根治全球金融危机的灵丹妙药？

根治全球金融危机的灵丹妙药
余元洲
（江汉大学政法学院；湖北武汉，430056）
一、方案设计：
1．以国家外汇管理局为基础创建“中华央行”，发行“华元”或“中华元”(the Chinese Dollars)作为“上币”(upper money)，另以现行的人民币为“下币”(lower currency)，实行“货币二重化”(money two-levellization)，构建一个完全新型的“双层国币制”(two-levellized monetary system)：
1）在二重币制中，华元或中华元为传统法币，与黄金挂钩保持定值，而人民币则为现代法币，币值可适当浮动以调节商业周期——即国民经济繁荣与萧条的周期性波动。
2）现设定每1华元单位恒等于0.01克金。上币华元与下币人民币的兑换比率，取决于以下币人民币标示的黄金价格（即：在任何时候任何地方，用1元人民币在黄金市场上能够买得到多少个0.01克黄金，就能兑换到多少个华元或中华元；反之，亦然）。在没有人民币黄金市场的情况下，得以各大商场的黄金饰品价格折算之。
3）华元与众外币的兑换关系，亦然。
2．自华元或中华元发行之日起，中国作为主权国家，得以立法明令境内一切法人和自然人（包括外国人）拒收美元、日元、欧元以及其他一切外币和（或）外汇。嗣后，举凡一切产品和（或）服务出口，只能以华元计价、结算（即要求外商从我国进口任何商品和服务必须用华元或中华元对我支付，而不能使用他们自己的国内货币）。到我们这里来买中国的东西，使用中国的货币付钱，理所当然，天经地义！有什么皮好扯？！倒是用他们印制的“合法伪钞”——美元、日元、欧元跑到我国来买走国人饱含血汗的产品和服务，太荒唐了！！！
至于境外进品商没有华元，这个问题很容易解决：可从其所在地的银行和（或）其他（非银行）金融机构取得（用他们的本币兑换或申请贷款都是可以的），后者（商业银行以及其他金融机构）则可从其所在国中央银行（包括美联储等）取得，而境外各中央银行则可以通过以下两种方式从我中华央行取得华元或中华元以应当地银行之需：
1）向我中华央行申请华元低息和超低息基准利率贷款（自华元创设发行之日起第一年之内的基准年利率可定为1.2%，第二年的年利率可定为2.4%，第三的年利率可定为3.6%，此后一直保持3.6%的标准年利率恒久不变）；
2）用黄金兑换，每吨黄金兑换1亿中华元。
经过一段时间之后，当境外企业和个人手里积存有一定量的中华元储备之后，他们就有了至少三种取得华元的正常途径，即：1）申请华元贷款；2）动用黄金兑换；和3）向我国出口创汇，赚取中华元。
3．华元创设发行之后，即为人民币与众外币的兑换中介，因为双层货币体制中的“上币”（华元或中华元）在性质上就是地地道道的“货币（下币）兑换中介单位”(the Units of Money Exchange Media, UMEM for short，音译为“有眉目”)。
作为“货币兑换单位”，“有眉目”（华元或中华元）虽然可以兑换成黄金，但绝无必要以黄金为价值基础，而仅只是以黄金为定值标准。记住这一点，非常重要。因为，如以黄金为价值基础和价值担保，那就总有一天会重蹈布雷顿森林体系的覆辙，总有一天会崩溃的。
反之，在上币“UMEM”（即华元、中华元）作为“货币兑换单位”不以黄金为价值基础而仅以其为定值标准的情况下，它的价值基础和价值担保就只能是与其等值的人民币、众外币以及其所能够买到的（也就是说，流通中的）世界各国（首先是中国的）商品、服务等实际社会财富之价值。
这样，虽然黄金可兑换为华元，华元也可回换为黄金，但作为通则，即使华元或中华元不能随心所欲地兑换为黄金，它也可以在任何时候、任何地方按照（1华元=0.01克金的固定比率）自由地将其兑换为任何一种相当于这么多黄金之价值的下币，比如说人民币。
既然如此，当然不存在任何的变现困难和（或）贬值风险。
4．现有外汇的处理办法：
总的原则是，不动声色地将其用出，花完为止。具体可以：
1）购买美、日、欧优质企业的普通股，如微软、谷歌、波音公司，欧洲空中客车公司、日本松下电器公司，等等等等诸如此类的企业股权；如果不成，则
2）购买其在华投资企业的股权；如果不成，则
3）购买其高端科技或科技产品；如果不成，则
4）购买石油以及其他为我国内经济发展所必需的矿产品；如果不成，则
5）购买其为我国内建设和谐社会所需的民生商品和服务等等。如果不成，则
6）购买黄金；
7）可能且必要的话，上述全选，各取一点。
至于现已买了外国政府（主要是美国）和企业（如黑石集团、房利美、房地美等债券或股票的），就听天由命吧。能不亏或少亏，谢天谢地；若能赚一点，当然就更好。即使血本无归，也只好认了吧。谁让我是个无名小卒呢？出了那么多书、发了那么多文章，包括在核心期刊（《当代财经》，而且是作为特约的“专家视线”之文稿刊发的）和相当权威的国家一级刊物（《欧洲》杂志）所刊发的文章，竟如石沉大海——没丁点儿响动！！
这里，还有几个小小的花恕，讲出来供大家一笑了之：
1．《论货币二重化》这本小书1994年5月出版之后，曾请朋友送到北大，放在北京大学“三角地”附近的一家书店，一个月过后只卖出了一本！现在也不知到底到了谁的手里？有暇翻看否？此外，这本书我还曾亲自送到中国人民银行政策研究室和IMF驻北京代表处，并与其代表有一面之交，而与其副代表则有多次交往，直到其离任回美国之后依然保持了一段时间的通信联系。后来我做博士后研究，就得到了他们在英文资料方面的大力帮助，至今心里感激不尽。
2．《国际货币基金组织法律制度改革研究》这篇博士后科研报告于1998年完成之后，我先是亲自送到了中国人民银行国际司，然后又一次送到了IMF驻北京代表处。此时，他们原来的代表已离任，新任日本籍代表尚未到任，而我与副代表则颇谈得来，他能讲中文，而我也多少懂一点英文，所以，翻译人员干脆打了个招呼后笑着走开了，留下我们俩吹了大半天。只是，自从我离京回汉以后，无论怎样也联系不上了。因此之故，我一直怀疑，此人对于我的改革建议有可能会损害美国霸权这一点恼怒在心而不愿为友？不得而知。
3．1997年5月，中国社会科学院欧洲研究所和中国欧洲学会为纪念《罗马条约》四十年在江苏省吴江市（苏州附近的一个县级市）召开了一个相当规模的国际研讨会，我是120个到会代表和其中的大约八十名学者之一。会议期间，曾有机会与欧盟代表坐在一起双语交谈（此人懂中文）；闭幕式上，我有幸成为四位大会专题发言人之一。只可惜，欧盟后来的货币统一完全没有接受我的意见，而是顽固地坚持取消法郎、马克等成员国货币，实行单层货币制，而不是我所建议的双层货币制。
也正因为如此，才有今天法国总统萨科齐先生以及许多欧盟领导人的叫苦不跌！
设若那位欧盟代表能将我的意见反映上去，并且得到应有的重视，何致于此？！
所以我说，一切的一切，——全球数万亿金融资产灰飞烟灭，这都是我小人惹的祸啊！
二、理论阐释：
（不懂英文，跳过看三）
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 these contradictions,for the Two-levellized monetary system can surely dissolve both the dilemmas mentioned above: The upper money can keep its value as stable as possible, and expand its monetary zone as large as possible,while  at the same time, the lower moneys can be used to perform the function of adjusting and readjusting business circles and have their monetary zones much smaller, or at least, the pattern of “one country, one money” can stay untouched.
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.
三、详请参阅：
1．《论货币二重化》，余元洲著，武汉大学出版社1994年版：
1）前言；
2）自序；
3）正文第1—40页；
4）正文第40—60页；
5）跋
2．《国际货币基金组织法律制度改革研究》，余元洲著，武汉大学出版社2001年版：
1）中英文摘要；
2）梁西先生《序》；
3）第五章（第56—68页）；
4）第六章（第68—84页）；
5）第七章（第84—95页）；
6）第八章的第二节、第三节（第99—109页）
7）第九章（第109—130页）
8）结论（第130—131页）
9）附录：亚洲金融危机与国际货币体制改革（第132—147页）
3．《论联合国的新角色》，余元洲著，世界知识出版社2005年版：
1）英文简介：How to reform the United Nations in reght direction?（第23—33页）
2）附录（第182—206页）
3）正文（第93—96页；第131—135页；第173—177页）
4．《哲经策论十篇》，余元洲著，新华出版社2008年版：
1）序；
2）正文（第88—101页）
5．余元洲：《货币二重化与欧盟货币统一》，载《欧洲》杂志1997年第5期。
6．余元洲：《国际金融危机与IMF的法制变革》，载《当代财经》1999年第2期。
7．余元洲：《美元撑起美国霸权》，载《环球时报》2005年1月19日第15版《国际论坛》。
8．余元洲：《美元——合法的伪钞》，载《学习月刊》2005年第9期。
9．余元洲：《货币二重化与国际货币体制改革的有关问题》，载《经济评论》（1998年增刊）。
10．余元洲：《论人民币汇率上的两难困境及其出路》，载《经济评论》（2006年增刊）。
11．余元洲：《货币二重化与欧洲单一货币方案的比较》，载于《欧洲与世界》一书（裘无伦、沈雁南主编），中国社会科学出版社，1998（第94~99页）。
12．余元洲：《论我国汇率并轨的成效、问题及对策》，载于《21世纪经济学前瞻》一书（武汉大学经济学院编），湖北人民出版社，1997（第488~499页）
13．余元洲：《论建立中华经济共同体》，《港澳经济》（广州），1993年第2期。
14．余元洲：《再论建立中华经济共同体》，同上，1993年第6期。
15．余元洲：《怎样建立中华经济共同体》，《当代》（香港），1993年第5期。