给法国总统萨科齐先生的一封信

给法国总统萨科齐的信
A Letter to Mr.Nicolas Sarkozy, President of France
亲爱的法兰西共和国总统——萨科齐先生阁下：
您好！
面对由美国“次贷危机”所引发的全球性国际货币金融危机，您提议召开的“8国集团”国际峰会非常重要。我是一个中国学者，长期致力于研究国际货币金融体制改革问题，提出了“货币二重化”、“金价平价论”和关于建立“双层货币制”的对策建议。所有这些，对于此次国际金融峰会所要讨论的问题，或有裨益。因此之故，现将1994年以来公开出版的4本拙著奉寄如另(第一本是《论货币二重化》，武汉大学出版社1994年版；第二本是《国际货币基金组织法律制度改革研究》，武汉大学出版社2001年版；第三本是《论联合国的新角色》，世界知识出版社2005年版；第四本是《哲经策论十篇》，新华出版社2008年版)，以供参考。
此致
敬意！
湖北武汉：江汉大学 教授 余元洲
2008年10月21日
21/ Oct./ 2008
Mr. Yu Yuanzhou
Politic & law School
Jianghan University
Wuhan City, 430056
Hubei, P.R. China
Dear Sir, Your Excellency Mr. Nicolas Sarkozy, President of the Republic of France:
How are you?
It is very important that you suggest the “group of 8” have a summit meeting to Deal with the international financial crisis we are facing.
I am a Chinese scholar majoring in international economics and have published 4 treatises on the issues of international monetary system reform, the fruits of which (the theory of Money Two-levellization, the theory of Gold Prices Parity, and the counter-measures, i.e., the idea about establishing a Two-levellized International Monetary System, etc.) might be helpful for the summit.
So, I am now sending those books, by Express Mail from the Mainland of China, to you for reference.
They are as follows:
1) On Money Two-levellization;
2) How to Reform IMF?
3) On New Roles of the United Nations;
4) Ten Articles of Philosophy and Economics for Building up Harmonious Society.
With best wishes,
Yours sincerely           Yu Yuanzhou, a Prof. at  Jianghan Univ., Wuhan
附：
英文阐释
余元洲
(An Exposition In English)
Yu Yuanzhou
Part One （第一部分）
Here is a brief introduction to my Theory of Money Two-levellization, which could be used for international monetary reform.
What is “money dualization”(or Money Two-levellization)? It is a monetary system in which two sorts of currencies work together coordinately and cooperatively at different levels: the upper money ( or top currency ) circulates in a large region or trans-small-regions, while a lower money ( or base currency ) circulates only within each small region.
The necessity and dynamics of “Money Two-levellization” (Money Dualization or Dual Monetization) originates from the contradictions of money itself. The first contradiction is that on one hand , money, when used as the measure of value, the standard of price, the means of circulation or exchange, the means of payment and saving, is required to keep its value as stable as possible; on the other hand, the monetary policy of a government has taken upon itself the task of adjusting and re-adjusting the periodical economic circles, thus requiring free and easy change (increase and decrease ) in money supply, which in turn necessarily leads to un-stability of the value of money. This produces a dilemma for us: when we aim at keeping money‘s value stable, we cannot fulfill the function of adjusting and readjusting economy; if we strive to adjust and readjust the economy, we cannot keep the stability of money‘s value at all. Evidently, to keep money‘s value stable and to adjust (readjust) economy are two contradictious demands (contradictious in roles or functions) , which cannot be met simultaneously. That is not all, however, as far as monetary zone is concerned, there is another contradiction to be noticed: on one hand, when money performs its function of measuring value, and serving as the means of exchange, the means of payment etc., we find monetary zone the larger the better, even to the extent of unifying the whole globe as one single monetary zone; on the other hand, monetary policy as the means of adjusting and readjusting the economy surely requires monetary zone to be much smaller, even to the extent of including only one big city and the countryside surrounding it, within which the economic circles or periods are inherently uniform and undivided.
The theory of “money two-levellization” has just come out to resolve the above-said contradictions.The scientific basis for “money two-levellization” is the fact that there are two sorts of paper money in history and reality: one is the value symbol of gold, with which it is directly linked up and thus has its own value identically fixed and constantly stable; the other is credit money which is directly linked (with no gold as the medium in between) to the commodities and services in circulation, i.e. depending upon how much social wealth a certain amount of money represents. The former can be called “traditional paper money” or “traditional legal tender”, while the latter is to be entitled “modern paper money” or “contemporary legal tender”.
Therefore, by “money two-levellization”, we mean nothing but taking traditional legal tender as upper money and the modern one as lower money. Thus we‘ve got the foundation upon which to exchange upper money for a lower one, that is, according to the price of gold tagged ( priced ) in lower currency at a certain time (or during a certain peiod of time) and a certain market of gold.
For example, if we have predefined that one unit of upper money (say, the Units of Moneys Exchange Media, UMEM for short) identically equals one gram of gold, and now have got the information that one unit of certain lower money can buy 0.5 gram of gold at a certain gold market for the time being, we then clearly know that the rate of exchange is:
1 unit of upper money ( 1 UMEM ) = 2 units of the lower money
There might be several concrete models for applying the theory of “money two-levellization”. It can be used to reform the unreasonable international monetary system, it can also be used to realize the dream of regional monetary unity, especially for Asia.
Part Two （第二部分）
The feasibility of this newly designed international monetary system lies in the guarantee mechanism of Money Two-levellization (or money dualization), by which I mean two sorts of currencies coordinately (in coordinative relationship with each other) working at two different levels: that at the higher level is called upper money; that at the bottom is lower money. The former is designed to be traditional money, i.e., a kind of currency linking up with (or fixed to) gold, thus having fixed value. In contrast to it, the latter is designed to be modern currency, i.e. one directly linked with commodities and services in circulation without gold in between, thus having no stable value. The exchange rate of the two is determined according to the Theory of Gold Prices Parity, i.e. according to the prices of gold tagged in lower currencies at certain time and certain gold markets, which might be changing over time, though the value of upper money (UMEM) itself never changes. If there is no gold market in a country, we can work it out from the prices of “golden jewelries” (rings and necklaces etc.) on sale in local markets.
So, the “Two-levellization” of international monetary system is targeted at keeping UMEM’ value stable and meanwhile letting the value of lower currencies (i.e. the domestic currencies all over the world) fluctuate freely.
Such a new monetary system can surely avoid the fate of collapse, which the old Bretton Woods System failed to escape in 1970s (in that event, many countries except the United States suffered a lot). The reason is that under the old Bretton Woods System, there were only one kind of single-level currencies. The US dollars is just the same as other domestic currencies. Suppose the United States had got a Two-levellized monetary system and had issued two sorts of currencies: one was golden dollars as upper money and had fixed value, the other was degoldenized ordinary dollars with value fluctuating freely, then the Bretton Woods System would have never collapsed!
Similarly, under the system of Money Two-levellization (money dualization), so long as the upper money (UMEM) has fixed value while the lower moneys’ value fluctuate freely and, owing to the principle that banks shall pay interest to “UMEM saving” but pay no interest to “gold saving” at all, people who possess the UMEM can get more out of real interest income than they can benefit from keeping gold (i.e. from getting the income of premium or the “margin” by buying and selling gold over a period of time), then, there will be no pressure for the UMEM’ value to go down, because, the UMEM holders are not so silly as to cry for gold in such circumstances! Even if something goes wrong, it can only pressure the lower currencies into devaluation, but not the upper one. That’s to say, it can only change the exchange rate between upper money and lower monies, but can never change the fixed rate between upper money and gold. Additionally, because the upper money (the UMEM) serves as intermediate link between all lower moneys, it naturally takes the value of all lower moneys (and ultimately the value of all commodities and services in circulation) as solid basis of its own value. That’s why those who hold that the UMEM has no basis of value are completely wrong. Therefore, we can responsibly say that the UMEM will never devaluate and the Two-levellized monetary system will never collapse. This explains how the self-maintaining mechanism of Money Two-levellization will work and guarantee the success of our monetary reform.
Part Three （第三部分）
What’s the use of Money Two-levellization in dealing with the present international financial crisis, one may ask?
The answer is that up to now we know only one kind of monetary systems, that is single-level monetary system.
Under such monetary system, there will be no currency that can really keep its value stable and be used as a means to adjust or readjust the business circles effectively at the same time.
Under such monetary system, our Global Community cannot have its own currency as international common currency that never devaluates.
Under such monetary system, once the US economy goes wrong, the whole world has to pay for it.
However, once we create a Two-levellized international monetary system, UMEM can take the place of US Dollars and can perform its functions of international money much better.
Then, if a country’s economy goes wrong, largely speaking only this country itself has to pay for it, none of the business of other countries! Or, at least we can say, other countries will be much less troubled! In other words, the crisis we’re now facing can at least be much lessened!
For, after all, 205 countries and regions of the world with a population of more than 6 billions are not producing just for the Americans to consume and get back nothing but the US Dollars!
Suppose, we, most peoples of the world, having created a common international currency such as UMEMs, can consume most of what we have produced, by ourselves!
Then, even if the American people buy nothing of the goods from us, we can buy them out with UMEMs as upper money and our domestic monies as lower currencies.
Then, how can there be a worldwide crisis when Uncle Sam catches cold due to a little carelessness ?!
……
Now, remember, under two-levellized monetary system, though people cannot exchange their holdings of the upper money (UMEMs) for gold as they like, they can certainly exchange their holdings of upper money (UMEMs) for any lower monies such as US Dollars, Euros, Japanese Yens, and RMBs also, acording to the theory of Gold Prices Parity. That’s to say, one can at any time and any place freely exchange one unit of UMEM for any lower monies equaling the value of 1 gram of gold, if we really set “1 UMEM =1 gram of gold”at the very start of our reform.