中金：从“被忽略”的牛市到“被延后”的修复

Core Insights - The article discusses the lessons learned from Japan's economic experience in the 1990s, emphasizing that despite facing multiple pressures such as deflation, real estate downturns, and debt issues, a bull market can still be stimulated through policy measures and capital inflows. However, unresolved structural problems can lead to interruptions in market recovery, as seen in Japan's case, which experienced three bull markets that were ultimately short-lived due to these underlying issues [1][7]. Group 1: Structural Issues in Japan in the 1990s - Japan faced significant structural issues during the 1990s, including a declining birth rate leading to an aging population, which increased the elderly dependency ratio from 17.4% in 1990 to 25.6% in 2000, a rise of 8.2 percentage points [9][10]. - The public pension system was under pressure due to aging demographics, with pension expenditures as a percentage of GDP increasing by 2.1 percentage points during the 1990s, raising concerns about sustainability [12][13]. - The real estate bubble burst after rapid interest rate hikes by the Bank of Japan, leading to a prolonged decline in housing prices, with national residential land prices dropping by approximately 52.8% over two decades [16][19]. - Employment challenges emerged as a result of a surplus in the labor market, with university graduate employment rates falling from 81.3% in 1991 to 55.1% in 2003, creating a competitive environment for public sector jobs [21][24]. - The financial system was strained as the real estate bubble's collapse weakened cash flows for real estate companies, increasing non-performing assets in banks [29]. Group 2: Policy Shortcomings in the 1990s - Japan's policies in the 1990s were inadequate, with a misalignment between technological investments and market realities, causing the country to miss the internet wave and lose competitiveness in the semiconductor industry [34][35]. - The government overly relied on short-term infrastructure investments, which constituted nearly 20% of fiscal spending at times, failing to address structural issues and leading to a decline in consumer demand [3][43]. - Real estate policies were slow and insufficient, with mortgage interest rates declining only marginally, resulting in prolonged downward pressure on housing prices and damage to household balance sheets [50][51]. - The slow pace of debt resolution and a lenient regulatory approach to non-performing assets weakened the financial system's resilience, leading to higher costs when external shocks occurred [54][59]. Group 3: Policy Awakening Post-2000 - After 2000, Japan shifted its policy focus towards social welfare, with public spending on social security rising from 21.4% in 2000 to 32.7% in 2015-2019, contributing to sustained income growth for residents [62][64]. - The government implemented large-scale institutional measures to address non-performing assets, significantly reducing the non-performing loan ratio from 8.4% in 2001 to 2.9% by 2004 [71][72]. - Technological policies became more aligned with market needs, with a focus on key sectors and direct support for corporate R&D, enhancing the effectiveness of government incentives [75][76]. Group 4: Implications for Current Economic Context - China currently faces challenges similar to Japan's past, with old economic drivers still weighing down growth. The fourth quarter has seen a slowdown in real estate and domestic demand, indicating potential market volatility [5][84]. - While new economic drivers and capital inflows can provide short-term boosts, addressing old economic drivers is equally crucial for sustainable recovery. Policies aimed at enhancing consumer welfare and stabilizing the real estate market are essential [5][82]. - China's economic advantages include strong government investment in AI and technology, a resilient export sector, and manageable government debt levels, providing a foundation for addressing structural challenges [80][81].