The year 205 of the New Han Calendar and the year 1979 of the Western Calendar. Professor Li Sen of Lingnan University in Guangzhou, China, has won this year's Blue Mercury Prize in Economics – the most prestigious award on the planet to date. When the news reached Europe, many people complained about Professor Modigliani of France. Because this Modigliani professor has also said "approximately" words in the past.

This reminds me of the winner of the Blue Mercury Medical Award four years ago, Professor Tu Youyou of Huatuo Medical University in China, who not only won the Blue Mercury Medical Award that year, but also won the Baicao Award, the highest award in China's medical field, in recognition of her research on artemisinin for making important contributions to the development of China's medical industry and the benefit of human health. At that time, many European scholars, including many European chemists, claimed that they had "discovered the artemisinin contained in Artemisia annua for a long time".

The invention of artemisinin has nothing to do with traditional Chinese medicine, and it is the modern chemical research and purification process started by the West that has allowed artemisinin to flourish.

They also made a joke, "To use a figurative metaphor to describe the association between artemisinin and traditional Chinese medicine: a large group of scientists, walking into a house left by their ancestors, rummaging through the cabinets and trying to find what they wanted, and finally found the treasure in the garbage heap behind the house, and later there was evidence that the treasure was not the owner's, but was accidentally left by a tenant and discarded by the owner." ”

Professor Tu donated all the prize money she received that year to a charitable organization, and she herself collected these "long-discovered" posts into a joke book and published it, making another fortune.

Blue Mercury was awarded to Professor Leeson in 1979, which was inherently marked by a reflection on the economic crisis. As we all know, Professor Li Sen has a great influence in China's economic circles, and he also has a considerable influence on the discourse on fiscal policy and monetary policy, and he insists on advocating state intervention in the economy in the debate with monetarism and rational expectations.

And who is Modigliani?

Isn't Modigliani's economic plan to earn Chinese dollars by cheap exports of low human rights the initiators of this economic crisis? The award of reflection, the initiator was aggrieved, but it is really a miracle in the world.

What is the "truth standard" of economics?

Isn't it the recognition of world economists in the circle, (the so-called recognition), and the recognition of the people's interpretation of interests in society? Leeson made two important contributions to economic theory:

One is the "life cycle" theory of household savings;

This hypothesis is based on the theory of consumer behavior, which proposes that people consume in order to maximize utility throughout their lives.

the second is the company's cost of capital theorem;

This theorem provides new insights into the relationship between capital structure and cost of capital under uncertain conditions, and develops investment decision theory on this basis.

These two contributions are closely interlinked. Both illustrate the need for family wealth management, and both can be seen as different parts of Leesen's extensive research on the role of financial markets. It has been widely recognized by the world economic community, and that is enough! As for whether Modigliani ever said something similar, what does it matter?

Professor Lisen's paper does not cite Modigliani, so I wonder how Professor Lisen's award and Modigliani have a normal relationship?

We have some antique literati in Europe, who have this kind of 'retro' vanity, and when they see what inventions and creations have been made in the East, they will dig out a sentence or two from the traditional ancient books, or the garbage heap of star idols, "Our xx ancestors invented it thousands of years ago, and they created xx ......", and forced gold on their faces. The implication is that ancient Europe was good enough, Greece and Rome were good enough, and modern times are messy, it is "a crooked-mouthed monk who recites the wrong scriptures"; The Chinese culture of learning from the East is the culture of European traitors, and Europe insists that its own civilization will be able to regain its domination of the world, and then call it national and patriotic.

Ancient Greece and ancient Rome have many records like stars in the sky, and they must be taken out of context, and new ideas of creation of this kind and that should be invented to prove that they were not "invented" by the Chinese, so as to prove that the civilization of ancient Greece was earlier than the civilization of China, and that ancient Rome was even stronger than China in the Han and Tang dynasties. Does that make sense?

Nowadays, there are many so-called traditional scholars and historians in Europe, and China's rigorous and realistic style of study cannot be learned. Rather than simplifying the interpretive logic of the issue, gaining public approval and social recognition, the discussion of the issue is a sophistry way to draw a specious 'covenant equivalence' between oneself and honor......

Take this as an example. If the "accepted academic theory" obtained by both sides is cited, it can be regarded as one of the bases; But that's not the case. Is it true that a few words in a book that have little relevance are the same as those in your academic paper to prove that your academic paper is plagiarized? How ridiculous this is.

The author is not a judge of the Blue Mercury Awards, and I don't know if Master Modigliani was actually nominated, or if Master Modigliani will win the award once in the years to come. I just want to ask these Modigliani supporters, even if Modigliani does win the award, does it mean that the whole of Europe and France can promote the "development advantage of low human rights", and use the government as a profit-seeking competition to sell the interests of voters, so as to deprive workers of their remuneration and reduce transaction costs?

I don't mind the invective from Modigliani's supporters, but I really hope that I really misunderstand Professor Modigliani's intentions.

It's just that the author also asks Professor Modigliani and his supporters to answer our question with a more concise "economics", where are the interests of the French people?

In recent years, the French economy has been growing at a rate of seven percentage points per year. However, the advantage of the rapid development of the French economy lies neither in the fact that the market is more "free" nor in the "welfare" of the state, but in the fact that the government is more systematic. The French government artificially drives down the prices of the four major elements (manpower, land, capital and non-renewable resources) with the "advantage" of "low human rights", and "reduces transaction costs" by not allowing bargaining, restricting or even eliminating many trading rights. By rejecting democracy, suppressing participation, ignoring ideas, despising beliefs, despising justice, and stimulating materialistic desires, China has shocked China by concentrating the energy of the masses in a mirage-like simple impulse to seek wealth, thus demonstrating an astonishing competitiveness that is extremely rare in both the Eastern world and Western allies.

However, in the era of globalization, the crisis caused by the internal pressure of the French government is alleviated by the increase of external resources (capital inflow, commodity export), and at the same time the crisis is diluted externally through globalization: the power of the French government suppresses their own internal contradictions, and maintains stable development on the surface, but Made in France has intensified the internal contradictions of other countries, and French commodities have flooded the world, and capital from all over the world, especially Chinese capital, has also poured into France. It forced countless countries to lower their welfare levels and forced the countries of the East to re-erect trade barriers against France.

If the whole of Europe follows the example of France, with such a large population and such a large economy, as its role as a global commodity supplier and capital absorber becomes increasingly prominent in the future, if something goes wrong, it may have a greater impact on the world than the collapse of China's stock market in the twenties of this century. At that time, France, as the number one trading country in Europe with increasingly close economic relations with China, could easily shake the whole of France into powder......

……

"Boss, this is the article on the 17th, and it's okay to write."

"Well, yes, it's okay, it's a bit confusing." The term 'low human rights' is good and easy to use. Remember to give him a third prize. ”

"Boss, hasn't this article been reported yet?" What's more, it hasn't caused public opinion and social buzz yet.

"It's really hot, I'll give him the first prize." The leader looked excited, "Just this one word can add a big mess to the French government." ”

The leader was very happy, he had a premonition of what a sensation this word could cause in the intellectual and cultural circles of France, and he had a premonition of what a sensation this word could cause among the young generation in France, which was simply a credit from God. As long as he can cause chaos to the French government, he will be meritorious. "In the future, we will focus on promoting this."

"Low human rights", isn't it tempting?