论文部分内容阅读
市场起决定性作用,财政制度该如何创新?斯密在《国富论》中的一句话对于这一问题的回答有重要的指导意义。在对重商主义的批评中,斯密曾睿智地说:“每一个人,在他不违反正义的法律时,都应听其完全自由,让他采用自己的办法,追求自己的利益,以其劳动及资本和任何其他人或其他阶级相竞争”。这意味着,一方面,市场要起决定性作用,其前提是公正法律的存在:市场的自由运行、个体的自由选择要以公正法律的建构为基本前提。另一方面,在事先所设定的公正法律规则下,任何个人、任何单位和组织都不能以任何理由和借口对于个体的自由选择与市场的自由运行进行干预和强制。进而,要发挥市场在资源配置中的决定性作用,财政制度创新的要义就在于寻求和建构对于市场运行起限制和引导作用的、事先对于市场运行方式进行规范的准永久性的正义的财政制度规则。在这一方面,对于那些支持斯密自由市场学说而反对政府干预的理论观点,由于忽略了斯密所强调的自由市场运行必不可少的“正义的法律”条件,它们其实是背离了斯密的自由市场理论传统。与之相反,对于那些对斯密理论进行批判而强调政府干预的理论学说,尽管它们强调了政府干预的必要性,但它们大多忽视了干预所需要坚持的正义原则;同时,由于并未能如斯密那样去透彻领悟社会秩序得以形成的内在机理和逻辑,它们也忽视了政府适当干预的层次:应该是事先的法律制度架构,而不是市场运行之后的政治上的肆意调整。基于这一点,首届长三角公共财政论坛的意旨就在于:通过聚集社会各界的智慧,通过公开的理性的对话,以寻求有利于市场决定性作用发挥的公平财政规则。毕竟,有迹象表明:我们现在对于许多公共财政问题的讨论,其实已经偏离斯密早期的优良传统已经很远了。
The market plays a decisive role, how to innovate the financial system? Smith’s “Wealth of Nations” in a sentence for the answer to this question has an important guiding significance. In his criticism of mercantilism, Smith had wisely said: “Everyone, when he does not violate the law of justice, should be fully freed and let him pursue his own interests in his own way, Compete with any other person or class with their labor and capital. ” This means that on the one hand, the market should play a decisive role. Its premise is the existence of fair law: the free operation of the market and the free choice of individuals should be based on the construction of fair law as the basic premise. On the other hand, under the just rules of justice set forth in advance, no individual, unit or organization can intervene and coerce an individual’s freedom of choice and free operation of the market for any reason or pretext. Furthermore, to play the decisive role of the market in the allocation of resources, the essence of the innovation of the financial system lies in seeking and constructing the quasi-permanent and just financial system rules that regulate and restrict the operation of the market in advance. . In this respect, for those theoretical arguments that support Smith’s free-market theory in opposition to government intervention, they are in fact a departure from the “legal” conditions necessary for the free-market operation underlined by Smith Smith’s Free Market Theory Tradition. On the contrary, the theoretical doctrines that emphasize government intervention that criticize Smith’s theory emphasize the necessity of government intervention, but most of them neglect the principle of justice that intervention needs to be adhered to. At the same time, As a thorough understanding of the internal mechanism and logic of the formation of social order, Smith also ignored the level of proper government intervention: it should be a priori legal system framework, not a political arbitrary adjustment after the market operation. Based on this, the purpose of the first session of the Yangtze River Delta Public Finance Forum lies in seeking fair fiscal rules that are conducive to the decisive role of the market by gathering wisdom from all walks of life and through open and rational dialogue. After all, there are signs that our discussion of many public finances now is far from the fine traditions of Smith’s early days.