Chinese Economics Thread

[manqiangrexue]

There was an SCMP article about the K visa that had a testimony from a Pakistani robotics PhD candidate that is expected to graduate in January but was worried that he wouldn't be unable to stay in China afterwards, he seems like the target demographic for this kind of program.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

And my perception was that it would also be more geared towards diaspora because being able to speak and read Chinese would obviously be important for finding employment, and some diaspora don't have any immediate family members willing to sponsor them for a longer term Q visa. So this visa is probably targetted at diaspora and international students who want to stay in China after graduating so that they can find a job and possibly stay longer term.

The government just needs to do a better job of being transparent on how many people will actually be admitted through the program, what the requirements are, and how they feel justified in doing this when youth unemployment is a persistent issue.

My thoughts are as well that the K visa is mostly geared towards overseas Chinese but this is a situation where you can practice it during selection but you shouldn't declare it. It does lead to confusion amongst the locals and some who cannot differentiate between temporary work and immigration will be angry but you can't always please everyone. Openly saying that the K visa is mostly for sea turtles is 1. politically incorrect and there will be international voices saying that this is evidence of China's racism 2. increases foreign efforts to keep Chinese students/beginner level workers out of their high tech programs (since it's more clear that China's plan for them is to learn then go back) and 3. it turns off the very few people who aren't Chinese but would have benefitted Chinese tech development anyway. You can reject their applications if these foreigners are not what you need but if that one guy who does have what you need didn't apply because you made it clear it was for sea turtles, then China missed out. One of the best things about the wording of the K visa is that it makes everyone think it's for them, so the choice rests with China on whether or not to approve them. The CCP tried to drop hints at the local population not to panic by making it a point that they cannot stay in China for more than 180 days at a time so it doesn't become immigration but some people just don't get it and went South Park "Dey dook ar joooobbbss!" Too bad; what can I say? Have faith in the government that always delivers.

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

China fundamentally could benefit from two very different types of foreign workers:

1) Exceptional talents- includes doctors (PhD holders) from top global universities, undergraduates from top foreign universities that pursue post graduate study at good Chinese universities, and exceptional bachelors/masters from the most elite global universities with proven track records in their career (ie someone that becomes a principal engineer at [FAANG - Amazon]+ prior to age 30- definitely not your generic lower level software grunt). This type of worker should be retained and offered permanent settlement.

2) In demand low-skilled workers and semi-skilled workers (ie caretakers for elderly, construction worker). These type of workers should only be allowed to stay on temporary basis, and be prohibited from bringing family or marrying a Chinese citizen. Once it becomes economically feasible to do, workers of this type in certain sectors can be replaced with automation.

 

[SanWenYu]

Regarding the concerns on the K visa, Yang Sheng of Global Times interviewed some people who are either in the authorities or in the loop of decision making. If these "insiders" are representative of the government, it appears to me that one of the intentions is to have catfish effects in multiple ways, just like how Tesla was to the EV industry.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

距离颁布增设K签还有一天，争论仍在继续，官媒也进行了发声，但疑虑并未消除，梳理了一下大家的反对意见有很多，既有基于过往国内外负面案例的合理担忧和督促，也有源于误解和情绪的应激反应，如果国家要想让政策防住漏洞，实现真的服务于国家利益造福本国人民，超出西方国家的以我为主的执行水平和清晰的政策细则是平息公众焦虑的关键。通过和一些涉及该政策的专业人士交流后，尝试通过这些交流所得回应一些大家普遍的焦虑，有些回答目前只能答成这样，希望能形成理性的建设性的讨论，欢迎大家的追问和批评指正：

1，我国之前的一些相关政策落到执行层面会体现出一种对外国人给予无差别且不合理的“超国民待遇”情况，导致吸引来的外国人获得了比本国人民还要优渥的待遇，出现了严重的不公平现象，甚至出现了为害社会稳定和人身安全的隐患。我们如何能相信门槛较低的K签不会加剧这种情况？

答：K签的实行将会全面考验我国从审批入境到基层执行的现代化治理能力。各部门对于此政策的领会和具体实践一定会从严出发，全面汲取国内外经验，以避免负面案例重蹈覆辙。现在颁布只是第一步，随着政策的施行展开，更多细则会逐步颁布，并有效回应公众关切。如何避免那种机械执行或为急功近利导致政策变形走样？这是全社会各个环节的共同责任，欢迎全社会时刻监督，确保政策执行不违背初衷。

2，目前公布的门槛为何是“学士及以上学位”，何为“境内外知名高校或科研机构”？在加拿大有很多印度人通过学历造假和伪造各种资料骗取签证的情况，我们的K签证如何确保扎稳篱笆？如果细则还没颁布就开始施行，会不会导致审核与执行失去固定标准并导致漏洞出现？

答：目前，科技部、教育部等部门正在联合制定《外国青年科技人才认定办法》，预计2025年底前出台，这将细化“知名高校/科研机构”目录、STEM学科清单等操作细则。这一配套措施的完善至关重要，它可以确保K字签证真正吸引到高质量人才，而非仅仅增加外来人口数量。在此之前，包括之后，K签的施行并不可能出现特别激进的“开闸放水”效应，因为政策的细化往往也是在实践的探索中去完善的，我国并不是依赖移民提供基本劳动力的西方移民国家，“开闸放水”这种完全背离初衷的做法与我国国情和国家利益完全不符。所以不必担心政策施行后有大量不符合要求的外国人涌入我国占便宜。

至于门槛线为什么划在“学士及其以上”，这一点主要是考虑到国内外教育体制和学制的差异。在某些国家，比如美国和加拿大等，是存在“本科直博”的现象的，具体说就是在本科期间展示出卓越的科研能力和潜力以及浓厚的研究兴趣的学生可以直接申请博士，这是一种常见的且受到鼓励的现象。但由于美国等西方国家近期的排外政策，有很多这类学生面临无法完成学业的压力和焦虑，我国适时推出开放政策对此类人群会产生虹吸效应，让中国变成全球人才和具备成为人才潜力的苗子的流动新终端。如果此时我们把门槛设在硕士研究生这一级，可能就会将很多苗子拒之门外，这也与政策初衷不符。所以政策的制定不能仅仅基于我们本国学制的认知，还要考虑到国际现实。

最后，“知名高校或科研机构”的名单应该以什么作为依据？关于这一点，有朋友拿QS前100或其他的一些全球高校排名来做例子，其实这都会导致我们的政策标准严重依赖西方制定的规则体系。众所周知，美西方等国制定的榜单具有严重的偏见性和可操作性，比如十年前，在QS前100的中国高校仅有清华北大两家，但这难道意味着中国其他高校的学子质量都完全比不上QS前100的其他高校吗？还有比如莫斯科国立大学等俄罗斯高校近年由于政治原因在西方高校为主的榜单上直线下滑，但这难道意味着俄罗斯这些高校的科研能力和学术价值会随着他们国家与西方关系的崩塌而直线跳水吗？这些例子都要求我国在制定相关政策时要以我为主，拥有基于我国利益和价值观的评判体系。

3，每次改革都会带来受益者和失意者，你认为K签会让谁获利？谁的利益又会被影响？对于那些因为改革而失意的人，他们的利益应该怎么被照顾？

答：目前来看，获益的人至少有三类：1，被美西方保守排外政策影响到的国外青年人才，中国会成为他们新的目的地；2，国内缺乏国际化人才和高质量劳动力的用人单位；3，需要外来新鲜血液盘活地方发展动能的各级政府。

利益会被影响的或感到压力增加的也有至少三类：1，同为本科及以上学历的面临就业压力的中国青年群体；2，直接面对外国来华人员的基层执法和相关服务单位；3，为社会治理成本上升而买单的普通民众。

可见，获益者中有外国人，而利益被影响的群体全是本国人。所以这就是为什么舆情中反对情绪较为激烈的原因。但需要指出的是，K签并非类似美国H-1B的工作签证，用通俗易懂的话说，K签是为那些初步满足来华工作交流创业的外国青年创造一个来华的便利通道的问题，在他们持有K签期间，他们可以和中国的用人单位和合作伙伴有一个双向选择的时间，在这个时间内，真正符合要求的会留下，会根据法律法规获得相应的工作，深造和创业资格，那些没有被选择的自然也就因签证到期而离境。当然，在这个环节中针对外国人的执法和服务将会面临考验，这需要和中国式现代化和高质量发展相匹配的高水平的治理能力。

毋庸讳言，我国的年轻学子将面临一定的竞争，但总体而言，要想根本上解决这一问题需要国内整个教育系统进一步提高自己的人才培养水平让我国的学子能够适应这种国际化的竞争，这些外来的“鲶鱼”才能发挥出他们本该发挥的价值。有朋友说R签已经能满足对高端人才的吸引，但是那是掐尖吃现成的，很多高端人才的成长期和培养期也同样重要，K签会让我国成为更多高端人才的培养皿，让他们来得了，留得住，还能传帮带。我们除了要全球招揽顶尖科学家，还要为他们招揽能辅助他们的青年人才，不然全是一群上了年纪的老专家但没有足够的科研劳动力，这也无法形成良性的生态。我们不仅要把顶尖的头部人才吸过来，还有把那些还没有完全成才但具备条件的苗子也吸过来，这样我们才能用中国的有利环境培养出一批又一批的国际化人才储备。这种良性趋势一旦形成，新的业态和需求以及消费也会纷至沓来，长远看这还会创造新的就业机会和岗位，我们本国的劳动力和社会以及这些国际化人才应该是一个双赢甚至多赢的局面。

总而言之，当全球掀起逆全球化的浪潮时，我们已经做出了坚定的判断，那就是逆全球化尤其现实原因，但反全球化是逆流，我们要做的不是加入到反全球化的逆流中去，而是用中国式现代化和全人类命运共同体的理念去为全球化找到新的路径，找到那个以中国智慧为指导，以中国机遇为驱动，以中国模式为框架的能够既为中国人民的利益服务又能为变乱交织的世界找到出路的答案。

政策的施行和长期执行要想不走样不变形，顶层设计和基层反馈缺一不可。欢迎更多理性的讨论和追问，关心此事的朋友也可以通过国家移民管理局12367服务热线等渠道，在政策正式实施和执行的过程中理性表达自己的意见与建议。

 

[manqiangrexue]

China fundamentally could benefit from two very different types of foreign workers:

1) Exceptional talents- includes doctors (PhD holders) from top global universities, undergraduates from top foreign universities that pursue post graduate study at good Chinese universities, and exceptional bachelors/masters from the most elite global universities with proven track records in their career (ie someone that becomes a principal engineer at [FAANG - Amazon]+ prior to age 30- definitely not your generic lower level software grunt). This type of worker should be retained and offered permanent settlement.

Agree

2) In demand low-skilled workers and semi-skilled workers (ie caretakers for elderly, construction worker). These type of workers should only be allowed to stay on temporary basis, and be prohibited from bringing family or marrying a Chinese citizen. Once it becomes economically feasible to do, workers of this type in certain sectors can be replaced with automation.

1. Was China's poverty alleviation so absolute that we don't have enough rural workers to do these jobs anymore? I haven't been back for a while but that's just shocking, in some ways a victim of our own success.

2. Absolutely, using machines to replace unskilled/semiskilled work while everyone is white collar or above is an ideal future.

3. "prohibited from bringing family or marrying a Chinese citizen" That's gonna be a nasty one. That reminds me of when Israel was hiring Chinese workers and stipulated they could not marry a local. Not that I'd ever want to but it's pretty offensive, isn't it? And that was decades ago when the world was way less PC. Then some couple's gonna elope, take their wealth abroad and become the hero tale of the West LOL

 

[GiantPanda]

My thoughts are as well that the K visa is mostly geared towards overseas Chinese but this is a situation where you can practice it during selection but you shouldn't declare it. It does lead to confusion amongst the locals and some who cannot differentiate between temporary work and immigration will be angry but you can't always please everyone. Openly saying that the K visa is mostly for sea turtles is 1. politically incorrect and there will be international voices saying that this is evidence of China's racism 2. increases foreign efforts to keep Chinese students/beginner level workers out of their high tech programs (since it's more clear that China's plan for them is to learn then go back) and 3. it turns off the very few people who aren't Chinese but would have benefitted Chinese tech development anyway. You can reject their applications if these foreigners are not what you need but if that one guy who does have what you need didn't apply because you made it clear it was for sea turtles, then China missed out. One of the best things about the wording of the K visa is that it makes everyone think it's for them, so the choice rests with China on whether or not to approve them. The CCP tried to drop hints at the local population not to panic by making it a point that they cannot stay in China for more than 180 days at a time so it doesn't become immigration but some people just don't get it and went South Park "Dey dook ar joooobbbss!" Too bad; what can I say? Have faith in the government that always delivers.

The Pakistani student in China is a great example of where K-Visa supplements a existing program -- that of Young Thousand Talents which is the undergrad component of Thousand Talents.

That program besides the diaspora overseas also targeted foreign students at the 985 schools (Beida, Tsinghua, etc.) YTT does go after an elite group. K-Visa undoubtedly give more of those on a lower tier a chance to apply and stay. I think as Chinese Unis get better and better (the majority of top 10 engineering/research slots on most lists!) then they will form more of the K-Visa applicants.

But right now, I think it is mainly targeted at overseas Chinese talent. It has nothing to do with attracting H1Bs that the US is trying to get rid of.

In fact, it seems deliberately set up for the large amount of Chinese secondary STEM talents working in the West who are feeling pressure and closed pathways for promotion because they are Chinese.

 

[Nevermore]

Regarding the concerns on the K visa, Yang Sheng of Global Times interviewed some people who are either in the authorities or in the loop of decision making. If these "insiders" are representative of the government, it appears to me that one of the intentions is to have catfish effects in multiple ways, just like how Tesla was to the EV industry.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

距离颁布增设K签还有一天，争论仍在继续，官媒也进行了发声，但疑虑并未消除，梳理了一下大家的反对意见有很多，既有基于过往国内外负面案例的合理担忧和督促，也有源于误解和情绪的应激反应，如果国家要想让政策防住漏洞，实现真的服务于国家利益造福本国人民，超出西方国家的以我为主的执行水平和清晰的政策细则是平息公众焦虑的关键。通过和一些涉及该政策的专业人士交流后，尝试通过这些交流所得回应一些大家普遍的焦虑，有些回答目前只能答成这样，希望能形成理性的建设性的讨论，欢迎大家的追问和批评指正：

1，我国之前的一些相关政策落到执行层面会体现出一种对外国人给予无差别且不合理的“超国民待遇”情况，导致吸引来的外国人获得了比本国人民还要优渥的待遇，出现了严重的不公平现象，甚至出现了为害社会稳定和人身安全的隐患。我们如何能相信门槛较低的K签不会加剧这种情况？

答：K签的实行将会全面考验我国从审批入境到基层执行的现代化治理能力。各部门对于此政策的领会和具体实践一定会从严出发，全面汲取国内外经验，以避免负面案例重蹈覆辙。现在颁布只是第一步，随着政策的施行展开，更多细则会逐步颁布，并有效回应公众关切。如何避免那种机械执行或为急功近利导致政策变形走样？这是全社会各个环节的共同责任，欢迎全社会时刻监督，确保政策执行不违背初衷。

2，目前公布的门槛为何是“学士及以上学位”，何为“境内外知名高校或科研机构”？在加拿大有很多印度人通过学历造假和伪造各种资料骗取签证的情况，我们的K签证如何确保扎稳篱笆？如果细则还没颁布就开始施行，会不会导致审核与执行失去固定标准并导致漏洞出现？

答：目前，科技部、教育部等部门正在联合制定《外国青年科技人才认定办法》，预计2025年底前出台，这将细化“知名高校/科研机构”目录、STEM学科清单等操作细则。这一配套措施的完善至关重要，它可以确保K字签证真正吸引到高质量人才，而非仅仅增加外来人口数量。在此之前，包括之后，K签的施行并不可能出现特别激进的“开闸放水”效应，因为政策的细化往往也是在实践的探索中去完善的，我国并不是依赖移民提供基本劳动力的西方移民国家，“开闸放水”这种完全背离初衷的做法与我国国情和国家利益完全不符。所以不必担心政策施行后有大量不符合要求的外国人涌入我国占便宜。

至于门槛线为什么划在“学士及其以上”，这一点主要是考虑到国内外教育体制和学制的差异。在某些国家，比如美国和加拿大等，是存在“本科直博”的现象的，具体说就是在本科期间展示出卓越的科研能力和潜力以及浓厚的研究兴趣的学生可以直接申请博士，这是一种常见的且受到鼓励的现象。但由于美国等西方国家近期的排外政策，有很多这类学生面临无法完成学业的压力和焦虑，我国适时推出开放政策对此类人群会产生虹吸效应，让中国变成全球人才和具备成为人才潜力的苗子的流动新终端。如果此时我们把门槛设在硕士研究生这一级，可能就会将很多苗子拒之门外，这也与政策初衷不符。所以政策的制定不能仅仅基于我们本国学制的认知，还要考虑到国际现实。

最后，“知名高校或科研机构”的名单应该以什么作为依据？关于这一点，有朋友拿QS前100或其他的一些全球高校排名来做例子，其实这都会导致我们的政策标准严重依赖西方制定的规则体系。众所周知，美西方等国制定的榜单具有严重的偏见性和可操作性，比如十年前，在QS前100的中国高校仅有清华北大两家，但这难道意味着中国其他高校的学子质量都完全比不上QS前100的其他高校吗？还有比如莫斯科国立大学等俄罗斯高校近年由于政治原因在西方高校为主的榜单上直线下滑，但这难道意味着俄罗斯这些高校的科研能力和学术价值会随着他们国家与西方关系的崩塌而直线跳水吗？这些例子都要求我国在制定相关政策时要以我为主，拥有基于我国利益和价值观的评判体系。

3，每次改革都会带来受益者和失意者，你认为K签会让谁获利？谁的利益又会被影响？对于那些因为改革而失意的人，他们的利益应该怎么被照顾？

答：目前来看，获益的人至少有三类：1，被美西方保守排外政策影响到的国外青年人才，中国会成为他们新的目的地；2，国内缺乏国际化人才和高质量劳动力的用人单位；3，需要外来新鲜血液盘活地方发展动能的各级政府。

利益会被影响的或感到压力增加的也有至少三类：1，同为本科及以上学历的面临就业压力的中国青年群体；2，直接面对外国来华人员的基层执法和相关服务单位；3，为社会治理成本上升而买单的普通民众。

可见，获益者中有外国人，而利益被影响的群体全是本国人。所以这就是为什么舆情中反对情绪较为激烈的原因。但需要指出的是，K签并非类似美国H-1B的工作签证，用通俗易懂的话说，K签是为那些初步满足来华工作交流创业的外国青年创造一个来华的便利通道的问题，在他们持有K签期间，他们可以和中国的用人单位和合作伙伴有一个双向选择的时间，在这个时间内，真正符合要求的会留下，会根据法律法规获得相应的工作，深造和创业资格，那些没有被选择的自然也就因签证到期而离境。当然，在这个环节中针对外国人的执法和服务将会面临考验，这需要和中国式现代化和高质量发展相匹配的高水平的治理能力。

毋庸讳言，我国的年轻学子将面临一定的竞争，但总体而言，要想根本上解决这一问题需要国内整个教育系统进一步提高自己的人才培养水平让我国的学子能够适应这种国际化的竞争，这些外来的“鲶鱼”才能发挥出他们本该发挥的价值。有朋友说R签已经能满足对高端人才的吸引，但是那是掐尖吃现成的，很多高端人才的成长期和培养期也同样重要，K签会让我国成为更多高端人才的培养皿，让他们来得了，留得住，还能传帮带。我们除了要全球招揽顶尖科学家，还要为他们招揽能辅助他们的青年人才，不然全是一群上了年纪的老专家但没有足够的科研劳动力，这也无法形成良性的生态。我们不仅要把顶尖的头部人才吸过来，还有把那些还没有完全成才但具备条件的苗子也吸过来，这样我们才能用中国的有利环境培养出一批又一批的国际化人才储备。这种良性趋势一旦形成，新的业态和需求以及消费也会纷至沓来，长远看这还会创造新的就业机会和岗位，我们本国的劳动力和社会以及这些国际化人才应该是一个双赢甚至多赢的局面。

总而言之，当全球掀起逆全球化的浪潮时，我们已经做出了坚定的判断，那就是逆全球化尤其现实原因，但反全球化是逆流，我们要做的不是加入到反全球化的逆流中去，而是用中国式现代化和全人类命运共同体的理念去为全球化找到新的路径，找到那个以中国智慧为指导，以中国机遇为驱动，以中国模式为框架的能够既为中国人民的利益服务又能为变乱交织的世界找到出路的答案。

政策的施行和长期执行要想不走样不变形，顶层设计和基层反馈缺一不可。欢迎更多理性的讨论和追问，关心此事的朋友也可以通过国家移民管理局12367服务热线等渠道，在政策正式实施和执行的过程中理性表达自己的意见与建议。

This article is utterly ridiculous, only serving to amplify public confusion about K visas. The “catfish effect”? Will that create more jobs in China? Will it make society more stable? Chinese graduates are already caught in an extreme cycle of intense competition. Countless master's and PhD holders are selling street food or delivering takeout. And now this article suggests using foreigners to drive domestic workers into even fiercer competition? The author has clearly lost their mind. This piece is completely detached from reality.
When a country cannot even retain its own talented individuals or guarantee decent job opportunities for them, yet still discusses how to attract overseas graduates with zero work experience and meticulously cultivate these foreign talents from scratch—such rhetoric is nothing but a castle in the air, a mirage!

 

[manqiangrexue]

The Pakistani student in China is a great example of where K-Visa supplements a existing program -- that of Young Thousand Talents which is the undergrad component of Thousand Talents.

That program besides the diaspora overseas also targeted foreign students at the 985 schools (Beida, Tsinghua, etc.) YTT does go after an elite group. K-Visa undoubtedly give more of those on a lower tier a chance to apply and stay. I think as Chinese Unis get better and better (the majority of top 10 engineering/research slots on most lists!) then they will form more of the K-Visa applicants.

But right now, I think it is mainly targeted at overseas Chinese talent. It has nothing to do with attracting H1Bs that the US is trying to get rid of.

In fact, it seems deliberately set up for the large amount of Chinese secondary STEM talents working in the West who are feeling pressure and closed pathways for promotion because they are Chinese.

Exactly. This is what I mean. It was put into place quickly to suck up disgruntled/disillusioned STEM workers in the US (many Chinese origin), NOT the eat up the ones that the US wants removed by shredding their H1Bs. If the US does not consider them valuable, then chances are neither do we.

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

I've been thinking about this visa thing for a while and my opinion has shifted to leaning more towards than against it. I was initially surprised by not conditioning it on employment, but on reflection that's a much better way to do it. It prevents Infosys-like companies from transforming the visa into an indentured servitude scheme. Having new entrants compete on a level playing field by being able to move between companies is the way to go.

I'm ambivalent on the educational qualifications, I would have shifted them to master's degree or higher but I can see the merit to setting them at this minimal level. Frankly, the R visa's requirements are comical, "Oh, you only have one Nobel Prize? Sorry, you're just not R material." What I would have liked to see is an explicit and stringent language proficiency requirement - that would have made it clear who the visa is primarily for without having ethnicity or nationality criteria.

Another thing I hope happens is favoring applicants with STEM subfield specializations like biotech. There hasn't been the big government push into biotech that we see with semiconductors, but the field is ripe for a major boom in China with the emergence of companies like WuXi. The talent rendered jobless in the US by the Trump Purge would be very useful to China now.

 

[Nevermore]

In my view, the K visa remains a rather foolish policy, at least as it currently appears—hasty and vague. I will follow up to determine exactly which universities and research institutions qualify for K visas.

 

[victoon]

How a visa is worded and how it's implemented are two very different things, and countries all have many unwritten rules over their implementation. If the K-visa ends up letting in mostly mid-skilled, young, good-looking single women, would anyone here complain about it? (Not that I think this is a good idea.)

I think it's silly to debate how the visa is categorically right or wrong. Instead, focus on how to implement it to be great for China.

And I agree that we should act with confidence in welcoming some young professional foreigners living and working in China. We are in the Tang dynasty, not Qing after the opium wars.

Also, obviously, being allowed to work and having a job are two very different things.