| Since the 1980s,financial globalization has swept all over the world. The open economies have enjoyed the chances for development brought by financial deepening. Meanwhile they have been obsessed by financial crises, and even some of them are suffering from the crises. These being around us, we can't help thinking seriously over an important issue: Is the financial globalization an irreversible tendency? In such a tendency, the development of finance is more like an endogenetic course of self-development. More and more finance has a trend that is finance is becoming an objective entity independent of physical economy. But can finance subsist, being completely divorced from physical economy? If the independency of finance from physical economy can be regarded as an trend, then whether there is an objective and reasonable limit and whether this limit is the capacity of physical economy which restrict finance so that it serves for physical economy? If not, where this kind of development can go in the end? Will it lead to wide and comprehensive financial crises so as to restrain the overdevelopment of finance? All the above made me choose "The financial independency "as the my theme.In my view the relationship between finance and economy is causality. The development of finance is an endogenetic requirement of economic development, and with the evolution of this relationship the specialization made finance become a comprehensive and independent industry, which is the tendency of the financialdevelopment. The uniqueness of finance -it is the most important tool for allocatingresources and also it is a resource itself-and the considerable defect in the globalmechanism of allocating resources lead to the financial dissimilation as well as the financial bubble and financial risk. My further study arrives at the conclusion: The independency of finance is not absolute but relative, and the tendency to be independent is absolute. The development of finance must be restrained, which is carried out by the capacity or potential of economy-this is the financial boundary as put forward in this paper. Within this boundary none of the financial activities can interfere with thedevelopment of economy, or induce the financial crises and economic crises; beyondthis boundary the extreme form of financial independency - financial dissimilationwill come into being. The financial dissimilation is beyond the capacity and potential ofthe development of economy-the bubblization of finance-and finally it destroysitself, which is the fundamental cause of all the financial crises. Therefore I put forward a system of boundary indexes for keep away from the financial crises, which composes of those in monetary markets, those in capital markets, those for national debts and those of national foreign reserves. However, within the boundary another instance will occur i.e. the underdevelopment of finance. Although this instance will not result in financial crises, finance can't serve economy very well. As for me financial regime itself cannot be thought of as good or bad no matter it evolves naturally or is created by exogenous innovation and there is no absolute and independent standard to evaluate it. It can only be evaluated under certain economic circumstances i.e. through the effect finance has on economy and "Pareto improvement" to evaluate the efficiency of finance. Hence the authority should consider the situation and make plan suitable for economical development and take good use of finance to serve for the economy.This paper composes of two pieces and eleven parts. The former one is the theoretical analysis that composes of the introduction and four chapters; the latter one is the empirical study composing six parts, in which a fundamental system of financial boundary indexes is set up on the basis of the previous theory about financial crises, and then an empirical analysis on the main subsystem of finance in China is carried outoThe fresh ideas in this paper are as follows:Some categories are pu...
|
PDF Full Text Request