下面是鄒老恆甫對經濟學的一大貢獻，把亞當﹣斯密好好敲了一下：

　　ML Wrote:

　　-

　　 Please stop with the trade imbalance nonsense.

　　 That had nothing to do with the recessions.

　　 Please read Adam Smith's the wealth of Nations.

　　In his 1776 book, Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith first laid out the theory that mercantilism hurts the economy of the country practicing it because it hurts consumers in order to benefit producers. He wrote:

　　Consumption is the sole end and purpose of all production; and the interest of the producer ought to be attended to only so far as it may be necessary for promoting that of the consumer. The maxim is so perfectly self-evident that it would be absurd to attempt to prove it. But in the mercantile system the interest of the consumer is almost constantly sacrificed to that of the producer; and it seems to consider production, and not consumption, as the ultimate end and object of all industry and commerce. (iv.8.49)

　　【亞當﹣斯密說話像一單純的小孩子！生產的目的就只有為了消費。可怜的理解能力。】

　　But Smith missed an important fact. The mercantilist country only misses out on consumption for a while and the victim country only gets increased consumption for a while. Eventually the growth of industry and income in the mercantilist country and the loss of industry and income in the victim country reverses the tide. As we noted in our book Trading Away Our Future:

　　In 1997, Peking University economics professor Heng-Fu Zou, a Senior Research Economist for the World Bank’s Development Research Group, showed, in an intriguing paper [“Dynamic Analysis of the Viner Model of Mercantilism”], that mercantilism can succeed on its own terms for a small economy. Accumulating foreign assets (running a trade surplus) leads to long term positive outcomes. “A nation with strong mercantilist sentiment ends up with large foreign asset accumulation and high consumption in the long run.” (p. 26)

　　In his 1936 book, The General Theory of Employment Interest and Money, John Maynard Keynes updated Smith’s mercantilism theory, pointing out:

　　(A) favorable [trade] balance, provided it is not too large, will prove extremely stimulating; whilst an unfavorable balance may soon produce a state of persistent depression. (p. 338)

　　 "一纸保证书能够走向学术？"

　　這就是中國全部學生欺騙鄒老的死證。

　　１９９１年至今天，他們進校和出國時都說要死命讀博士，死玩學問。

　　但是，他們後來只知玩色情，玩錢財，玩酒宴，玩小小權力，玩老婆，玩小秘，玩王巴。。。

　　從武大ＩＡＳ出來在中國當了教授的也沒繼續革命，曲學阿世而已！

　　陳丹青言國人三特色：奸滑，丫挺，好死不如癩活。

　　此三點言中恆甫所有學生和所謂門生故舊。

　　恒甫学社 在上文中提到：

　　CEMA是中国最学术的地方。

　　邹老师培养学术人才心情之急切堪为中国知识分子之典范。然若李敖《北京法源寺》开篇康有为问道之所述，行为之目的并不可成就合理之行为。

　　暑期课堂，如若邹老师可以顾忌同学们的学习时间而非偏离课堂，那么效率会更高。此言并非指邹老倡及阅读文献之微薄，而在事情之先后。教育本质在于发挥每人之潜能。邹老只顾研一中原先本院本科同学，而不顾及其他二十余人，此为违背教育之要义。更遑他们亦不过蜻蜓点水，不求甚解，此等教育法则是否有效，当时目以待。

　　同时据本人之调查，此三十余人读博者了了无几。吾等热心教育之人首要反思。学术是否可逼？我们之道路是否促进学术？一纸保证书能够走向学术？

　　另，自由之本质在于尊重。邹老在谈自由之时却忘记对他人之尊重，有妄邹老之形象。如果注意，邹老则更完美。

　　最后，邹老必定对此文大发雷霆。因为邹老从不听从他人意见。

　　至此，打住。

　　发布者 空虚(http://liuweigang1985.blog.sohu.com/)

　　2010-07-20 02:10

　　

　　 "一纸保证书能够走向学术？"

　　這就是中國全部學生欺騙鄒老的死證。

　　１９９１年至今天，他們進校和出國時都說要死命讀博士，死玩學問。

　　但是，他們後來只知玩色情，玩錢財，玩酒宴，玩小小權力，玩老婆，玩王巴。。。

　　從武大ＩＡＳ出來在中國當了教授的也沒繼續革命，曲學阿世而已！

　　陳丹青言國人三特色：奸滑，丫挺，好死不如癩活。

　　此三點言中恆甫所有學生和所謂門生故舊。

　　下面是鄒老恆甫對經濟學的一大貢獻，把亞當﹣斯密好好敲了一下：

　　ML Wrote:

　　-

　　 Please stop with the trade imbalance nonsense.

　　 That had nothing to do with the recessions.

　　 Please read Adam Smith's the wealth of Nations.

　　In his 1776 book, Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith first laid out the theory that mercantilism hurts the economy of the country practicing it because it hurts consumers in order to benefit producers. He correctly wrote:

　　Consumption is the sole end and purpose of all production; and the interest of the producer ought to be attended to only so far as it may be necessary for promoting that of the consumer. The maxim is so perfectly self-evident that it would be absurd to attempt to prove it. But in the mercantile system the interest of the consumer is almost constantly sacrificed to that of the producer; and it seems to consider production, and not consumption, as the ultimate end and object of all industry and commerce. (iv.8.49)

　　But Smith missed an important fact. The mercantilist country only misses out on consumption for a while and the victim country only gets increased consumption for a while. Eventually the growth of industry and income in the mercantilist country and the loss of industry and income in the victim country reverses the tide. As we noted in our book Trading Away Our Future:

　　In 1997, Peking University economics professor Heng-Fu Zou, a Senior Research Economist for the World Bank’s Development Research Group, showed, in an intriguing paper [“Dynamic Analysis of the Viner Model of Mercantilism”], that mercantilism can succeed on its own terms for a small economy. Accumulating foreign assets (running a trade surplus) leads to long term positive outcomes. “A nation with strong mercantilist sentiment ends up with large foreign asset accumulation and high consumption in the long run.” (p. 26)

　　In his 1936 book, The General Theory of Employment Interest and Money, John Maynard Keynes updated Smith’s mercantilism theory, pointing out:

　　(A) favorable [trade] balance, provided it is not too large, will prove extremely stimulating; whilst an unfavorable balance may soon produce a state of persistent depression. (p. 338)


转自Zou Heng-fu 博客http://blog.ce.cn/html/91/107991-609260.html