youyanjiangcu, I think China, swing stalls, and basketry baskets prepared small business operators and the traveling salesman (which should not be publicly owned), the implementation of all these questions are of public ownership by the government arrangements. Does not allow private ownership in any way. Once a little bit of the tail of capitalism is necessary to resolutely cut off. This has got to put the public of extreme, absolute, single-oriented, the result is extremes meet. Should not be public because the public ownership is also oriented, and so that people's enthusiasm, initiative has been devoid of flexibility was constrained. Not only failed to liberate the productive forces, but to limit, bound even destroy productivity. People are not onto the common wealth, but poverty and embark on a common path. People do not like this kind of socialist, despite the lip service and singing a good song of socialism, but the thinking and action, always wanted to go to capitalism, the Berlin Wall was unstoppable. Finally led to the Soviet Union and Eastern upheaval, the collapse of socialism. This is neither a joint 14 imperialist countries armed intervention, but not Hitler's cruel oppression under siege, nor is the United States, peaceful evolution, but the people who abandoned the tradition of socialist public ownership of this exclusively.
The overall socialist public ownership is a mistake, should the overall privatization of capitalism and the right effect?
After the Soviet Union and Eastern upheaval, the US-led Western capitalist countries, is schadenfreude, but also more convinced of their overall privatization is entirely correct. And the identity of the teacher, making indiscreet comments. Especially in the accession to WTO issues, some countries erect pick his nose, Wang hypercritical. They went so far as the overall privatization and market economy open to the same, who have not traveled a comprehensive privatization, there are still some countries state-owned enterprises, have been labeled a "do not have a full market-based" zero volumes.
Proven that, it is undeniable that the overall privatization of capitalism, and the socialist public ownership of a comprehensive, just as wrong, and equally wrong in the "full" word, regardless of size, were all privatized. This should not put the privatization of the national economy has also privatized. Especially the banks, the economic lifeline of the utmost importance, since privatization, bringing endless catastrophe.
"Currency war" book, a large amount of irrefutable historical facts, discusses the bank was privatized, as the freed themselves from Zhou Fu, like the devil, stirred up trouble in exchange for plundering the wealth of people with their blood and sweat.
As the bank's privatization, the formation of a small number of financial oligarchs, they can be rich With the enemy's wealth with the government the right to compete for currency. In this battle, many of country's president, was assassinated out, with the U.S. president was assassinated, more than the Normandy landings of World War II the U.S. military casualty rate. This is a historical fact that no one can deny, how can you say is nonsense. Of course, this battle to win the currency of the right financial oligarchs, the president orders end up in the financial oligarchs, it now goes without again to assassinate the President of the. This is the talk by Professor Lang's financial speculators ambiguous relations with the government, that is, government has become a tool of the financial oligarchy. Financial oligarchy get money after the distribution rights, but also abolished the gold standard, into a paper-based. 100 U.S. dollars bill for printing costs only a sub-cents, so profits from currency, to give financial oligarchs to bring tens of thousands of times more of the profits. In this way, financial oligarchy as war maniacs mastered the "nuclear weapons", as acted in a self-yun, covered in hand to rain. Could provoke a world war; can create an economic crisis, the financial crisis; could damage the relationship between market supply and demand, free to bring the price of a barrel of oil soared to 174 U.S. dollars, but also be allowed to plunge to 30 U.S. dollars. They are a means of using such a crime, like vampires draw the same people of the world's wealth. The Lang Professor of treated these vampires is praised as "first-class, the most outstanding talents of financial manipulation" is "elites." I read this somewhat like a nonsense. To ask, if not a bank privatization, if not the financial oligarchs currency monopoly rights and the abolition of the gold standard, that is, day-old genius can not be such a trouble and plunder as a mountain, such as the sea's wealth. Conversely, if the right to monopolize the currency, abolished the gold standard, that is fool can make big money, why does first-class talents.
There is another point that I am most can not agree, Professor Lang to belittle China has no talent. He said, "We Chinese have 1.3 billion people, including Lang, including The saddest thing is that we do not know that we do not own people." China really do not have talents? Professor Lang has been hailed as "the best, the most outstanding financial operations personnel" In my opinion, it's not talent, is the only magic is the vampire. China now does not and will not be. Only those who can promote economic development, social progress, and benefit the people of the elite is the real talent. That kind of person is not only China but also around the world first-class. This is our reform and opening up, Comrade Xiaoping, chief architect, he designed a socialism with Chinese characteristics, so that China's economy continues to thirty high-speed large-scale development.
Ownership of socialism with Chinese characteristics is the world's first, Comrade Deng Xiaoping as the pressure in both the private ownership of the foot of the Monkey King to liberate the five elements, the release of enormous productivity, but also to give it labeled as "inhibition", which upholds the lifeline of the national economy --- banks, railway, mining, military, etc., especially in the hands of banks controlled by the State, so Monkey can not become a villain. China's ownership, neither the overall public ownership, but not completely privatized, but the diversity of both public and private. Both public, another private ownership; not only rely on the government, but also by the market; both the macro-control, but also micro-invigorate; both independent, but also with the world. This is my friend Professor Wu's phrase "multi-interaction." It is this "multiple interaction", the Chinese economy continues three decades of rapid development; is precisely this "multiple interaction" from the Asian financial crisis of the disaster; or is it because of this "multiple interaction" in the current world financial crisis minimal damage, although the "gates of fire, affecting fish pond," but the fundamentals of China's economy or to maintain the normal, the economy still growing steadily. Unlike the Eastern European countries has nearly sunk. They sink into the underlying reason for this is because of the overall privatization, in particular, that more than 90% of the banks by foreign financial oligarchs control.
Now China has become a world model of a model, all countries are in the research study. However, Professor Lang was timid and lamented China has no talent. If China is not a talent, how can we become a world model for it!
Liu Feng-chang
2009-5
This is my father's recent article
Liu Nebula
