The government wants to regulate the elite class, but the government itself is composed of elites. Therefore, the government can only use the guise of cutting speculators to expand itself and seize the market, especially the large market of leasing as mentioned by the original poster. So, I particularly admire what the original poster said earlier: the government has found the best opportunity to profit from leasing, ostensibly to control housing prices, but in reality, a large portion of the common people end up renting government-owned houses. This means the government will have more money, and they can demolish wherever they want. The elites become more elite, while the common people become more ordinary… It’s so sad!
The operation of funds tells us that when regulation suppresses investment funds in first-tier cities, a considerable portion will shift to second and third-tier cities where housing prices are relatively lower. Major developers entering these second and third-tier cities will accelerate urban upgrading. Therefore, the beginning of regulation signs is actually the best time to layout in second and third-tier cities, rather than in first-tier cities.
In a country with high growth and high inflation, high corruption costs and huge wastage will lead to the country having to maintain high taxes to keep functioning. Maintaining normal operations and a large consumption of tax revenue by a civil servant workforce that does not create revenue is necessary and inevitable for an actual 8% GDP growth. How can rapid GDP growth be possible without maintaining a high tax revenue?
Generally, when reducing civil servants, it is typically those without connections, relationships, or who do not flatter superiors, and who are willing to do menial tasks that are targeted for cuts. Those who remain are usually well-connected individuals who excel at flattering superiors but do not perform their tasks diligently. After the removal of the hardworking civil servants, those who remain continue to not work diligently. Consequently, the government realizes that there is a lack of productivity, a shortage of workforce, and then has to recruit a large number of people, resulting in more staff despite the aim of streamlining. This phenomenon is called “streamlined expansion.” Especially when experienced hands are let go, it becomes necessary to hire three newbies to compensate. Once the newbies gain experience, more people become available. This cycle of “streamlined expansion” is unchangeable. It is crucial not to streamline, as those who propose it will be the ones facing consequences, leaving the people with no way out.
0 Comments