尊敬的李强书记，尊敬的陈元主席、小川行长，各位领导，各位金融界的朋友们，大家上午好。 Distinguished Secretary Li Qiang, Chairman Chen Yuan, Governor Zhou Xiaochuan, leaders, and friends from the financial community, good morning.
感谢大会的邀请，很高兴有这个机会和大家一起学习、探讨、交流。 Thank you for inviting me. I am delighted to have this opportunity to learn, discuss, and exchange ideas with all of you.
2013年，也是在上海，我发表了一通互联网金融的异想天开的观点。七年过去了，今天我这个金融的外行，又来了。 In 2013, also here in Shanghai, I shared some fanciful ideas about internet finance. Seven years have passed, and today this outsider to finance has returned.
今天要不要来讲，坦白说我也很纠结。但是我想我们这批人，有一个东西是责无旁贷的，就是为未来思考的责任，因为这个世界虽然留给我们的发展机会很多，但是关键性的机会只有一两次，现在就是到了最关键的时刻。 To be honest, I struggled with whether I should speak today. But I believe that people of our generation have an inescapable responsibility to think about the future. Although the world offers us many opportunities for development, there are only one or two truly decisive opportunities, and we have now reached the most critical moment.
所以我想我还是要讲一讲我自己的一些想法，这些想法，是我们自己十六年实践经验总结出来，加上担任联合国数字合作高级别小组联合主席和联合国可持续发展目标倡导者期间，跟全世界的学者、专家还有实践者认真探讨交流得出的。 So I still want to share some of my thoughts. They come from sixteen years of our own practical experience, as well as serious discussions with scholars, experts, and practitioners around the world while I served as co-chair of the United Nations High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation and as an advocate for the UN Sustainable Development Goals.
我想我反正已经退休，就畅所欲言一下，分享三个观点，供大家参考，可能不成熟，讲得不对，贻笑大方，大家估且一听： Since I am retired, I will speak freely and share three views for your consideration. They may not be mature, and what I say may be wrong or invite ridicule, so please take them simply as ideas to consider.
第一，一直以来我们有一些思维上的惯性，比如总觉得要为了跟国际接轨，必须要做欧美发达国家有，而我们没有的所谓空白，要填补国内的空白。把填补空白当作追求的目标。 First, we have long been guided by habitual ways of thinking. We often assume that, to align ourselves with international practice, we must fill supposed domestic gaps by creating whatever developed European and American countries have that we do not. Filling gaps has become an objective in itself.
我一直觉得填补空白这句话是有问题的，不是因为欧美的就是先进的，就是我们要去填补的。其实今天我们不应该要和哪个东西接轨，适应哪国的标准，填补哪个空白，今天我们要思考的是怎么和未来接轨，怎么适应未来的标准，怎么弥补未来的空白，我们要想明白未来是如何的，以及自己到底要做成一个什么样的体系，然后再去看看别人怎么做，如果永远重复别人的语言，讨论别人设定的主题，我们不但会迷失现在，而且会错失未来。 I have always believed there is something wrong with the phrase “filling gaps.” Something is not necessarily advanced, or a gap we must fill, merely because Europe or America has it. Today we should not be asking what system to align with, which country's standards to adopt, or which present gap to fill. We should think about how to align with the future, adapt to future standards, and fill the gaps of the future. We must understand what the future will look like and what kind of system we ourselves want to build, and only then examine how others do things. If we keep repeating other people's language and discussing subjects set by others, we will not only lose sight of the present but also miss the future.
二战以后，世界需要恢复经济繁荣，布雷登森林体系建立起来，对全球经济的推动是巨大的；后来亚洲金融风暴发生，巴塞尔协议讲的风险控制越来越受重视，到后来变成了一个风险控制的操作标准，现在的趋势越来越象是全世界变成了只讲风险控制，不讲发展，很少去想年轻人的机会、发展中的国家机会在哪里，这其实是导致今天世界的很多问题的根源。我们今天也看到巴塞尔协议本身也让欧洲的整体创新受到了很大的限制，特别是金融数字化方面。 After the Second World War, the world needed to restore economic prosperity, and the Bretton Woods system made an enormous contribution to the global economy. Later, following the Asian financial crisis, the Basel Accords placed increasing emphasis on risk control and eventually became an operational standard for it. The trend today is for the entire world to discuss risk control but not development, with little thought given to opportunities for young people or developing countries. This is one root of many of today's global problems. We can also see that the Basel framework has constrained innovation across Europe, particularly in the digitalization of finance.
巴塞尔比较象一个老年人俱乐部，要解决的是运转了几十年的金融体系老化的问题，系统复杂的问题。但是中国的问题正好相反，不是金融系统性风险，而是缺乏金融生态系统的风险。 Basel is rather like a club for old people. It addresses the aging and complexity of financial systems that have operated for decades. China's problem is precisely the opposite: it is not systemic financial risk, but the risk created by the absence of a complete financial ecosystem.
中国的金融和其他刚成长起来的发展中国家一样，在金融业是青春少年，还没有成熟的生态体系，没有完完全全的流动起来，大银行更像是大江大河和血液的主动脉，但是我们需要湖泊、需要水塘，需要小溪小河，需要各种各样的沼泽地，缺少了这些生态系统，我们才会涝的时候涝死，旱的时候旱死，所以今天我们国家是缺乏金融系统的风险，不是金融系统性风险。这是两个完全不同的病，就象老年痴呆症和小儿麻痹症，症状看起来很象，其实差别很大，如果小孩子吃了老年痴呆的药，不光会得老人的病，还有很多见都没见过的病会冒出来。这个巴塞尔协议就是考虑治系统老化、过度复杂的老年人的病的，我们要思考的是跟着老年人我们要学什么？要知道老年人关心的是离医院近不近，年轻人关心的是有没有学区，是完全的不同体系的思考。 Like other developing countries that have only recently grown, China's financial sector is still young. It does not yet have a mature, fully circulating ecosystem. Large banks are like great rivers or the major arteries of the bloodstream, but we also need lakes, ponds, streams, and all kinds of wetlands. Without this ecosystem, floods overwhelm us in wet times and drought destroys us in dry times. Our country therefore faces the risk of lacking a financial system, rather than systemic financial risk. These are completely different illnesses. They may look similar, like dementia and polio, but they are fundamentally different. If a child takes medicine intended for dementia, the child will not only acquire the ailments of the elderly but may develop illnesses no one has ever seen. The Basel Accords were designed to treat the ailments of an aging and excessively complex system. We must ask what young people should learn from following the elderly. Older people care about living near a hospital; young people care about access to good schools. These are entirely different systems of thought.
第二，创新一定会付出代价，我们这代人必须有所担当。 Second, innovation inevitably carries a price, and our generation must accept responsibility for it.
习主席讲过“功成不必在我”，我理解这句话讲的是一种责任，讲的是为未来、为明天、为下一代担当。今天世界的很多问题包括中国，都只能用创新去解决；但是真正的创新，一定是没有人带路的，一定需要有人担当，因为创新一定会犯错误，问题不是怎么样不犯错误，而是犯了错误之后能不能完善修正坚持创新。做没有风险的创新，就是扼杀创新，很多时候，把风险控制为零才是最大的风险。 President Xi has said that success does not have to be achieved in one's own tenure. I understand this as a statement of responsibility: responsibility for the future, for tomorrow, and for the next generation. Many of the world's problems, including China's, can be solved only through innovation. But genuine innovation has no guide and requires someone to take responsibility, because innovation inevitably produces mistakes. The issue is not how never to make a mistake, but whether we can improve, correct, and persist with innovation after mistakes occur. Innovation without risk is the strangling of innovation; often, reducing risk to zero is itself the greatest risk.
当年的赤壁之战，曹操把船连起来的思考就是最早的航母的思考，但是一把火让中国一千年再也没有人敢去想航母这个事，这是一个错误消灭一个创新。 At the Battle of Red Cliffs, Cao Cao's idea of linking ships together was the earliest form of thinking behind an aircraft carrier. But one fire kept people in China from daring to think about aircraft carriers for a thousand years. One mistake destroyed an innovation.
七八年前我提出过互联网金融，但我们一直强调互联网金融必须有三个核心要素：一是丰富的数据；二是基于大数据的风控技术；三是基于大数据信用体系。用这个标准衡量，就会看到P2P根本不是互联网金融，但是今天不能因为 P2P把整个互联网技术对金融的创新否定了，其实我们要想一想如果全国几千家P2P犯金融公司的错误，是不是我们其它地方出了问题？中国如何可能在几年内出现几千家互联网金融公司？这完全是不敬畏技术，P2P是一批打着互联网金融幌子，拿着合法牌照的骗子。 Seven or eight years ago I proposed internet finance, but we always emphasized that it must have three core elements: abundant data, risk-control technology based on big data, and a credit system based on big data. Judged by these standards, P2P lending was never internet finance. Yet we cannot reject all financial innovation based on internet technology because of P2P. We should ask whether thousands of P2P firms across the country were able to commit the errors of financial companies because something else in our system went wrong. How could thousands of internet-finance companies emerge in China within only a few years? This showed a complete lack of respect for technology. P2P operators were swindlers who used the banner of internet finance while holding legal licenses.
今天我们的监管确实很难。创新来自市场，来自基层，来自年轻人，对监管的挑战越来越大。 Regulation is indeed difficult today. Innovation comes from the market, the grassroots, and young people, creating ever greater challenges for regulators.
其实监和管是两件事，监是看着你发展，管是有问题的时候才去管，但是我们现在管的能力很强，监的能力明显不足，好的创新不怕监管，但是怕昨天的监管，我们不能用管理火车站的办法来管机场，不能用昨天的办法来管未来。 Supervision and administration are two different things. Supervision means watching development, while administration means intervening when a problem arises. Today our ability to administer is strong, but our ability to supervise is clearly inadequate. Good innovation does not fear regulation; it fears yesterday's regulation. We cannot manage an airport with methods designed for a railway station, or govern the future with yesterday's methods.
监和管不一样，政策和文件也不一样，今天是这个不许那个不许的文件太多，政策太少。今天需要“政策专家”，而不是处长式的“文件专家”，制订政策是一门技术活，其实解决系统复杂性的问题，我可以提供淘宝的经历作为参考。当时淘宝的政策非常复杂，商家都看不懂，后来我们提出来，加一减三，你要加一条政策，就要减前面三条。我们现在的政策越来越多，导致的结果是谁都干不了什么事，谁干都可能出事情。 Supervision differs from administration, just as policy differs from official documents. Today we have too many documents saying what may not be done, and too few genuine policies. We need policy experts, not section-chief-style experts in drafting documents. Policymaking is a technical craft. To address systemic complexity, I can offer Taobao's experience. Its rules once became so complicated that merchants could not understand them. We later adopted a “one added, three removed” principle: adding one rule required removing three earlier ones. Our policies are now multiplying to the point where nobody can accomplish anything and anyone who acts may run into trouble.
理论和系统是不一样的，专家和学者是不一样的，专家是干出来的，干得很厉害，但不一定会总结，很多学者是不具体干，但是能形成理论。只有专家和学者结合起来，只有理论和实践结合起来，才能真正去创新解决今天和明天的问题。我们需要来自实践的理论，不是来自办公室理论的实践，P2P是来自办公室理论的实践，它给我们的启发，不是否定互联网，而是不要再重复办公室理论的实践。 Theory is not the same as a system, and an expert is not the same as a scholar. Experts develop their ability through practice and may be highly capable without knowing how to summarize their experience. Many scholars do not engage in concrete practice but can formulate theories. Only by combining experts with scholars, and theory with practice, can we genuinely innovate to solve the problems of today and tomorrow. We need theory that comes from practice, not practice imposed by office-based theory. P2P was practice derived from office-based theory. Its lesson is not that we should reject the internet, but that we should stop repeating practice invented in offices.
我觉得有一个现象，就是我们的一些处长，监管到后来，变成了自己没有风险，自己部门没有风险，但是整个经济有风险，整个经济不发展的风险。未来的比赛是创新的比赛，不仅仅是监管技能的比赛。我的理解，习主席说的执政能力的提升，是指发展了并且监管有序的发展，而不是监管了没发展。 I have observed that some officials regulate until they themselves and their departments bear no risk, while the entire economy bears the risk of stagnation. The competition of the future will be a competition in innovation, not merely in regulatory technique. I understand President Xi's call to improve governing capacity as meaning development that is achieved and regulated in an orderly way, not regulation that prevents development.
第三，金融的本质是信用管理，我们必须改掉金融的当铺思想，依靠信用体系。 Third, the essence of finance is credit management. We must abandon the pawnshop mentality in finance and rely on a credit system.
今天的银行延续的还是当铺思想，抵押和担保就是最当的当铺。这在当年也是很厉害的思想，没有抵押，担保这些创新，就没有今天的金融机构，中国经济40年来不可能发展到今天。 Today's banks still perpetuate a pawnshop mentality: collateral and guarantees are its purest expression. In their time, these were powerful innovations. Without collateral and guarantees, today's financial institutions would not exist, and the Chinese economy could not have developed as it has over the past forty years.
但是靠资产和抵押的体制会走两个极端，我这几年跟很多企业家交流，中国的金融当铺思想最为严重，要么是资产全押了出去，压力巨大；要么肆无忌惮贷款，不断加杠杆，负债搞的很大。有个段子可能大家都知道：你向银行借10万块，你有点慌；借1000万，你和银行都有点慌；借10个亿，你一点不用慌，银行会很慌。 But a system based on assets and collateral moves toward two extremes. From my conversations with many entrepreneurs in recent years, China's pawnshop mentality in finance is especially severe. Some pledge all their assets and face enormous pressure; others borrow recklessly, continually increase leverage, and accumulate huge debts. You may know the joke: borrow 100,000 yuan from a bank and you feel nervous; borrow ten million and both you and the bank feel nervous; borrow one billion and you no longer need to worry, because the bank will be very worried.
抵押的当铺思想，是不可能支持未来30年世界发展对金融的需求的。我们必须用借助今天的技术能力，用大数据为基础的信用体系来取代当铺思想，这个信用体系不是建立在IT基础上，不是建立在熟人社会的基础上，必须是建立在大数据的基础上，才能真正让信用等于财富。要饭也必须有信用，没有信用，连饭都要不到。 A collateral-based pawnshop mentality cannot support the world's financial needs over the next thirty years. We must use today's technological capabilities to replace that mentality with a credit system founded on big data. This credit system cannot rest merely on IT or on a society of personal acquaintances; it must be built on big data so that credit can truly become wealth. Even a beggar needs credibility—without it, one cannot even obtain food.
——世界期待一个真正为未来而思考的全新的金融体系 —The world expects a genuinely new financial system designed with the future in mind.
如果二战后，当时的人们能够有这样的远见和担当为未来、为年轻人建立一个全新的金融体系，今天的我们同样有责任思考未来的金融体系。未来的金融体系，要从帮助20%的人，到帮助80%的小企业和年轻人；要从过去的人找钱、企业找钱，做到钱找人、钱找企业，钱找好企业。评价这个体系的唯一标准是普惠，绿色，可持续，背后是大数据、云计算、区块链等前沿技术起决定性作用。 If people after the Second World War had the foresight and responsibility to build a new financial system for the future and for young people, then we today have the same responsibility to consider the financial system of the future. It must move from helping twenty percent of people to serving eighty percent of small businesses and young people. Instead of people and companies searching for money, money should find people, companies, and good companies. The sole measure of this system should be whether it is inclusive, green, and sustainable, with advanced technologies such as big data, cloud computing, and blockchain playing a decisive role behind it.
今天我们不是做不到，而是不去做。今天我们的技术发展让我们已经完全可以做到这些，遗憾的是很多人不愿意去做。今天全球的金融体系必须改革，不然不仅仅是失去机会的问题，而是让世界会陷入混乱的问题，因为创新走在监管前面是正常的，但是当创新远远走在监管前面的时候，当创新的丰富度远远超过监管想象的时候，就不正常了，世界会陷入混乱。 It is not that we cannot do this today; we choose not to. Technology has already made it entirely possible, yet regrettably many people are unwilling to act. The global financial system must be reformed. Otherwise the problem will not merely be lost opportunities—the world may fall into disorder. It is normal for innovation to move ahead of regulation, but when innovation moves far beyond regulation and its richness greatly exceeds regulators' imagination, the situation becomes abnormal and the world risks disorder.
拿数字货币来说，如果用未来的眼光打造30年后世界所需的金融体系，数字货币可能是非常重要的核心。今天的金融确实不需要数字货币，但是明天需要，未来需要，成千上万的人需要，我们应该问自己，数字货币到底要解决未来的什么实际问题？十年以后的数字货币和今天的数字货币可能不是一回事，这个数字货币不是从历史上去找，不是从监管角度去找，不是从研究机构去找，而是从市场去找，从需求去找，从未来去找。 Consider digital currency. If we look ahead and build the financial system the world will need in thirty years, digital currency may become a crucial core component. Finance may not need digital currency today, but it will need it tomorrow and in the future, and millions of people will need it. We should ask what practical future problem digital currency is meant to solve. The digital currency of ten years from now may be very different from today's. It cannot be discovered by looking to history, regulation, or research institutes; it must be found in the market, in demand, and in the future.
这件事事关重大，我们的研究机构不应该是政策机构，政策机构也不能仅仅依赖自己的研究机构。因为数字货币体系是一个技术问题，但又不仅仅是技术问题，更是一个解决未来问题的方案，数字货币可能重新定义货币，尽管货币的主要功能仍然在，但是会重新定义货币，就象苹果手机重新定义了手机，而不是仅仅是个电话。 This is a matter of great importance. Research institutes should not become policymaking bodies, and policymaking bodies should not rely solely on their own research institutes. A digital-currency system is a technical issue, but it is not merely technical; it is a proposal for solving future problems. Digital currency may redefine money. Although money's principal functions will remain, the concept may be redefined just as the iPhone redefined the mobile phone rather than merely serving as a telephone.
数字货币远远没有到抢标准的时候，是创造价值，是解决世界经济、贸易可持续、绿色、普惠的问题。 It is far too early to compete over digital-currency standards. The task is to create value and solve problems of sustainability, green development, and inclusion in the world economy and trade.
最后我想说，今天人类社会到了最最关键的时刻，千万不要小看这场疫情，这场疫情是倒逼人类社会进步的力量，不亚于二战。我们对今天世界上很多的组织机构，不是简单的去反对它，而是一起重新思考他今天的价值，无论是联合国，WTO，还是WHO，这些组织我们都需要，但这些组织应该怎么面向未来，如何改革，是要重新思考的。 Finally, humanity has reached an exceptionally critical moment. We must not underestimate this pandemic. It is a force compelling human society to progress, no less consequential than the Second World War. We should not simply oppose many of today's global organizations, but join together to reconsider their present value. We need the United Nations, the WTO, and the WHO, but we must rethink how these organizations should face the future and how they should reform.
新金融是未来的方向，不管我们高兴不高兴，它一定会起来；不管我们做不做，一定会有人去做。未来的标准必须符合普惠、绿色、可持续。过去16年，蚂蚁一直在坚持探索，如果普惠、绿色、可持续是个错误，那么我们愿意一错到底！ New finance is the direction of the future. Whether we welcome it or not, it will emerge; whether we act or not, someone will. Future standards must be inclusive, green, and sustainable. Ant has continued exploring these goals for the past sixteen years. If inclusion, green development, and sustainability are a mistake, then we are willing to keep making that mistake to the end.
改革是要牺牲的，要付出代价的，我们这一代人做这个改革，结果可能是下一代才能看到，我们可能就是负重前行的一人，但是这是历史给我们的机遇，也是给我们的责任，这就是我想和大家交流探讨的内容，不一定正确，但都是我个人认真的思考。 Reform requires sacrifice and carries a price. Our generation may undertake the reform while only the next generation sees the results. We may be among those who bear the burden and move forward, but this is both the opportunity and the responsibility history has given us. That is what I wanted to discuss with you. These thoughts are not necessarily correct, but they are all the product of my serious reflection.
谢谢大家！ Thank you.