Between Digi and Tencent, first on the music rights front, now we see on the opium of the mind represented by video games what’s behind this Beijing grip on the private education sector, on the tech sector because then it is literally scaring off investors on Chinese companies listed in New York and there are many.
In my opinion these events follow a very clear and very simple line in China is granted for companies, granted companies to make money, People are allowed to get rich and become millionaires and billionaires, but they still have to stay within the scope that I call micro-business. In no way can any company cross this line and become, as it were, an agent of macroeconomic policies. That’s a lot, she said Alibaba, that’s fine, that was fine until Alibaba was B2B, C2C, trade between users but cannot in any way become a bank mobilizing savings of consumers to which it offered interest rates also competitive with the large Chinese banks and essentially altering the curve of rates. We know very well that the rate curve I call the mother of all curves and must be firmly in the hands of the Central Bank of China, can not thrown into the hands of a company that decides interest rates in China because we know that this is the basis of the economy.
I don’t know if you spoke before about Bitcoin, Bitcoin is the satan for China because it is clear that currency, is the characteristic of Bitcoin that is a decentralized currency that puts an economy where the government through all its agents must however control the economy that surely cannot be left to the twenty-year-old who make Bitcoin around the world. So the same for schools the education system must be fair was not until now, the rich could have access to after-school, to support courses and this has been so up to now this changes but beware, I stress, this is written in the five-year plan on page two, it says: the Chinese education system must become fairer. What does that mean? That it should no longer be based on who has money can access it and who does not, no. Because this creates inequalities and we complain about income inequalities, now this is my judgment you might want to have a more equitable society.
But then there is not really the risk evidently Beijing does not consider it so important that no one more puts money on Didi, rather than on Tencent than on Alibaba?
But Beijing doesn’t need the money of the West it needed it twenty years ago now if the Western funds were to decrease their weight on the Shanghai stock exchange or on the Chinese shares listed in New York and this is fine for China we know very well that foreign investors on their stock markets and also attention and bonds because this is the next trend, is not good.
Attention is the problem of Italy, what is the problem of Italy? That we have 30% of our public debt in the hands of residents outside Italy and instead Japan that has 250% of the debt does not care because all the debt is held by Japanese banks, in short, by a company. So China wants some kind of opening to international markets but in no way even here I emphasize a bit as it was in the movie Wall Street can not allow a twenty-year-old with suspenders to press a button and bring to his knees or alter his economy rate curve then also here micro yes, there is some small shareholding but not that the shareholding, the shareholding is dominated by foreign entities especially for these large companies like Alibaba, Tencent and other that dominate within the Chinese market so that the fact that investors can get away from China, for China, attention is almost good. Very clear indeed Michele Geraci, needless to say that those who read the entire Chinese five-year plan and on page 2 also found the theme on instructions can only be one of the leading experts in the Chinese system, Thank you professor a pleasure to have you with us very soon thanks to you.