In the absence of violation of the law, the pursuit of maximizing personal interests in the market is the right of entrepreneurs. The government has neither the power to intervene and the power to sit on the rent. In the past three decades, China's private enterprises have achieved amazing development. In the 1980s, the private economy was not recognized in China. The government implemented the "three no principles" for the private economy of more than eight people, that is, "not advocating, not propagating, not suppressing." Thirty years later, more than 8.4 million registered private enterprises, accounting for 74% of the total number of enterprises, contributed to the GDP from less than 1% to more than 60%, while the private economy provided 76% of the government. Taxes and 80% of social employment. In the 30 years of this storm, a large number of private entrepreneurs have emerged. They are not only household names in China but also become idols of young people. They are attracting more and more attention from the media abroad. In 2009, Alibaba founder Ma Yun became one of the world's most influential 100 figures selected by Time magazine. Among the 50 most influential people selected by Vanity Fair magazine in 2011, Baidu President Li Yanhong was ranked No. 25; the new "China's richest man" Sany Heavy Industry Chairman Liang Wengen won the "Wall Street Journal" Asian business leader nomination, and Geely Chairman Li Shufu is called "China's Henry Ford." However, the media seems to focus more on the political and economic environment in which Chinese private entrepreneurs are located. This living environment largely determines the fate of Chinese private entrepreneurs and the rise and fall of China's private economy. Financing difficulties Financing difficulties are a common problem faced by China's private economy, especially for SMEs. Everyone knows that China is “not bad moneyâ€, but according to the World Bank report, among the more than 8.4 million private enterprises, the loans that can be obtained from banks are not more than 0.5%. The main financing channels for SMEs are limited to their own funds and Financing between relatives and friends. Why is private enterprise financing so difficult? The root of the problem lies in China's lack of a sound financial market. A perfect financial market allows free flow of funds, allowing human capital and capital to be combined and functioning effectively; an imperfect financial system separates the two, resulting in double waste of human capital and capital resources. Let's take a look at the financing history of a US company. In 1976, an American youth decided to drop out of school to produce a computer of his own design. His initial financing includes an investment of $90,000 from a millionaire angel, $250,000 from a commercial bank, and $600,000 in venture capital. After that, the company developed smoothly and successfully listed and issued shares after 4 years. Since the US company listing system is a “registration systemâ€, as long as the company meets the open standards, it can be listed for financing. The company's IPO is $22 per share, with 4.6 million shares issued for the first time and $100 million in financing. In October, when its latest product was launched, the company became the largest company in the US with a market value of more than $390 billion. Because the cash is extremely abundant, the company chose not to issue any claims, but if needed, the US corporate bond market with more than 7.7 trillion US dollars can help him with bond financing, which is equivalent to 53% of US GDP. You must have guessed that this company is known as Apple. Apple's success has a lot to do with Jobs, but the mature US capital market is undoubtedly a solid backing for Apple's rapid development. Some people ask why China can't get Steve Jobs. There are many answers, but one reason is that the financing channels of Chinese private enterprises are too narrow. Imagine if Jobs started a business in China, it was difficult for him to get a bank credit loan at the beginning of his business. This is because in the absence of interest rate marketization, a large number of bank loans were occupied by state-owned enterprises. Small businesses have to turn to the private lending market, but the average annual interest there is as high as 40%. Venture capital does not necessarily help, because China's venture capital is basically entering the enterprise at maturity, and companies that accept venture capital will go public on average two years later. This time is later than the US company accepts venture capital. The time to market is much shorter. Therefore, the initial financing of the company is extremely difficult. Even if Jobs was lucky enough to get the initial investment, when he was ambitiously preparing for listing financing, he found that in China, the company was listed on the “approval system†and the actual operation was “audit systemâ€. In other words, the key to whether a company can be listed is not whether it meets the open standards, but whether it can get a limited listing share from the competent authorities. There are two problems with this planned economic listing: first, the tight share of the listing cannot meet the needs of the market; second, sometimes the government will allocate the share of the listing to state-owned enterprises with poor asset quality and solve it through the stock market. With regard to funding, private enterprises with good qualifications can only be self-defeating. Jobs is still reluctant, he hopes to finance through the bond market, but China's corporate bond market is about 770 billion US dollars, accounting for 11% of China's GDP, only about one-tenth of US corporate bonds. With a population that accounts for a quarter of the world's total, China is by no means unlikely to produce Jobs-style talent, but without a sound financial system, it is difficult for genius to achieve a career. If we can let go of unreasonable controls and let the financial market develop naturally to meet the needs of the market, then our private enterprises will explode with amazing energy. Government-enterprise relations In November 2011, the British "Financial Times" reported that Alibaba founder Ma Yun, Baidu CEO Li Yanhong, Tencent CEO Ma Tenghua and Sina CEO Cao Guowei and other Chinese network giants gathered in Beijing. Interestingly, they are not attending IT summits or charitable fundraising, but are called "class" by the National Internet Information Office. After the "Network Culture Construction Seminar" ended, IT leaders "agreed that Internet companies should strengthen self-management, self-discipline, and strict self-discipline." Foreign media are hard to understand the relationship between Chinese companies and the government. "We have been in love, but we will not get married." This is the subtle interpretation of Alibaba's relationship with the government when Ma Yun, chairman of Alibaba's board of directors, spoke at Stanford University this year. In the eyes of foreign media, Chinese entrepreneurs need to maintain a delicate relationship with the government. On the one hand, because China has not completely shaken off the shadow of the planned economy, the government has taken control of too many social resources and set limits. Therefore, in many cases, the most important thing for private enterprises is not to develop and innovate in products, technologies, markets, etc., but to seek rents from the government, that is, enterprises have to spend huge costs and establish "relationships" with the government to obtain "Concession," because privilege itself means huge economic benefits, and usually excess profits. On the other hand, the inconsistency between enterprises and the government also makes it impossible for enterprises to get rid of the political vortex. Business leaders are often imprisoned behind the imprisonment. Entrepreneurs who originally pursued economic interests have also become victims of political games. In the case of public power, the law does not authorize it; in the case of private rights, the law does not prohibit it. In the absence of violation of the law, the pursuit of maximizing personal interests in the market is the right of entrepreneurs. The government has neither the power to intervene and the power to sit on the rent. In this way, political and business can be separated, entrepreneurs do not have to spend their money to please the government, and do not have to worry about their own political risks. At the same time, the pressure of government corruption has also decreased a lot, and most importantly, when the government withdraws from the field that should not be involved. Do not use the government's "tangible feet" to step on the market "invisible hand." The market economy is functioning, and the economic decisions made by thousands of economic individuals are far superior to those of the government's deliberate plan. Property Security “They are used to holding ample cash, dual citizenship and many backup plans.†Chinese businessmen seem to have a lack of security in the eyes of Southeast Asian media. It is not difficult to understand that although Chinese are the richest in many countries in Southeast Asia, property security is sometimes threatened. But recently, foreign media about China's high-net-worth individuals competing to emigrate overseas feels that this "insecurity" is spreading in China. According to Forbes magazine, 60% of high net worth individuals with assets of more than 10 million yuan are preparing to emigrate overseas. Of the rich people with assets of over 100 million yuan, 27% have already moved overseas, and 47% are considering leaving China. The author has visited many overseas Chinese in the United States for a year. For them, Chinese food, Chinese folk, and rhyme can always evoke a strong nostalgia. If so, why do the rich people in China still have to "collectively leave"? The answer is simple. They have no sense of security at home. The collective departure of a rich country is a great irony. Many of them are excellent entrepreneurs, and the country has spent a lot of money to train a group of elites, but in the end they can't keep them. The loss of entrepreneurs is a terrible phenomenon, because we lose not only wealth, but more importantly, talent, and confidence in the country. We need to retain the rich and need to rebuild the private property rights system to protect private property from public power. The private property rights system is the most basic system for social innovation and progress, because it is not the passionate patriotic slogan that is inspiring people to work tirelessly, not the illusory social ideal, but the real personal wealth.
Item name: Ferrous Oxalate Dihydrate
Search number: [CAS 6047-25-2]
Molecular formula: FeC2O4.2H2O
Molecular weight: 179.89
Properties: light yellow powder crystallization, slightly soluble in water, soluble in dilute acid, melting point 160 degrees, heated to 190 degrees when the decomposition of iron oxide; is the production of lithium iron phosphate quality materials.
Use: used as a photographic developer, for the pharmaceutical industry, battery grade Ferrous Oxalate can be used as cathode materials of lithium iron phosphate materials.
Ferrous Oxalate
Ferrous Oxalate,Ferrous Oxalate Dihydrate,Additive Ferrous Oxalate
Xi'An Lanzhiguang Fine Material CO.Ltd , http://www.lanzhiguangchem.com