Difference Between Private Ownership and State Ownership.
Private ownership and ownership by the whole people are two completely different forms of ownership, the former in which corporate profits are owned by individuals, and the latter in which the state owns them. Individuals cannot enjoy the dividends of shares, but there are many benefits.
In a private enterprise, private owners are free to use the profits of the business and use them for their own consumption and **. On the contrary, the income of state-owned enterprises is owned by the state and can be used for some public welfare undertakings, such as tax cuts. Although some people are worried that public property will be squandered by some people, it is a crime after all and can be prosecuted, while the corruption of private enterprises is difficult to curb through judicial channels.
At the same time, the ownership of the whole people can also shoulder greater social responsibilities. For example, for more than 20 years, electricity has not risen, and railway fares have not been greatly improved. In contrast, private companies tend to have profit maximization as their first goal, so they can easily control their own **, and when prices rise, we usually can't interfere and we can't react.
The importance of universal ownership for national development.
Ownership by the whole people has a bearing on the stability and development of a nation. For example, since railways are the lifeblood of a nation, the involvement of the private sector will inevitably lead to a large loss of state-owned assets, so the economic lifeline of the country can only be guaranteed through the maintenance of national ownership. In times of crisis, it can quickly mobilize a large number of people and funds to bail out, which many countries in the world cannot do.
It is precisely because of the benefits of this "ownership by the whole people" that the doctors of these public hospitals are at the forefront without hesitation, while private medical institutions may have to negotiate before reaching an agreement, and the longer it drags on, the more unfavorable it will be to the control of the disease.
In short, although we cannot get dividends from the "whole people", it is very valuable for the development of a nation, a society, and the stability of an whole. Compared with private ownership, it can better reflect the values of fairness, justice and social responsibility.
Self-reflection and induction.
From the standpoint of individuals, for us ordinary people, we may not be able to get any benefits from the ownership of the whole people, but we must understand that this is not just a kind of interest appeal of the individual economy, but a kind of pursuit of national and social welfare. We must realize that the development of a nation and the interests of each individual are closely linked, and the stability of a nation is closely linked to the well-being of each individual.
Therefore, we, the broad masses of workers, should give more support and more participation in the establishment and development of China's socialist market economic system. While we cannot reap the dividends of universal ownership, we can enjoy the benefits of price stability, public services, and tax incentives. We firmly believe that with the joint efforts of everyone, we will be able to benefit more people, let more people benefit, and benefit every ordinary worker.
As Mr. He Zuoxiu said, "We cannot pursue profits like private ownership, but we must bear corresponding obligations." "We should not only evaluate it from our own selfishness, but also stand on a longer-term perspective and link our own interests with the development of the nation and the well-being of society. We advocate ownership by the whole people, which is not only a useful supplement to the construction of the motherland, but also a way to benefit ourselves.