橋水CEO領英文章：瞭解中國資本市場最近的動向_風聞

Ray Dalio Co-Chief Investment Officer & Co-Chairman of Bridgewater Associates, L.P.

中國最近的政策舉措包括1)滴滴出行上市和對其數據使用的控制，2)中國的教育公司被轉型為非營利組織，這些都引發了人們對中國資本主義和資本市場的許多質疑，所以我想幫助澄清這其中的原因。我知道這讓不瞭解情況的人很困惑。自從我開始在中國36年前,我發現大多數西方觀察人士沒有直接接觸決策者和不遵守詳細模式的變化往往不相信中共使用資本市場促進發展是真實的。他們將最近的這兩次行動解釋為共產黨領導人展示了他們真正的反資本主義的一面，儘管過去40年的趨勢明顯是如此強烈地傾向於發展資本市場的市場經濟，企業家和資本家變得富有。因此，他們錯過了中國正在發生的事情，可能還會繼續錯過。在這種情況下，政策制定者向滴滴表示，繼續上市可能不是最好的，他們希望解決數據隱私問題，這是可以理解的。在教育輔導公司的情況下，他們想減少教育不平等和財政負擔，那些人迫切希望讓他們的孩子有這些服務，但不能負擔他們的廣泛提供。他們相信這些東西對國家更好，即使股東們不喜歡。我記得有許多類似的誤解。例如，我記得中國散户投資者泡沫破裂導致政府購買股票，然後政府試圖操縱市場一段時間。我還記得2015-16年中國央行擴大匯率浮動區間導致人民幣大幅貶值，並導致許多投資者將這些情況視為政策制定者正在遠離發展中的資本市場的證據。一些持懷疑態度的投資者將這些舉措視為不恰當的反自由市場干預，儘管同樣的舉措在許多資本主義市場發生過多次，儘管美國和其他發達市場的財政和貨幣政策干預令中國政府對其市場的干預相形見絀。在整個過程中，中國的政策制定者都成功地應對了影響，並實現了自己的目標;也就是説，他們的行動方向從未改變。它一直支持資本市場的快速穩定發展、企業家精神和對外國投資者的投資開放。所以我鼓勵你們關注趨勢，不要誤解和過度關注波動。瞭解發生了什麼,你需要明白,中國是一個國家資本主義制度，這意味着國家為大多數人的利益服務,政策制定者不會讓那些在資本市場的敏感和豐富的資本家妨礙做他們相信對大多數人是最好的事的國家。相反，那些在資本市場和資本家必須明白他們在系統中的從屬地位，否則他們將為自己的錯誤承擔後果。例如，他們不需要錯誤地認為自己擁有財富就意味着有權決定事情的發展。你還需要明白，在這個快速發展的資本市場環境中，中國監管機構正在制定適當的監管規定，因此，當它們變化迅速而不明確時，就會導致這些混亂，這可能會被誤解為反資本主義的舉動。此外，你需要了解全球地緣政治環境的變化導致了一些變化。你可以從美國政府的政策轉變中看到這一點，例如a)改變對中國公司在美上市的政策，b)威脅禁止美國養老基金在中國投資。假設未來會發生這樣的事情，然後進行相應的投資。但不要誤解這些波動是趨勢的變化，也不要指望中國的國有資本主義會和西方資本主義一模一樣。話雖如此，但我確實認為，不幸的是，中國政策制定者沒有公開地更清楚地傳達其舉措背後的原因。在投資方面，我認為中美兩國的體制和市場既有機會，也有風險，可能相互競爭，相互多樣化。因此，它們都應該被視為個人作品集的重要組成部分。我敦促你們不要誤解這些走勢，認為它們是過去幾十年存在的趨勢的逆轉，不要讓它們把你們嚇跑。

Understanding China’s Recent Moves in Its Capital MarketsRay Dalio Co-Chief Investment Officer & Co-Chairman of Bridgewater Associates, L.P.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.