世界第一对冲基金创始人：宏观解读滴滴和新东方的困境

通知

关注和订阅的读者有加入微信和电报读者群的机会，请在后台留下微信ID或者查看自动信息。

导读

近来滴滴和新东方的困境让很多观察家和投资人胆寒。本文转载翻译了Ray Dalio几天前在领英上发的一个长贴，从宏观上解读中国政府目前在资本市场上的动向。

Ray Dalio在20多岁的时候创立世界第一对冲基金桥水集团（Bridgewater Associates），他目前在世界富豪排名榜上排第79位。自从36年前进入中国后，Ray Dalio对中国经济有深入的观察，一直以来特别是在新冠之后更加看好中国经济的前景。

理解中国最近在其资本市场的动作

最近中国的政策动向有：1）滴滴的上市和对他数据使用的控制；2）中国的教育公司纷纷转向为非盈利。这些都让人对中国未来的资本主义和资本市场产生了疑问，在此我希望对所发生的一切做一些澄清。

我理解，对于那些在远距离旁观的人来说，这一切都让人困惑。36年前，我进入了中国，从那以后我发现，大部分的西方观察家没有机会直接接触到有拍板能力的中国决策者，同时对中国经济发展的细节也不甚了了。中国政府真的会运用资本市场来培养经济发展吗？这些人不相信。

对滴滴和新东方的动作，让这些人解读为中国政府反资本主义的真实意图的体现。实际上呢？中国过去40年道路清晰地指向运用资本市场发展市场经济的大方向，同时很多企业家投资人都发财了。所以说，这些西方观察家对中国发展的判断从来都是错的，可能会继续错下去。

具体而言，中国政府告诉滴滴，现在挂盘上市不是一个好时机，同时他们对数据隐私权的关注也是合理的。对于教育职业培训产业而言，政府旨在减低教育的不平等，降低那些发誓不让孩子输在起跑线上的父母的经济压力。如果这些父母的确需要为孩子争取这些教育机会，那么（政府）就努力普及这些教育机会。

中国政府坚信这些政策有利于国家，当然，投资人是不会高兴的。

我可以印证几个类似的（过去对中国政府政策的）错误解读。比如，中国零售业投资的泡泡破了，这导致了中国政府出面收购股票，甚至试图操纵市场。再有，中国央行拓宽日交易波幅，导致了2015-2016年度人民币的贬值。这些都让很多投资者认为找到了中国偏离资本市场的证据。

其实类似的政府干预现象，在很多外国的资本市场中多次出现。同时，美国的金融和货币政策的干涉程度之大，能让中国政府的类似行为好似小巫见大巫。但是，这些政策发生在中国，就让充满疑虑的投资人们认为是不合适，反自由市场的政府干涉。

但是，通过这些措施中国的决策者们成功地阻止了问题的恶化，他们达到了目的，也就是，他们行动的大方向从未变更。这一切有资本市场和企业活力的稳定快速的发展为佐证，有对外国投资的开放程度为佐证。所以我主张你们看中国要看整体趋势，而不是去误读和执拗于局部的摆动。

要理解这一切究竟是怎么回事，你需要理解中国在本质上是一个国家资本主义系统，也就是说政府在管理运作这个资本主义体系，目的是为了服务绝大多数人民的利益。拍板的人，他们要做对这个国家大部分国民有利的事情，他们不会被你们市场中人的多愁善感所挡了道儿。另一方面，这些投资人和资本家，他们必须理解在这个游戏规则中谁才是老大，否则就要为自己判断的失误而付出代价。比如，他们千万不要以为掌握了财富就是掌握了拍板权。

同时你们必须理解，在中国这样一个快速发展的资本市场环境中，政府也在摸索合适的调控手段。所以当他们的步子迈大了而且沟通不清晰的话，就会引发这种困惑，就会被误读为他们在实施反资本主义的政策。

另一个因素是全地缘政治大环境的变化也会导致（资本市场的）变化。比如美国政府的政策改变包括：1）对中国公司在美挂牌上市的政策的改变；2）威胁要禁止中国对美国养老基金的投资。

（投资人要）假定这些变化会成真并据此调整自己的投资策略。但是不要把这些局部摆动误读为整体趋势的改变，不要预期中国的国家资本主义会和西方的资本主义一模一样。

说了这么多，我也承认中国决策者们没有对这些动作背后的运筹进行公开明晰的沟通。

对于投资而言，中美的体系都有其机遇和风险，很可能会在未来互相竞争并且在竞争中更加多样化，他们都应该成为投资人投资组合中的重要部分。

我再一次劝你们不要让近期的波动把自己吓跑了，也不要把他们误读为一个已经存在几十年的大趋势的反转

。

Understanding China’s Recent Moves in Its Capital Markets

Recent Chinese policy moves related to 1) DiDi’s listing and controls on its data usage and 2) China’s education companies being converted into non-profits have created a lot of doubt about capitalism and capital markets in China, so I’d like to help clarify what’s going on there.

I understand that it’s confusing to people who are not close to what’s happening. Since I started going to China 36 years ago, I have found that most Western observers who do not have direct contact with policy makers’ and don’t follow in detail the patterns of the changes have tended to not believe that the Chinese Communist Party’s usage of capital markets to foster development is real. They interpret moves like these two recent ones as the Communist Party leaders showing their true anti-capitalist stripes even though the trend over the last 40 years has clearly been so strongly toward developing a market economy with capital markets, with entrepreneurs and capitalists becoming rich. As a result, they’ve missed out on what’s going on in China and probably will continue to miss out. In this case the policy makers signaled to DiDi that it might not be best to go ahead with the listing and they understandably want to deal with the data privacy issue. In the case of the educational tutoring companies they want to reduce the educational inequality and the financial burden on those who are desperate to have their children have these services but can’t afford them by making them broadly available. They believe that these things are better for the country even if the shareholders don’t like it.

I remember a number of such analogous misinterpretations. For example, I remember how the Chinese retail investor bubble bursting led to government stock buying and then the government trying to manipulate the market for a while. Also I remember the Chinese currency plunge in 2015-16 resulting from the PBoC widening the band and how that led to many investors pointing to these developments as evidence that policy makers were turning away from developing capital markets. Some skeptical investors looked at these moves as inappropriate anti-free market interventions even though these same moves happened many times in many capitalist markets and even though the fiscal and monetary policy interventions in the U.S. and other developed markets dwarf the Chinese government interventions in its markets. Through it all Chinese policy makers successfully managed the fallout and pursued their goals; i.e., the direction of their actions never changed. It has been in support of a fast and steady development of capital markets, entrepreneurship, and openness to investment to foreign investors. So I encourage you to look at the trends and not misunderstand and over-focus on the wiggles.

To understand what’s going on you need to understand that China is a state capitalist system which means that the state runs capitalism to serve the interests of most people and that policy makers won’t let the sensitivities of those in the capital markets and rich capitalists stand in the way of doing what they believe is best for the most people of the country. Rather, those in the capital markets and capitalists have to understand their subordinate places in the system or they will suffer the consequences of their mistakes. For example, they need to not mistake their having riches for having power for determining how things will go.

You also need to understand that in this rapidly developing capital markets environment Chinese regulators are figuring out appropriate regulations so, when they are changing fast and aren’t clear, that causes these sorts of confusions, which can be misconstrued to be anti-capitalist moves.

Also, you need to understand that the global geopolitical environment changing leads to some changes. You can see that reflected in the U.S. governments’ policy shifts such as a) changing its policies about Chinese companies’ listings in the United States and b) threats to prohibit American pension funds from investing in China.

Assume such things will happen in the future and invest accordingly. But don’t misinterpret these wiggles as changes in trends, and don’t expect this Chinese state-run capitalism to be exactly like Western capitalism.

Having said that, I do think that it is unfortunate that Chinese policy makers don’t publicly communicate the reasoning behind their moves more clearly.

As for investing, as I see it the American and Chinese systems and markets both have opportunities and risks and are likely to compete with each other and diversify each other. Hence they both should be considered as important parts of one’s portfolio. I urge you to not misinterpret these sorts of moves as reversals of the trends that have existed for the last several decades and let that scare you away.

（图片来自网络）

参考资料：

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/understanding-chinas-recent-moves-its-capital-markets-ray-dalio/

（如果喜欢本文，请点击最下方六角形的“在看” Wow）

通知

关注和订阅的读者有加入微信和电报读者群的机会，请在后台留下微信ID或者查看自动信息。

Email 联系：[email protected]