2026-01-13 18:26:47

If the trading market is merely a redistribution of wealth among participants, then its long-term existence should have long been questioned. But this understanding overlooks a more fundamental aspect—the market is actually a connector between the financial sector and the real economy. Even if the trading process inevitably leads to misallocation of resources, its core mission remains to direct funds to where they can create the most value.

History provides us with the answer. In the 19th century, the United States financed the construction of its railway network through capital markets. This was not just about stockholders making money, but about the entire national economy becoming integrated. Fast forward to today, China supports tech startups through a multi-tiered capital market, with technology-related loans growing at over 30% by 2023. These cases demonstrate a principle: when funds truly flow to places that can generate wealth, the market shifts from "I earn, you lose" to "everyone earns"—companies receive capital to expand production, investors share in growth, and society’s total wealth increases.

The problem is that imbalance indeed exists. Before the 2008 US financial crisis, the derivatives market had already exceeded the size of actual GDP, with money circulating in the virtual economy. The A-shares market experienced a similar phase, with funds piling into small-cap stocks and junk stocks, eventually detaching from the real economy to pursue pure speculation. This disconnection between finance and the real economy is the true cause of the worsening zero-sum game.

How to break the deadlock? It relies on institutional design to correct it. On the financing side, screening mechanisms should filter out truly valuable companies, preventing shell companies from siphoning funds; on the investment side, long-term funds like pension funds should be cultivated, and short-term speculation suppressed; internationally, the German model of close cooperation between banks and enterprises is also worth learning from. Ultimately, the market’s purpose is not to eliminate zero-sum games but to regulate them through rules so that they remain within society’s capacity to bear, allowing finance to truly become the "heart" of the economy.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

22 Likes

Reward
22
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

NFTRegretDiary

· 12h ago

Really, just telling stories is useless; the key is to block shell companies completely. --- Who wasn't cut during the 2008 wave? The virtual economy's idle transfer sounds nice, but in reality, it's just big players siphoning blood. --- Germany's model sounds good, but the question is whether the execution level can keep up. --- Long-term holding of pension funds sounds reliable, but what about retail investors? Are they still just going to be chives? --- It sounds nice, but in reality, there are still people trading garbage stocks. No matter how perfect the system is, human nature can't be changed. --- The idea of capital flowing into value companies is idealistic; in reality, only hot stocks can make money. --- The metaphor of the "heart" is a bit over the top; now it’s more like a casino, right? --- Strict financing review processes have made it harder for innovative companies to get funding. It's really difficult to find the right balance.

View OriginalReply0

BearMarketSurvivor

· 01-15 08:51

Well said, but what about reality? In the A-shares market, isn't it still about speculating on concepts like new energy and chips these years? Truly innovative tech companies are still struggling to raise funds. No matter how beautiful the制度设计 (system design) is, execution is the real problem. --- The German model sounds good, but here our finance and实体 (real economy) are still two separate worlds. Banks prefer to lend to real estate... that's the real disconnection. --- To put it plainly, money is all flowing to the top, while financing costs for small and medium-sized enterprises are still very high. Long-term funds are even more out of reach, and everyone is playing short-term games... --- The lessons from 2008 seem to have been learned little, as the规模 (scale) of derivatives has soared again, and the虚拟经济 (virtual economy) is still entertaining itself. --- We've tried that审核机制 (review mechanism), and shell companies still go public. Those that should violate the law still do, and the root problem isn't how the制度 (system) is written, but how it's executed.

View OriginalReply0

GamefiEscapeArtist

· 01-13 18:56

Well said, the key is to have real industry support; money just circulating without backing will eventually collapse. The logic is sound, but I'm just worried that the institutional design can't keep up. The 2008 wave was indeed tragic; virtual economy was too detached from the real economy. Pension funds are the right path; long-term holding is the only way to stability. A-shares still need to improve the listing review process; no more empty shells allowed to come in and harvest retail investors. The German model is indeed worth learning from; the relationship between banks and enterprises is much closer. It's easy to say, but execution is the real challenge.

View OriginalReply0

CantAffordPancake

· 01-13 18:49

Honestly, without a good financing system for screening, no matter how many railway stories there are, it's all in vain. --- Shell companies exploiting resources definitely need to be regulated; otherwise, it's just nakedly cutting the leeks. --- The idea of a pension fund is good; long-term capital inflow is necessary to stabilize the market. --- The issue of virtual economy idle circulation was seen back in 2008. We must truly learn from the lessons. --- Financial health is important, but it must be ensured that it's not about bloodsucking, but about providing blood. --- The German model sounds reliable; close cooperation between banks and enterprises indeed reduces disconnection. --- Ultimately, it still depends on where the money flows; if it flows to the right places, profits are made; if it flows to the wrong places, it’s a cut. --- The problem isn't with the market itself but whether the rules are truly designed to protect the real economy. --- China's sci-tech innovation financing growth rate exceeding 30% sounds good, but I'm worried it might just be impressive numbers with actual idle circulation.

View OriginalReply0

StablecoinAnxiety

· 01-13 18:30

Basically, it's a matter of system design. Relying on regulation to prevent shell companies from siphoning blood really needs to be strengthened.

View OriginalReply0

CoffeeNFTrader

· 01-13 18:29

Well said, the key is to let the money flow to places that can truly create value, and not just another round of pure speculation.

View OriginalReply0

gas_fee_trauma

· 01-13 18:27

It sounds nice, but I just want to ask—how much money is really flowing into the real economy now? Most of it is still just hype and speculation. The German system does seem to have some merit, but can our system be effectively implemented here? The analogy of shell companies draining blood is spot on. Who will actually be the gatekeeper? Long-term funds sound good, but the problem is retail investors still need to survive. The market's "heart" theory is good, but I'm just worried that if the heart fails, everyone will be finished.

View OriginalReply0