【经济学家 111015】无以为家：中国的社会保障性住房

满仓

【中文标题】无以为家：中国的社会保障性住房
【原文标题】Social housing in China: No way home
【登载媒体】经济学家
【原文链接】http://www.economist.com/node/21532334

中国城镇贫困居民能拥有一个叫做家的地方吗？

如果说有一件事情让北京的老百姓发愁，那就是中国城镇的购房成本了。据非官方数据统计，首都一套房子的平均价格在过去十年中上涨了5到10倍。于是，极有可能成为中国下一任总理的李克强试图采取行动解决这个问题。在他的命令下，地方政府为城市贫困人群集中建造了一大批社会保障性住房。官方称这项行动取得了空前的成功，但是居民们是否也在分享他们的喜悦，却是另外一回事了。

表面上看来，李先生所施加的压力似乎起到了一些作用。官方的统计数据显示，在最近几周，地方政府（从未听说过他们对花钱救济穷人有这么大的热情）已经开始急于完成年内的计划。10月10日，中央政府宣布，今年计划建造的1000万套社会保障性住房中，已经有98％开工建设。仅在9月一个月里，就有120万套住房开工建设，这比美国去年建造的所有私人住宅数量的两倍还多。



中央政府并不是在对穷人示好，而是把这看作是在全球经济低迷中的一种刺激经济的方式。今年的保障性住房计划是，比2010年增长70％（见上图）。政府在3月份宣布，2015年将完成3600万套保障性住房的目标。如果平均三个人住在一套房子中，这等于为英国和波兰的人口总和提供了住房。

然而，一些政府报纸却在散布怀疑的观点。一些评论人士把保障性住房的开工建设与毛泽东在50年代末开战的大跃进相提并论，当时，地方政府竞相发布越来越高、令人难以相信的土地粮食产量。南部省份广东的《番禺日报》一篇评论员文章说：“这场闹剧似乎有大跃进回归的迹象”。仅在9月份，广东发布的年内保障性住房建设达标率从66％（全国最低水平）一下子提升到96％，因为有29.1万套住房在当月开工建设。新浪网发表的一篇文章称，很多分析人士在怀疑广东是否人为篡改了这些数据。

下一个年度的目标是再建设1000万套住宅（差不多相当于去年一年全国商品房的销量）。但是清华大学的郑思齐担心热火朝天的建设激情能否持续下去。她猜想，中央政府仅支付建设成本的10％到20％，官方声称这个数字是1.3万亿元人民币（2040亿美元）。郑女士说，政府需要投入更多。

上个月，中央政府通知地方当局，如果保障性住房建设没有达标，他们的新政府办公建设申请就不会被批准。这或许是一个有效的措施，因为地方政府很喜欢修建奢华的办公楼。在李先生即将从他的领导温家宝手中接过总理职位的时机，这样的政治压力是相当管用的。但是长期保持这样势头并非易事，地方政府非常擅于违背中央的指令。

评论人士还指出，社会保障性住房的受益者主要还是城市居民，因为他们的“户口”决定了他们的身份。而来自农村地区的农民工即使在城市中生活多年，通常也很难拿到户口。大部分地方政府不愿意承认他们的身份，因为如果给他们落下户口，就必须提供全套的社会福利。

中央政府希望新的住房项目可以缓和公众对高房价的不满情绪，但即使是那些城市户口的所有者，也对政府的努力不屑一顾。官员们发现他们很难衡量究竟谁有资格获取保障性住房，因为很多家庭隐藏了他们的真实收入，有些相对比较好的房子被分给明显没有资格的人。到北京东部的一个保障性住房小区朱辛家园参观一圈，就会发现楼下停着若干辆豪华汽车。旁边一家房地产中介在出租小区的房屋，很明显，业主的住房不止一套，因此可以非法地把保障性住房变为牟利的工具。

李先生强调，确保社会保障性住房的公平分配极为重要，并且呼吁接受“媒体和群众”的监督。但是他自己手下的那些官员似乎并不愿意提供地方官员令人信服的跟进行动。就像麦格理资本证券的记者遗憾地说：“令人信服的事实很难获取。”


原文：

IF THERE is one thing that annoys the man on the Beijing omnibus, it is the cost of housing in China’s cities. By unofficial estimates, the average price of a flat in the capital has risen between five and ten-fold in the past decade. So Li Keqiang, who is likely to become China’s next prime minister, is trying to show his mettle by sorting out the problem. Under his direction, local governments have embarked on a campaign to build unprecedented quantities of social housing for the urban poor. Officials have been claiming a spectacular success, but persuading citizens to share their joy is proving another matter.

Pressure from Mr Li looks, on the surface, to be paying off. Official statistics suggest that in recent weeks, local governments (not normally known for their enthusiasm for spending money on the poor) have been racing to meet their quotas for the year. On October 10th the central government declared that a target of starting work on 10m social-housing units this year was 98% complete. In September alone, work began on 1.2m units—more than twice the number of private homes America began building last year.

The central government is not just trying to woo the poor. It also sees the project as a way of pepping up the economy at a time of global gloom. This year’s target represents a 70% increase in the construction of social housing compared with 2010 (see chart). In March the government announced a goal of completing 36m units by 2015. If three people on average live in one flat, this would be the equivalent of building new housing for the combined populations of Britain and Poland.

Some state-controlled newspapers have, however, been airing scepticism. The surge in construction has been compared by a few commentators to Mao Zedong’s Great Leap Forward of the late 1950s, when local governments vied with one other in their increasingly implausible claims of soaring output. “This kind of farce is showing signs of making a comeback”, said a columnist in Panyu Daily, a newspaper in the southern province of Guangdong. In September alone, others noted, Guangdong’s reported fulfilment of its quota for the year increased from 66% (the country’s lowest rate) to 96%, thanks to work started on another 291,000 units. An article published by Sina.com, a news portal, said many analysts were wondering whether Guangdong had massaged its figures.

Next year’s target is for work to begin on another 10m units (roughly the number of commercial housing units sold nationwide last year). But Zheng Siqi of Beijing’s Tsinghua University worries whether the building boom is sustainable. The central government, she reckons, is only paying about 10-20% of the construction costs, which officials say will total around 1.3 trillion yuan ($204 billion) for 10m units. It needs to provide more, Ms Zheng says.

Last month the central government told local authorities that they would not be allowed to build new offices for themselves if they failed to meet their quotas. That might help: local governments are fond of erecting lavish headquarters. Political pressure on them is likely to mount while Mr Li, a deputy prime minister, prepares to take over from his boss, Wen Jiabao. But sustaining this pace for long will not be easy. Local governments are well versed in frustrating central directives.

Critics also point out that the social-housing programme will mostly benefit urban residents, whose household-registration certificates, or hukou, identify them as city residents. Migrants from the countryside usually find it difficult to get hold of such certificates, even if they have lived in a city for many years. Most local governments prefer not to hand them out, because to do so would commit them to providing the holder with the full range of welfare benefits.

The central government hopes the new housing will reduce public discontent over property prices, but even among urban hukou holders, many are cynical about the government’s efforts. Officials find it difficult to assess who is qualified for the housing, given that many households disguise their true incomes. Some of the better-quality housing ends up in the hands of people who are clearly not entitled to it. A visit to one social-housing complex in eastern Beijing, Zhuxin Homes, finds several luxury cars parked around its apartment blocks. An estate agent nearby offers one of its apartments for rent: a sign that the owners have more than one property and are illegally turning their social housing into a money-spinner.

Mr Li has stressed the importance of ensuring that social housing is distributed fairly and has called for supervision of the process “by the media and people”. But his own officials seem reluctant offer much convincing detail on local government compliance. As a report by Macquarie Capital Securities laments, “reliable facts are still hard to find”.

驴驹

这样的的言论，在经济学家报上很正常！

南瓜大仙

和米国之音一个调调，无视之{:soso_e141:}

shwz001

一生就为一个房子在拼命

蔚蓝矢车菊

很多家庭隐藏了他们的真实收入，有些相对比较好的房子被分给明显没有资格的人。到北京东部的一个保障性住房小区朱辛家园参观一圈，就会发现楼下停着若干辆豪华汽车。旁边一家房地产中介在出租小区的房屋，很明显，业主的住房不止一套，因此可以非法地把保障性住房变为牟利的工具。

这个确实是个问题