The main problems of agricultural development at present

First, agricultural costs are getting higher and higher, and the security crisis of grain and other major agricultural products is becoming more and more obvious.

State agricultural departments and statistical departments have said: China's grain and other major agricultural products have achieved "ten consecutive increases", with a total output of more than 120 billion jin. Per capita possession of staple grain reached 900 jin, creating a record high. At the same time, however, net imports of grain and related products grew at double-digit rates, reaching 14 billion jin in 2013, a record high. The self-sufficiency rate of major agricultural products set by the state is 95%, while the actual self-sufficiency rate has dropped below 90%.

Has China's grain output really achieved "ten consecutive increases"? If it is really "ten consecutive increases", how can there be such a contradictory phenomenon? Will the fact be just the opposite, China's grain and other major agricultural products output is in a relatively low period?

It is an indisputable fact that it is now "old man agriculture" that produces food. Since 1990, the price of grain storage in our country has only increased by 6 times, while the prices of other commodities have increased by N times 6 times. In this case, of course, only the left-behind elderly who have no market price for labor are engaged in food production. The question of who will farm the land (grain) in the future worries the central leadership.

Worried that no one is engaged in grain production, the government promotes land circulation, finances money subsidies to so-called agricultural leading enterprises or large households, and transfers land from farmers at high prices for "intensive" management. Now the land circulation price has reached an average of 800 yuan/mu per year, equivalent to RMB. Russia is only 2 yuan/mu per year, the United States is only 100 yuan/mu per year, and Japan is only between 100-150 yuan/mu per year. Will China's leading agricultural enterprises or large households produce food after renting the land of old farmers at high prices?

The author has traveled all over the country and inspected the production bases of countless agricultural leading enterprises. The scenes of hundreds or thousands of acres of land or dozens or hundreds of contiguous greenhouses only growing grass but not crops can be found everywhere. Every year, dozens or hundreds of villages visited by the author have reduced grain production year after year, while those reported have increased production year after year.

I don't understand why governments at all levels push high prices for agricultural land to be concentrated in leading agricultural enterprises and large households on the grounds of food security. The more the central government subsidizes and invests in agriculture, the more local governments will do such nonsense. Under such an incentive mechanism, is it credible that grain production has increased continuously?

Second, the land system and other reform policies are deviated, grass-roots organizations and governments are becoming more and more lax, and rural governance is becoming more and more ineffective.

As farmers occupy land without paying rent ("no occupation for white, no occupation") and "more occupation for more subsidies"(Agricultural subsidies are approved according to the area occupied, and subsidies such as grain seeds are enjoyed even if the land is not planted) and other unfair and unreasonable policies are gradually moving towards "long-term unchanged" and legalization, resulting in the legalization and perpetuation of uneven and unfair land occupation in the village, resulting in the increase of violent land occupation, and inducing the uncontrolled expansion of homesteads and private plots, and even inducing some people to attack the legitimacy of the Communist revolution. Land system is not only the root of agriculture, but also the root of rural economy, rural society, rural politics, and even rural ecology and rural culture. Fairness--equal land ownership and public ownership of price increase are the most fundamental principles for the construction and perfection of rural land system, but this principle no longer exists under the distorted discourse of "reform". This is the source of rural chaos.

For a long time, land reform, agricultural industrial policy and rural economic policy adjustment have not evolved in the direction of consolidating the peasant village community and its autonomy, but in the opposite direction. Especially, the abolition of agricultural tax also cancels the right of village collective (community) to collect land contract fee by virtue of land ownership, which leads to the democratic autonomy system of village community under the leadership of Party branch, which gradually exists in name only because of losing the support of property right system and economic foundation, the leadership of Party is weakening day by day in rural areas, and the trend of rural underworld is becoming more and more obvious, and this trend is still continuing.

Since the reform, the authority of the township government has been continuously weakened, and it basically has no command over the functional departments under its jurisdiction. In addition, the gradual disintegration of the peasant village community has made it almost impossible for the township party committee and government to legally or normally exercise their administrative power effectively. The township government generally has only four major tasks left: compiling data, preventing peasants from petitioning, dealing with family planning inspections and running projects. And the vast majority of township party committees and governments complete this "four major" work has a common feature is "false", township economic data, family planning data, financial revenue and expenditure data and central transfer payment project fund use data, not false has been extremely rare.

Third, the opening up of the agricultural industry is out of control, endangering national security.

Under the background of globalization, the United States and other countries rely on their agricultural technology advantages and capital strength, and use free trade as a weapon to try to occupy the market share of other countries 'agricultural products and compete for pricing power--to pursue stable market share income and pricing power income, that is, to implement the "weaponization" strategy of agricultural products and implement "control" on the economic, political and social security of other countries. A populous country like China must ensure the autonomy of its agricultural industry in order to safeguard its own security.

After our country joins WTO, did not add precautionary ground to liberalize agriculture. Whether it is technology or seed, its autonomy is weakening day by day; Whether it is the overseas market share and pricing power of labor-intensive agricultural products, or the domestic market share and pricing power of land-intensive agricultural products, its autonomy is weakening day by day; Whether it is the production, storage, processing, logistics and retail commerce of agricultural products and related products, foreign capital enters unimpeded, and many local governments even hand over the grain purchase and sales system to foreign capital. The continuation of this trend is bound to endanger national security.

Fourth, agricultural modernization deviates from peasant urbanization, resulting in higher and higher social risks in modernization transformation.

At the beginning of the reform, China's rural registered population was more than 700 million. After more than 30 years of rapid development of reform and opening up, China's rural registered population has increased to more than 900 million. In all the countries and regions before the Asian "Four Little Dragons", under the background of modernization of industrialization and urbanization strategy, when the per capita GDP reached US $4500, the rural population had basically been urbanized-only less than 15% of the agricultural rural population remained. China's industrialization is coming to an end, GDP per capita has exceeded 7000 US dollars, and the registered population of rural farmers has increased instead of decreasing, which has no precedent in the modernization process of all the pioneering countries (regions) in the world. The author's explanation for this phenomenon is that after the global general manufacturing gradient transferred to China, there was a "Chinese inflection point"-from "a few people making for the majority" to "most people making for the minority"-manufacturing surplus, and the low wage income of Chinese migrant workers could not support the high cost of migrant workers 'urbanization. China's export-oriented industrialization-the development of general manufacturing-has only created 200 - 300 million urban refugees, but failed to create 200 - 300 million urban citizens and families.