中财网粤菜顶级:教育：中国经济上行的硬伤（中英）
来源：百度文库 编辑：中财网 时间：2024/05/05 19:48:36
Both bulls and bears like to compare Japan in the 1960s and China in 2010. Bulls say the comparison offers China a well-trodden path to a modern, high-tech economic future. Bears point to Japan’s asset bubbles in the 1980s, the subsequent crash, and the lost decade that followed.
Today a note by MF Global’s Nicholas Smith - provocatively entitled ‘The Sweatshop that Roared’ - came out on the side of the bears, warning that 1960s Japan was in much better shape than today’s China, principally because of one thing: education.
While policymakers in the western world fret about the many millions of graduates being churned out of China’s universities every year, Smith points not to the number, but to the quality of those graduates. Take engineers:
The educational system produces far too few properly trained engineers. McKinsey did a study of China’s looming talent shortage in a 2005 report, interviewing 83 HR professionals involved in hiring in low-wage countries: it concluded that only 10% of China’s graduate job candidates are suitable for employment by multinationals. Small wonder foreign companies in China complain of a talent shortage.
For those graduates that do find a job, there’s another problem.
Pay for recent graduates is below that for unskilled migrant workers and over a million remained unemployed – a sign the education system is tragically failing the parents that saved for it, and the economy generally.
Japan, says Smith, laid the foundations of its high-tech industry with education reforms dating back to the late 19th centry - which helped boost school attendance and literacy rates. China, by comparison, is still suffering from the legacy of the Cultural Revolution:
The effects are felt not only in the thinness of the cream in industry senior management, but also in the quality of leadership and mentoring in universities. A recent study by the Chinese government revealed that a third of the 6,000 scientists at 6 of the country’s top institutions admitted to plagiarism or the outright fabrication of research data.
As Jiang Xueqin wrote on China Power:
as long as the Communist Party controls the universities, they’ll continue to be political bureaucracies where professors care more about serving the agenda of some bureaucrat and fraud and cheating will become even more pervasive ‘non-problems’.
So what is the upshot of all this?
Essentially, Smith says that China will not follow Japan, and that it cannot forever be an export-driven economy. Wages will have to rise, growth will have to slow. The summary of his note presents a gloomy picture:
[China's] growth has come at the expense of wages, and discontent is bubbling to the surface in unseemly riots that make Japanese companies nervous about investing. By chaining its currency to the dollar it has manacled its monetary policy to US monetary policy, which is already resulting in disturbing asset bubbles reminiscent of those that humbled Japan.
Economic growth is likely to slow over the next 2-3 years, dashing the expectations of its citizens, with serious risks to stability at home and relations with its neighbours. China investments are no longer fire-and-forget.
乐观者和悲观者都喜欢把上世纪60年代的日本与今天的中国进行比较。乐观者表示，这一对比为中国提供了一条通向现代高科技经济未来的坦途。而悲观者则提到日本上世纪80年代的资产泡沫、以及随后的崩盘和再往后的“失去的十年”。
近日，MF Global的尼古拉斯?史密斯(Nicholas Smith)发表的一份报告站在了悲观者这边。报告题目具有煽动性，叫作《咆哮的血汗工厂》。他告诫我们，上世纪60年代日本的状况远远好于现在的中国，主要原因在于一点：教育。
中国大学每年培养出数百万大学毕业生，这一数字令西方世界的政策制定者触目惊心，但史密斯并不关注数量，而是关注这些毕业生的素质。以工程师为例：
中国教育系统培养出的接受过合格培训的工程师数量太少。麦肯锡(McKinsey)在2005年的一份报告中，对中国即将出现的人才短缺进行了调查。该公司采访了在低工资国家负责招聘的83名人力资源专家，而后得出结论：只有10%的大学毕业生应聘者够格在跨国公司工作。难怪在华外企会抱怨人才短缺。
对于那些找到工作的毕业生而言，还有另外一个问题。
新近毕业的大学生，薪资水平甚至不及技能不高的农民工，此外还有100多万毕业生仍未找到工作。这表明，教育系统令人遗憾地辜负了为教育子女辛苦攒钱的家长的期望，也辜负了整个中国经济的期望。
史密斯表示，凭借可追溯到19世纪末的教育改革，日本为本国高科技行业奠定了基础——那些改革帮助提高了入学率和识字率。相比之下，中国今天仍受到文革遗留问题的影响。
这些影响不仅仅体现在行业高级管理人才缺乏，还体现在大学的领导与辅导质量方面。中国政府最近的一项调查发现，在中国六所顶尖大学的6000名科学家中，有三分之一承认有过剽窃或直接伪造研究数据行为。
正如江学勤在《中国式崛起之路》(China Power)中写到的那样：
只要共产党还把控大学，它们就会继续沦为政治官僚机构。在那里，教授们更关心的是为某些官僚的议程服务，会有越来越多的人认为欺诈“不是什么问题”。
那么这一切的结果会是什么呢？
史密斯表示，从本质上来说，中国不会走上日本的道路，它也不可能一直维持出口驱动型的经济。薪资肯定会上涨，增长也肯定会放缓。他报告的摘要展示出一幅令人沮丧的画面：
（中国的）增长是以牺牲薪资为代价的，不满情绪在一些有失妥当的骚乱中逐渐浮出水面，这些骚乱令日本企业对投资感到担心。由于人民币盯住美元，中国的货币政策就与美国的货币政策紧紧拴在一起，这已然导致令人不安的资产泡沫，让人不由得想起当时日本是如何被挫败的。
未来两三年，中国的经济增长很可能会放缓，这会打击中国民众的预期，同时对国内稳定及中国与邻国的关系构成严重风险。在中国投资将不再是一劳永逸的事情。
Today a note by MF Global’s Nicholas Smith - provocatively entitled ‘The Sweatshop that Roared’ - came out on the side of the bears, warning that 1960s Japan was in much better shape than today’s China, principally because of one thing: education.
While policymakers in the western world fret about the many millions of graduates being churned out of China’s universities every year, Smith points not to the number, but to the quality of those graduates. Take engineers:
The educational system produces far too few properly trained engineers. McKinsey did a study of China’s looming talent shortage in a 2005 report, interviewing 83 HR professionals involved in hiring in low-wage countries: it concluded that only 10% of China’s graduate job candidates are suitable for employment by multinationals. Small wonder foreign companies in China complain of a talent shortage.
For those graduates that do find a job, there’s another problem.
Pay for recent graduates is below that for unskilled migrant workers and over a million remained unemployed – a sign the education system is tragically failing the parents that saved for it, and the economy generally.
Japan, says Smith, laid the foundations of its high-tech industry with education reforms dating back to the late 19th centry - which helped boost school attendance and literacy rates. China, by comparison, is still suffering from the legacy of the Cultural Revolution:
The effects are felt not only in the thinness of the cream in industry senior management, but also in the quality of leadership and mentoring in universities. A recent study by the Chinese government revealed that a third of the 6,000 scientists at 6 of the country’s top institutions admitted to plagiarism or the outright fabrication of research data.
As Jiang Xueqin wrote on China Power:
as long as the Communist Party controls the universities, they’ll continue to be political bureaucracies where professors care more about serving the agenda of some bureaucrat and fraud and cheating will become even more pervasive ‘non-problems’.
So what is the upshot of all this?
Essentially, Smith says that China will not follow Japan, and that it cannot forever be an export-driven economy. Wages will have to rise, growth will have to slow. The summary of his note presents a gloomy picture:
[China's] growth has come at the expense of wages, and discontent is bubbling to the surface in unseemly riots that make Japanese companies nervous about investing. By chaining its currency to the dollar it has manacled its monetary policy to US monetary policy, which is already resulting in disturbing asset bubbles reminiscent of those that humbled Japan.
Economic growth is likely to slow over the next 2-3 years, dashing the expectations of its citizens, with serious risks to stability at home and relations with its neighbours. China investments are no longer fire-and-forget.
乐观者和悲观者都喜欢把上世纪60年代的日本与今天的中国进行比较。乐观者表示，这一对比为中国提供了一条通向现代高科技经济未来的坦途。而悲观者则提到日本上世纪80年代的资产泡沫、以及随后的崩盘和再往后的“失去的十年”。
近日，MF Global的尼古拉斯?史密斯(Nicholas Smith)发表的一份报告站在了悲观者这边。报告题目具有煽动性，叫作《咆哮的血汗工厂》。他告诫我们，上世纪60年代日本的状况远远好于现在的中国，主要原因在于一点：教育。
中国大学每年培养出数百万大学毕业生，这一数字令西方世界的政策制定者触目惊心，但史密斯并不关注数量，而是关注这些毕业生的素质。以工程师为例：
中国教育系统培养出的接受过合格培训的工程师数量太少。麦肯锡(McKinsey)在2005年的一份报告中，对中国即将出现的人才短缺进行了调查。该公司采访了在低工资国家负责招聘的83名人力资源专家，而后得出结论：只有10%的大学毕业生应聘者够格在跨国公司工作。难怪在华外企会抱怨人才短缺。
对于那些找到工作的毕业生而言，还有另外一个问题。
新近毕业的大学生，薪资水平甚至不及技能不高的农民工，此外还有100多万毕业生仍未找到工作。这表明，教育系统令人遗憾地辜负了为教育子女辛苦攒钱的家长的期望，也辜负了整个中国经济的期望。
史密斯表示，凭借可追溯到19世纪末的教育改革，日本为本国高科技行业奠定了基础——那些改革帮助提高了入学率和识字率。相比之下，中国今天仍受到文革遗留问题的影响。
这些影响不仅仅体现在行业高级管理人才缺乏，还体现在大学的领导与辅导质量方面。中国政府最近的一项调查发现，在中国六所顶尖大学的6000名科学家中，有三分之一承认有过剽窃或直接伪造研究数据行为。
正如江学勤在《中国式崛起之路》(China Power)中写到的那样：
只要共产党还把控大学，它们就会继续沦为政治官僚机构。在那里，教授们更关心的是为某些官僚的议程服务，会有越来越多的人认为欺诈“不是什么问题”。
那么这一切的结果会是什么呢？
史密斯表示，从本质上来说，中国不会走上日本的道路，它也不可能一直维持出口驱动型的经济。薪资肯定会上涨，增长也肯定会放缓。他报告的摘要展示出一幅令人沮丧的画面：
（中国的）增长是以牺牲薪资为代价的，不满情绪在一些有失妥当的骚乱中逐渐浮出水面，这些骚乱令日本企业对投资感到担心。由于人民币盯住美元，中国的货币政策就与美国的货币政策紧紧拴在一起，这已然导致令人不安的资产泡沫，让人不由得想起当时日本是如何被挫败的。
未来两三年，中国的经济增长很可能会放缓，这会打击中国民众的预期，同时对国内稳定及中国与邻国的关系构成严重风险。在中国投资将不再是一劳永逸的事情。