The aim of measures to shore up the real estate market is not to save property developers, but rather, to protect the interests of ordinary people, says an article in People's Daily. The following is an excerpt:

The 24 real estate measures taken by the municipal government of Hangzhou, capital city of Zhejiang province, to shore up local real estate market have aroused widespread social reactions recently. People are discussing whether the government should help protect the property market. In fact, the government move should be aimed at saving our economy, banks and the masses. It is not meant to protect the interests of property developers or the interests of wealthy people, but to help people living in difficulties or with low incomes. Statistics show in the first three quarters of this year commercial real estate housing sales in the downtown of Hangzhou, except subsidized housing offered by the government, declined 50 percent in floor space.

Currently, 88 percent of Hangzhou families own homes and the family housing mortgages reach 107.7 billion yuan ($15.74 billion). Once the housing market in Hangzhou collapses, the housing price will plummet, making those people's family assets shrink on a large scale.

The real estate market is the pivotal industry of Hangzhou, and it's also a leading industry that affects many related industries. If the meltdown of Hangzhou's property market becomes a reality, the economy would be hit hard and eventually bring down people's living standards.

Meanwhile, the land market is closely linked to the real estate market too. Once Hangzhou's real estate market slumps and housing price falls, the land market would also be dragged into the doldrums. As a result, the government's income from land leasing would decrease by a big margin. Accordingly, government investment in urban construction and the protection of people's welfare will largely decrease. At present, land lease fees have contributed a lot to protecting the livelihood of ordinary Hangzhou citizens. It is, therefore, a wrong argument that saving the property market is aimed at protecting the local financial revenues and the local government.

For the wellbeing of citizens, the local government must make every effort to prevent the ups and downs of the real estate market, maintaining its healthy and stable growth.