How Yongkun's Gold Scheme Operated Like a Ponzi

 

---

The Unspoken Divide: How Yongkun's Gold Scheme Operated Like a Ponzi

The story of Yongkun Mall's collapse is a textbook example of a Ponzi scheme, meticulously executed and disguised over a decade. It ensnared over 10,000 victims, siphoning off an estimated 2 to 5 billion RMB, predominantly from wealthy individuals in Zhejiang province – the very people who had accumulated significant assets through economic booms and property demolitions. Many of these victims, including Yongkun's own employees, lost their entire life savings.

Here's how this elaborate "golden cicada shedding its shell" operation unfolded:

The Deceptive Foundations (First 3 Years: Building Trust with "Real Gold")

Yongkun understood the power of trust. In its initial phase, it acted as a legitimate gold trading platform. Customers who bought investment gold could withdraw physical gold upon maturity, and the promised 9% annual returns arrived promptly. This appeared far more lucrative than traditional bank deposits. To bolster this façade, the company invested heavily in superficial displays: genuine gold in showrooms, but the "warehouses" were filled with brass, and bank gold reserves were mere photoshopped images. This convinced shrewd Zhejiang business owners and demolition beneficiaries that they had stumbled upon a hidden gem, leading to rapid word-of-mouth expansion.

The Snowballing Illusion (Middle 4 Years: Robbing Peter to Pay Paul)

As Yongkun's reputation spread, new investor capital became the primary source for paying off older clients' interest. For instance, with 1 billion RMB in principal, a 9% annual interest payout would require 90 million RMB. However, the actual market volatility of gold during those years only offered a maximum return of 150 million RMB, leaving a deficit of 75 million RMB. This shortfall was covered by a multi-level marketing (MLM) recruitment model. Promising a staggering 29% commission for developing new "downlines" (meaning 290,000 RMB for every 1 million RMB invested by a recruit), Yongkun incentivized its staff and even local community members to pull in their relatives and neighbors. This viral recruitment fueled the Ponzi structure, with even company employees succumbing to the allure, investing their entire savings and borrowed money.

The Evasive Endgame (Final 3 Years: Delay Tactics and Covert Transfers)

In the last three years, as gold prices surged (reaching 767 RMB/gram in 2025 from an earlier 560 RMB/gram, implying massive promised payouts), Yongkun began its exit strategy. While investors were due substantial gains, the funds had already been moved. The company employed various delay tactics to string investors along:

• Debt-to-Points Conversion: Offering virtual points that could supposedly be redeemed for gold, but in reality, only allowed exchange for copper-plated iron pieces.
• "Lock-up" Threats: Scaring investors with high withdrawal fees, urging them to keep their money in to "earn more."
• Fake System Upgrades: The mobile app would conveniently undergo "maintenance," disabling withdrawal functions.

Simultaneously, a sophisticated money laundering operation was underway. Funds were transferred to hundreds of shell companies spanning jewelry, e-commerce, and supply chain businesses. Franchisees' daily revenues were forcibly collected and diverted to cover interest payments, while executives secured overseas properties and created fabricated gold insurance policies (one claiming 4.1 billion RMB in value with only 4,000 RMB paid in premiums).

The inevitable collapse finally occurred, with Yongkun's boss, Wang Guohai, reportedly escaping to the U.S. on a private jet, his timing impeccable.

The Unseen Cost: A Lesson in Preserving Wealth

The most poignant aspect of this decade-long "pig butchering" scam is the sheer scale of personal devastation. One three-generation Zhejiang family, for instance, lost 20 million RMB – the accumulated wealth of a lineage that included a wartime codebreaker, 1960s university graduates, top-tier doctors, and Fortune 500 executives. Three generations of hard-earned assets vanished at the hands of a single scammer.

This tragedy underscores a profound lesson: preserving wealth is an even more profound wisdom than accumulating it. Many successful individuals, whether self-employed bosses, demolition beneficiaries, or hardworking people with savings, often shy away from simply depositing money in banks for modest returns. Instead, they seek higher returns through entrepreneurship, investment, or even gambling – a desire for accelerated wealth that can make them vulnerable to schemes like Yongkun's. The story highlights how even well-intentioned individuals seeking to grow their wealth can, by placing "all their eggs in one basket" and chasing unrealistic returns, unwittingly expose themselves to catastrophic losses.

智與慧：稅負之辨

 智與慧：稅負之辨

夫世人好以智識學業論才，然「智」（即聰明，能創新解難者）與「慧」（即智慧，能觀局識變，優化終局者）常混為一。特就財賦之道，析此異同，以察人智之妙。

---

一、智與慧兼備者：高入而稅輕

此乃財智雙絕之士。其人智足以致高俸，慧足以固財源，善守其富。或為賈者，深諳稅則利弊，巧用策略；或為士人，憑謀士良言，優化資產。其聰明令其富甲一方，其智慧使財不虛耗，乃智、慧合璧之象也。

---

二、智高而慧淺者：高入而稅重

此類人者，惑人反常。其學業精湛，才華洋溢，收入豐厚，毋庸置疑為英才。然不善理財，任巨額錢財，徑入府庫，而不知善用稅律。譬若良醫巨律，心專術業，無暇顧及私財；或高管顯要，獨重功績，怠於財計。其智足以聚財，然慧不足以守財，故常負重稅，甚可惋惜。

---

三、學淺而慧深者：入微而稅輕

此類人者，異於俗見。其人或非學有所成，或無顯赫之職，所得或寡。然深具務實之市井智慧，善察稅法，盡用其利。其人勤儉儲蓄，量入為出，善理薄產。如匠人自營，細計開銷；或長者持家，善理資產。其不假外物，全憑己慧，使微薄之財，亦能保全。

---

四、智慧俱失者：入微而稅重

此類人者，眾生之常也。其人常困於生計，所得寡薄，復不諳財稅，致稅負沉重。或為庸碌之輩，或陷於貧困之境，掙扎求存，難顧遠慮，亦無力善用稅制之利。其人所得既微，復無慧以自救，故常為重稅所困。

---

結語：智慧無定，財道有常

夫此論非在臧否人物，乃欲明智之多面也。「智」足以興業，而「慧」則可安身。善賺固要，然善守善增，乃真慧之所在，世人每易忽之。願天下人皆能明此理，善理財資，以圖長久。此不僅關乎富貴，亦關乎安樂也。

Are You Clever, Smart, or Just Paying Too Much Tax?

 

The Unspoken Divide: Are You Clever, Smart, or Just Paying Too Much Tax?

In a world obsessed with IQ scores, academic accolades, and career achievements, we often conflate various forms of intelligence. But what if "clever" — the ability to innovate, solve complex problems, and excel in traditional metrics — doesn't always translate to "smart" — the wisdom to navigate systems, optimize outcomes, and secure one's long-term well-being? This distinction becomes particularly stark when we examine financial acumen, especially concerning income and taxation.

Let's dissect this fascinating spectrum, using income tax as our provocative lens.

---

1. The Apex: Clever and Smart (High Income, Low Tax)

This is the pinnacle of financial astuteness. These individuals possess both the intellectual prowess to command high incomes and the strategic wisdom to retain a significant portion of their earnings. They are the highly successful entrepreneurs who understand business structures, tax incentives, and reinvestment strategies; the top-tier professionals who engage expert financial advisors to optimize their portfolios and deductions; or savvy investors who meticulously plan their asset allocation for tax efficiency.

Who they are: The venture capitalist structuring their investments through tax-advantaged vehicles, the international consultant leveraging dual residency laws, or the tech CEO who pays meticulous attention to their company's (and personal) financial architecture.

Why they are both: Their cleverness allows them to generate immense wealth, while their smartness ensures that wealth works for them, minimizing leakage to taxes through legitimate, well-planned strategies. They see the tax code not as a burden, but as a complex system to be understood and optimized.

---

2. The Contradiction: Clever But Not Smart (High Income, High Tax)

This group represents a perplexing paradox. They are undeniably brilliant, often at the zenith of their respective fields, earning substantial incomes. Yet, a significant portion of their hard-earned money flows directly into the tax coffers without much resistance. They might be highly skilled doctors, lawyers, senior corporate executives, or renowned academics. Their focus is almost exclusively on their craft, often neglecting personal financial literacy or strategic tax planning.

Who they are: The neurosurgeon making a seven-figure salary but relying solely on standard payroll deductions, the celebrated attorney too busy with client cases to delve into personal wealth management, or the top research scientist who maximises their pension contributions but overlooks other tax-efficient investment avenues.

Why they are clever but not smart: Their "cleverness" drives their high earning potential. However, their "not-smart" aspect lies in their disengagement from financial strategy. They may consider it too complex, boring, or simply a necessary evil. They often pay the highest effective tax rates because they don't leverage the legal mechanisms available to reduce their burden, effectively leaving money on the table.

---

3. The Understated Genius: Not Clever, But Smart (Low Income, Low Tax)

This category challenges conventional notions of intelligence. These individuals may not have excelled academically, may not hold prestigious titles, or command high incomes. Yet, they possess a profound, pragmatic "street smarts" when it comes to money. They are master navigators of the tax system for their income bracket, adept at claiming every available credit and deduction. They live frugally, prioritize savings, and understand simple, effective ways to protect their limited assets from undue taxation.¹

Who they are: The self-employed artisan who meticulously tracks expenses and claims every business deduction, the single parent who expertly navigates government benefits and tax credits, or the retiree living simply but wisely investing in tax-free savings accounts and understanding inheritance laws.

Why they are not clever but smart: Their lack of traditional "cleverness" doesn't impede their financial wisdom. They understand the system at their level, make shrewd choices within their means, and prioritize financial resilience. They are often highly resourceful and pragmatic, turning every available financial lever to their advantage, ensuring what little they earn or possess is retained efficiently.

---

4. The Majority: Not Clever, Not Smart (Low Income, High Tax)

This group sadly represents a significant portion of the population. They often struggle with low incomes and, due to a lack of financial literacy, strategic foresight, or simply limited opportunities, bear a disproportionately high tax burden relative to their earnings. They may not understand how to claim basic deductions, are vulnerable to predatory lending, or live paycheck to paycheck with no buffer against financial shocks.

Who they are: The hourly wage earner who rarely reviews their tax filings, the individual trapped in cycles of high-interest debt, or those whose primary focus is simply survival, leaving little room for financial planning or optimization.

Why they are neither clever nor smart: Their circumstances often limit their earning potential, and a lack of financial education or guidance prevents them from navigating the tax system effectively. They are on a financial treadmill, where the struggle for basic needs overshadows any opportunity for strategic planning, leaving them with little income and few avenues to reduce their tax exposure.

---

Beyond the Labels: A Call for Financial Wisdom

This exploration isn't about judgment, but about recognizing the multifaceted nature of intelligence. Being "clever" is invaluable for innovation and societal progress. But being "smart" – especially financially smart – is critical for personal well-being and security.

The high-income individual paying high taxes isn't necessarily "bad," but they are missing an opportunity to optimize their wealth for greater impact or personal legacy. The low-income individual escaping most taxes isn't necessarily a genius, but their pragmatic wisdom deserves recognition.

Ultimately, this analysis highlights the urgent need for greater financial literacy and accessibility of strategic financial advice across all income levels. Understanding how to earn is crucial, but understanding how to retain and grow that earning, wisely and legally, is a distinct and often overlooked form of true intelligence.

論毛澤東之廣宣大才：直追伯內特與奧格爾維諸賢

 

論毛澤東之廣宣大才：直追伯內特與奧格爾維諸賢

欲評毛澤東主席為「廣宣大才」，與李奧·伯內特、大衛·奧格爾維等商業巨擘並駕，須易視角，由商賈販賣之術轉至政治宣傳與大眾動員之域。毛氏之策，雖非為貨物之銷，然其造就品牌、巧鑄標語、策劃全民運動之能，足顯其於大眾說服與心理操控之深解。其所以為奇才者，蓋深諳民心，能將繁縟之理念化為簡潔有力之訓示，並以無遠弗屆之聲勢，驅動全國上下之變革。

標語之力：毛氏口號之版權威能

誠如賢能廣宣之士，毛氏深知其策之成敗，繫於箴言之精煉、有力、易傳。其於巧鑄標語，可謂天賦異稟，能將繁複之意識形態，濃縮為響徹雲霄之口號，根植於民心。此非僅辭藻，乃行動之召，簡明之令，形塑公眾意識之巨器也。

試觀其影響深遠之「標語」：

• 「為人民服務」：此口號歷久彌堅，為中國共產黨之核心品牌承諾。其將黨員塑造成為人民無私奉獻之公僕，深植民眾信任與忠誠。猶如品牌強調以客為尊，深得民心。
• 「敢想敢幹」：大躍進期間，此為一極具煽動性之號召，旨在激發革命熱情與無窮潛力。此乃一「品牌挑戰」，鼓勵百姓懷抱宏大甚至不切實際之目標，不質疑權威，以求掌握自主與集體之力。
• 「破四舊」：文化大革命之核心指令，此口號提供明確之行動綱領，直指紅衛兵攻破「舊思想、舊文化、舊風俗、舊習慣」。此猶如直效行銷，明確目標，為推翻傳統社會之破壞行為提供依據。
• 「革命無罪，造反有理」：此為最具煽動性且極其有效之口號，明確宣示反抗權威無罪，尤其為紅衛兵之行為提供合法性。此猶如對混亂行為之「背書」，以革命之名，徹底顛覆既有秩序。
• 「槍杆子裡面出政權」：此簡潔而具侵略性之聲明，乃革命運動之根本「使命宣言」，強調武裝鬥爭之不可或缺。
• 「一切反動派都是紙老虎」：此為心理戰術之巧用，旨在貶低敵人，鼓勵革命者無所畏懼。乃宣傳中「貶低競爭者」之經典範例。
• 「婦女能頂半邊天」：此強而有力之號召，旨在促進性別平等，凸顯婦女於國家建設之關鍵作用，有效擴大動員之「目標受眾」。
• 「農業學大寨，工業學大慶」：此為具體之「案例研究」或「見證」，轉化為全國性指令，推廣模範企業，供全國效仿。
• 「一不怕苦，二不怕死」：此口號精煉傳達革命英雄主義與犧牲奉獻之核心價值。
• 「毛主席萬歲！」：此乃極致之「品牌忠誠」口號，無處不在，鞏固其個人崇拜。

這些口號，皆直白有力，富於情感煽動性，且反覆傳播。其簡潔性確保即便是廣大文盲亦能輕易理解記憶，猶如廣告語之深入人心。

運動式大眾動員：品牌與行為改造

毛氏之政治運動，乃大眾動員之策略典範，比擬於雄心勃勃之廣告運動，追求訊息之全面滲透與行為之徹底改變。其不僅止於說服，更在於塑造沉浸式之意識形態環境。

• 大躍進（一九五八至一九六二年）：此為毛氏規模最鉅、範圍最廣之「運動」，旨在迅速實現國家工業化與農業集體化。

  • 廣宣之術：廣泛使用宣傳畫報，虛報豐收與鋼鐵溢流之景，即便饑荒蔓延全國。組織大眾會議、遊行、批鬥地主之「訴苦」活動，以製造狂熱與順從。其宏大之「品牌承諾」為「超英趕美」，此一雄心激勵了不切實際之目標。
  • 影響：大躍進之強烈「廣宣」，營造出虛假之樂觀氛圍，掩蓋了災難性之現實。由宣傳驅動之不斷施壓，追求不切實際之目標，導致虛報與災難性政策，終釀成人類歷史上最大之饑荒之一。

• 赤腳醫生運動（一九六零至一九七零年代）：此舉旨在訓練農民提供農村基本醫療服務。

  • 廣宣之術：「赤腳醫生」一詞本身，乃一精妙之品牌塑造，立即喚起基層、親民、務實之醫療服務形象。此乃有意與傳統且常難以企及之城市醫療機構形成對比。此運動透過正面形象與自力更生、服務農村大眾之敘事而推廣。
  • 影響：赤腳醫生計畫雖有其局限，然卻成為一極其成功之「社會品牌」，顯著改善偏遠地區之基本醫療可及性，示範了良好品牌塑造與廣泛推廣之社會倡議所蘊含之力量。

• 文化大革命（一九六六至一九七六年）：此動盪且具破壞性之政治運動，旨在肅清「資產階級」與「修正主義」份子，鞏固毛氏權力。

  • 廣宣之術：此運動乃心理操控與製造群體歇斯底里之典範。毛氏有意利用青年（紅衛兵）之狂熱作為其主要「行銷力量」。《毛主席語錄》（「紅寶書」）成為無處不在之「產品」，為千百萬人攜帶與引述，幾乎如聖典。宣傳畫報、革命樣板戲、大型集會，營造出無所不在、無可逃避之意識形態環境。不斷之「批鬥會」與公開批判，則充當了對被視為敵人者之負面廣告。
  • 影響：在強烈宣傳與極端大眾動員之驅使下，文化大革命導致了社會動盪、廣泛迫害及文化遺產之毀壞，展示了失控之政治「運動」所蘊含之巨大破壞力。

與西方宣傳家之比較

雖然毛氏之手法乃極權統治者之所為，然其作為宣傳家之效力，可與西方人物如羅納德·雷根、溫斯頓·邱吉爾、唐納德·川普及馬丁·路德·金恩二世等相較，儘管其背景與目的有根本之異。

• 羅納德·雷根（「偉大溝通者」）：與毛氏相似，雷根擅於簡化複雜議題，並運用令人難忘之金句（如「邪惡帝國」、「推倒這堵牆」）。其長處在於樂觀之敘事與設定明確之選擇，訴諸普世價值。然雷根處於民主體制下，有新聞自由與政治反對；他必須說服而非強制。
• 溫斯頓·邱吉爾：作為演說大師，邱吉爾運用生動之語言與有力之比喻（如「熱血、辛勞、眼淚和汗水」、「我們永不投降」），激勵國民於戰時團結。其目標乃在面對外敵時團結國家，號召愛國主義與勇氣，此皆在一自由社會中為之。
• 唐納德·川普：作為一股顛覆力量，川普精通透過社群媒體與集會直接向支持者溝通。其反覆使用具爭議性之口號（如「讓美國再次偉大」、「假新聞」），建立起強烈之內部認同與外部敵意。雖培養個人崇拜，然其手法分散，且不斷受到自由媒體與政治反對之挑戰。
• 馬丁·路德·金恩二世：金恩博士乃道德說服之大師，訴諸普世人權與美國理想之良知。其「我有一個夢」之演說，充滿願景之語言與精妙之修辭，旨在透過非暴力倡議實現社會轉型，其運作乃是與既有權力結構對立，仰賴思想、同理心及集體良知之力量。

其根本差異在於控制與競爭，以及強制與同意。毛氏在絕對國家控制之體制下運作，其「宣傳」乃唯一之訊息，透過身心強制而貫徹。其目的在於實現社會與個人之全面改造。西方領袖則在競爭性之媒體環境與政治體制下，依賴說服以獲得同意（如透過選票、公眾支持）以推行特定政策或團結國家，而非實現全面之思想控制或強制之意識形態灌輸。

結語

毛澤東作為「廣宣大才」之效力，源於其深邃之心理洞察，其將複雜意識形態簡化為易於理解之口號之非凡能力，以及其將宣傳融入國家生活各層面之策略。他深知，不斷重複、強烈情感訴求，以及建立強大集體認同，乃動員千百萬人之關鍵，即便其所「販售」之「產品」（政策與運動）常導致災難性後果。毛氏之遺產，強烈提醒吾人，宣傳、大眾傳播與政治權力之交集，其潛力之巨大與危險，此等影響之規模，於商業領域實屬罕見，若非絕無。