论文部分内容阅读
中国的经济体制改革已走过了10个年头。10年来,如果说我们关于微观机制改革的取向(即以增强企业活力、硬化约束机制为改革方向)基本上是正确的话;那么相比之下,我们在宏观调控手段上的改革则至今还未走出混沌状态。所以,必须在这方面重新认识,重新思考,重新设计。一、既有的宏观调控模式评价设计社会主义经济运行的宏观调控模式的基本点是如何寻求计划调节和市场调节的最佳结合。刘国光曾以完全集中的中央集权的计划调控模式为一端,以纯粹的市场调节模式为另一端,定义了迄今各种改革的经济调控模式的可行域。几十年来,一些社会主义的改革理论家们一直在这个区间里探索着计划调控和市场调控相结合的各种模式,从兰格模式经布鲁斯、锡克,直到科尔奈的有宏观控制的市场协调模式(即所谓的IIB模式)等。这里,我们可
China’s economic reform has gone through 10 years. In the past 10 years, if we say that the orientation of the micro-mechanism reform (that is, to enhance the vitality of enterprises and harden the binding mechanism is the direction of reform) is basically correct, then in contrast, the reforms we have adopted in macro-control measures have not yet been implemented Out of chaos. Therefore, we must re-understand in this regard, re-think, re-design. I. The Existing Macro-control Models The basic point of evaluating the macro-control mode of designing the socialist economy is how to find the best combination of planning and market regulation. Liu Guoguang once centralized the centralization of the centralized planning and control of the program as one end, with purely market regulation as the other end of the definition of the economic reform so far so far the feasibility of various modes of control. For decades, some socialist reform theorists have been exploring various modes of planning and control and market regulation in this interval. From macro-control of the Lange model through Bruce, Sikh, and Kornai Market coordination mode (the so-called IIB mode) and so on. Here we can