There is a famous saying of Mr. Hu Shi on the Internet, which goes like this:
A dirty country, if everyone doesn't talk about rules and morality, will eventually become a normal country with human feelings, and morality will naturally return gradually; A clean country will eventually degenerate into a dirty country full of hypocrites, if everyone doesn't talk about morality and nobility according to the rules, and talks about moral norms every day when nothing happens.
Although this passage is false, I agree with the general idea. Before waving a moral stick, see if you are a person who speaks rules and has a bottom line.
What is the basis of A-share market? Moral priority or rule priority?
First, the A-share market is out of date.
First of all, the stock market can't keep up with the growth rate of GDP, which is often a bull market and a bear market of GDP. 2065438+March 2005, Gwan Chin, Vice President of China Finance Association, published "Why is the stock market of the big country with the most" bull "economic growth the most" bear "? It is pointed out that from 1992 to 20 13, the correlation between A-share market and GDP growth is only 9.67%, which is far lower than that of almost all major economies.
The relevance of the United States is 46.3%, Japan is 65%, Germany is 84.7%, Britain is 54.4%, Brazil is 43.4%, and Russia is as high as 74.5%.
After strict screening of listed companies, why can't the return rate of holding their stocks for a long time keep up with the overall growth rate of GDP?
The main reason for this situation is that the stock market returns are not high. In 2000, I invested 1 yuan in the stock market and kept it. By 2065,438+04, there is 0.75 yuan left (excluding inflation, including cash dividends), so I might as well deposit it in the bank according to the current demand. After deducting inflation, the net value at the end of the period still reached 0.78 yuan. Comparatively speaking, the United States is 1.5 yuan, and India and Brazil, both emerging economies, are above 2 yuan. The stock market is not as good as the survival period.
The quality of listed companies is poor and their profits are not as good as those of non-listed companies. After thousands of listed companies were selected, they breathed a sigh of relief after crossing the wooden bridge, and the proportion of net profit was not as good as that of non-listed companies: from 2000 to 20 14, the overall annual net profit of all listed companies was between 13.7%-35. 1%, while that of non-listed companies was 64.9% in the same period. During the period of 15, the former lags far behind the latter every year without exception.
There are only three explanations for this paradox: first, listed companies make false profits before listing; Second, the profit after listing is poor; Third, even if they are profitable, they are not willing to pay dividends.
It is unrealistic for all companies to falsify, and it is impossible for profits to decline after listing. That is, in this case, it can only be said that listed companies do not need to establish a return culture, but can also obtain good market value through other means. In short, in the past, the A-share market paid more attention to financing than return.
Second, due to the poor credit soil, large-scale implementation of the registration system and large-scale delisting will lead to collapse.
At present, China stock market can only be marketized in a strict legal environment, and the current supervision and market means should be adapted to the credit difference of A-share market.
Some professionals pointed out that the registration system can prevent the regulatory authorities from seeking rent, which is a fact, but the current market has no basis for implementation. There are too many companies that want to go public, and the supply exceeds the demand. Whoever goes first, who goes later, and who goes to the board have huge rent-seeking space. At present, there are more than 3,000 A-share companies, which have been severely scolded by the regulatory authorities. What about 30,000 companies? What about half of the "fairy stocks"? What if 200 companies withdraw from the market every year? In a market with a majority of retail investors, the above practice will turn the A-share market into a slaughterhouse.
Don't forget the put warrants issued in the name of marketization. What was the result? Into a massacre.
Local governments also sell land in the name of marketization, and now real estate is too big to fail, which has a lot to do with local finance.
The marketization of A-shares needs to match the local credit base, which cannot be taken for granted. Otherwise, any so-called innovation in the name of marketization is just a new round of interest distribution. Look at the essence instead of the slogan.
Third, worry about the market game in the name of conscience.
If every moralist defends his own interests in the name of populism, the market will become the worst market.
A benign market should have room for interest game, so that the interests of all parties can be taken care of fairly under the premise of procedural justice. In addition, a benign market will form a culture of respecting procedures, because these procedures are tested. The bottom line that regulators should keep is that there will be no large-scale events that break through the legal bottom line.
For the securities market, the bottom line is that there is no insider trading, and there is no "bonus hunter" through information superiority. It is impossible to ban all insider trading, and it is impossible to make the shareholders who have insider information in the market become Lei Feng. So, what should regulators do? Prevent most violations, and prevent the market from becoming a lemon market where the inferior wins and the superior is eliminated.
A-share manipulation is not uncommon. Gengs once wrote a paper and made a sample analysis of market manipulation. The sample is 247 A-share listed companies in Shanghai in 20 10, and 282 listed companies in Shanghai in 2000-20 10. Is there insider trading?
In this paper, the announcement date of the high-proportion stock issuance and share conversion plan and the announcement date of the high-proportion allotment plan are taken as 0: 00 respectively. By analyzing the 30-day average excess return before and after 0: 00 and the results of T test, combined with the cumulative excess return curve, turnover rate curve and the calculation results of insider trading effect and announcement effect, it is found that there are obvious abnormal fluctuations in the stock price in the first few days of information disclosure. This shows that there is a greater probability of insider trading in listed companies with a high proportion of share transfer and share allotment before information release.
No high transfer? Or strictly investigate insider trading? In the case of more and more high turnover, we can only control the phenomenon of high turnover first, then strictly investigate insider trading at a lower cost, and then use European and American market means when the market credit improves. This is also the reason why the stock market is in the early stage of development and the supervision is particularly strong.
If laws and rules can make more than 70% people keep the bottom line (more than 30% people violate the rules, the market will be uncontrollable), the A-share market as a whole is a benign market; If most people don't follow the rules, this is a lemon market where the fittest survive.
Why did the A-share market stop issuing new shares to save the market from shocks? Because citric acid has reached a certain level, investors are afraid to try it. Why do you want to buy milk powder abroad? Because of the loss of credit to a certain extent, consumers can only discount the quality of domestic consumer goods as a whole.
The bottom line is maintained by law and culture, and a society with misplaced laws will be opaque. Whether the law is implemented in place depends on culture. If culture prevents most people from enforcing the law, the law will also become a dead letter.
Considering the cost of law enforcement, I have always advocated that the bottom line rules should be few and precise, so that most people can abide by them and avoid the phenomenon that the law does not blame the public. Once the rules are formulated, they must be strictly implemented to protect the dignity of the rules and greatly increase the cost of violation. This is how the American tax system works. There seems to be no problem with your tax evasion in cash transactions at ordinary times, but once it is discovered, it will be completely over.