I believe everyone has seen this news, and many places have recently introduced this policy, that is, to voluntarily withdraw from the homestead reward of 50,000 yuan, and then use this money plus the hard-earned money that you have struggled for a lifetime to pay a down payment in the city, and bear a 30-year mortgage, and since then your life has been completely handed over to the capitalist. In fact, before that, in July 2014, some experts had already called for the formulation of this policy, which shows that some "experts" have never died in their hearts. Let's imagine if there is no homestead, will the next step be to contract land, once the peasants have no land, what can they rely on to survive, and rely on working for the capitalists to accept exploitation? Fortunately, the mainland constitution was prescient at the beginning of its formulation, and Article 6 stipulates that rural land shall be collectively owned. Although this article restricts many black hands reaching out to the countryside to a certain extent, in recent years, some people have been changing ways to shake this foundation, such as circulation, ownership, and so on.
Despite this, some capitalists have tried all kinds of methods, but they are still unable to break through the provisions of the Constitution. It is precisely because of this that the land in the rural areas of the mainland is still firmly in the hands of the peasants and will not be annexed and embezzled by some financial capitalists. In fact, we all know that since ancient times, the countryside has been an important guarantee of the state, since the founding of the People's Republic of China, the countryside has always been the carrier of resolving various social crises, when hundreds of thousands of unemployed homeless people did not have jobs, the state timely launched the policy of going to the mountains and going to the countryside, the purpose of which is actually to solve the employment problem. A few decades ago, when it was necessary to repay the foreign debt of the Soviet Union, it was the vast countryside that tightened their belts and used a large amount of agricultural products to pay off the debt, making an important contribution to the country. In the early days of industrialization, rural areas across the country used a large amount of money to support national construction. Once the country is subject to external sanctions and the foreign trade of commodities is weak, the country has put forward an internal circulation, which is embodied in a series of rural policies such as cars going to the countryside and household appliances going to the countryside.
When the state wants to vigorously promote the real estate economy to improve the competitiveness of international finance, it is the vast number of peasants who go to the city to buy houses and dedicate themselves to the accumulation of wealth for decades, and at the same time they are burdened with debts and overdraft the fruits of their labor in the next few decades to undertake this task. Because of this, the countryside and the peasants have always been called the stabilizer of the state, or the reservoir. However, from the current point of view, this kind of policy seems to be a bit excessive, if 50,000 yuan is used to get away the peasants' homesteads, then how can these peasants have a place to live in the countryside in the future? If there is no place to live, how will the peasants contribute in the future, and how will the rural areas be stable? Therefore, in the eyes of some netizens, these concepts of trying to use farmers' homesteads in the name of safeguarding real estate interests are actually not a clever plan for rural areas and farmers, but may also be a "desperate plan", which is extremely harmful.
It can be said that since the founding of the People's Republic of China several decades ago, the mainland's economy and society have encountered many major problems, and behind the resolution of each crisis, it is the rural areas and peasants who are bearing the consequences. Despite this, due to the natural resilience of the countryside and the vast number of farmers, although it has been damaged many times, it has always been able to miraculously heal itself. Although this is not as obvious as ecological restoration, we can fundamentally appreciate this profound historical change, and the most critical support is that rural land and labor have always been the main body of the country's wealth creation and preservation. For rural areas and farmers, it is the same as toothpaste, squeezing it when it is needed, and squeezing it again, it will always be able to resolve some crises. This time, however, the means adopted were different from those of the past, and the introduction of such a policy seemed to be aimed at eliminating the peasants and the countryside. We all know that when a person is cold, wearing a thin garment, although it cannot completely resist the cold, but if the clothes are burned, although the temperature can be greatly increased for a while, what should be done after burning?
Up to now, in fact, everyone already knows that the real estate economy is no longer in line with the development of the times, although he cannot be brought down, but there is no need to make great efforts to maintain, let alone damage the countryside and farmers in exchange for a temporary return to the real estate economy. We can see that many places across the country are still desperately trying to save real estate, from the delay in the property tax, some places have reduced the down payment ratio to 15% or even lower, and many cities have canceled the purchase restriction policy and so on. It can be said that no matter how you play and how you operate, there is only one fundamental purpose, that is, to further squeeze out the last silver or two in the pockets of the people at the bottom. We say that if we can drive economic development in this way, promote employment, and increase people's income, then there is nothing wrong with that, but in fact, this kind of behavior can only further increase the burden on the people, after all, from the perspective of Japan's development model, the real estate economy has a certain era and cycle, and is not sustainable.
But despite this, why are localities still so desperate to maintain the real estate economy? This brings us to our current values. It can be said that no matter which place it is, the tenure of a chief official will not be too long, and there is no spare energy to develop some new economic models that can be more long-term, and the development of real estate for so many years has been deeply tied to the local economy. The real estate economy not only has quick results, but also reflects the GDP figures very obviously, and it is also one of the favorite political performance projects of many leaders. Because of this, many people have to reflect their ability level on the one hand, and on the other hand, they also have to face the task of annual data indicators from their superiors, as well as the huge pressure in various data rankings every year, so they can only desperately maintain the real estate economy, trying to look more beautiful and better before they leave office.
On July 22, 2014, Xinhua News Agency reported that Anhui had introduced this policy. Therefore, this is not a new thing at all, in recent years, some places that have benefited a lot in the real estate economy, facing the current predicament, they have to come up with this thing again, almost all places are under the banner of "to ensure the balanced and healthy development of real estate". Let's imagine that apart from real estate, there is no other way of economic development in the mainland? Could it be that without the real estate economy, many places have lost the momentum for development? Don't say it, for many places, it may still be true. Do you remember that in some places, what would happen once the treasury ran out of money? That is to sell land, as a result of selling for so many years, almost all the land has been sold, and their finances have never been good, because they have not formed a new economic development model, and have completely relied on the real estate economy, so as soon as the real estate economy has problems, there will be a major financial crisis in many places.
In fact, we can understand this phenomenon to a certain extent, after all, most of the heavy responsibility for resolving the previous crises has fallen on the heads of the peasants. But this time, I don't agree with this approach, because after the crisis is resolved, it needs to be restored, and if the farmers' homesteads are taken away, the farmers will lose their place in the countryside, and it will be difficult for them to get out of this crisis, let alone restore the ecology. In the eyes of many people, this policy is not a "clever plan" to resolve the real estate crisis, but a "desperate plan" that will destroy the rural ecology and disrupt the economic form of small farmers.