Chinese Economics Thread

KYli

Brigadier
You don't understand what is meant by '30 years'. Here I am talking about social changes. Chinese cities can have tall buildings and modern metros but still plenty of petty and unruly people. You cannot expect these people to change. Not if they experienced the Cultural Revolution. Not if they were Red Guards. Not after age of 10. 30 years define a full generation. My Chinese students/interns/colleagues born after 1990 are great. Not so for the older ones. They belong to a different era. They had to struggle and be more self-protective and it shows in their more self-centered behaviors. I don't suggest that majority of them don't try to adapt and be more civil-minded because they know time has changed and/or they don't want to get locked by for 5 days. In the end, you can't teach new tricks to old dogs. In another 30 years the teenagers then will probably sneer at us for not recycle a tiny piece of paper or use a plastic bag and they would be right. Even a few years ago when I visited Taipei last, I had to use the chopsticks provided by the restaurant when everyone else brought their own.

I don't. You talk about social progress and political progress and then environmental consciousness. These topics by itself are already too broad. But you tried to combine all of these topics to depict a picture. I just want to point out some of what you said that I disagree with.
These 30 years cannot be accelerated with money or even hard work but as I wrote, Mother Nature ensures this problem will automagically disappear in 30 years time. You can fit anyone in a Brioni suit but don't expect them to suddenly start ordering dry martinis shaken but not stirred. It is really not a 'fixable problem' rather a 'process'.

People in Taiwan complain a lot. People in the U.S. complain all the time. They 'flee' everywhere for better opportunities too. Are they poor? No. They simply have choices, freedom to do so, and most importantly of all, they know they are empowered to do so. Go check CIA World Book, Taiwan's quality of live has been right in between Germany and Iceland for years now. Taiwan is a place where one in four families has a live-in domestic worker and they never have to worry one second about their health for their entire lives. Talk (a.k.a complaints) is cheap, look at the numbers. A lot of people complain not because their current situation is bad but because they have high expectations for themselves and that is a very good silver lining. Per capita, the number of people in the Arts field in Taiwan is 5X that of China, most of these artists and writers will never accumulate much material wealth but they are doing what they want to do and they add to the richness of a society far more than a coal mine owner with a gold-plated toilet.

Drinking martinis is a progress for someone but might not be a progress for the others. How do we define what is a progress or what isn't a progress.

They do have a choice that is why they choose to flee. Taiwan has one of the highest net migration in all developed economies. That says a lot of quality of live in Taiwan. Taiwan has fallen behind Singapore, South Korea, and Hong Kong in every metric. That means for the last few decades, Taiwan is a failure.

Many Hong Kongers hire domestic helpers even though their apartment is less than 400 sq feet. It is a good thing that people can choose to pursue their interests even if it lowered their quality of living. However, unless you want to go back to live in the Pre-industrial society, then those coal miners, steel workers and oil workers are the foundation of the modern society. They might not have added richness to the society but without them there wouldn't be a modern society to begin with.
You may not agree with the current political situation in Taiwan but if you study how smoothly and how peacefully Taiwan has transitioned in the last 30 years, you'll wish the same can happen in China someday (not in 30 years). Forget about China, contrast Taiwan's experience with that of South Korea where hundred got killed during the transition and EVERY President except one went to prison or died of unnatural causes (suicide or a bullet) in the last 70 years. You may think Taiwan politics is messy and it is but look behind it, you'll see the beauty of it. A two-party democratic society naturally bickers to the point that it seems nothing gets done and that is the whole point of the system! When you have reached that level of prosperity (like the U.S., Iceland, and Taiwan), you want a system that maintains the status quo. China's current system is working well and let's hope it will continue to do so and if a transition does happen for the better, let's hope it will be more like Taiwan's model, not South Korea's (or Libya's).
Mankind fears changes. So they want to maintain the status quo. When face with difficult decisions, they would hide behind the system saying we don't need to make any decisions or the decisions can wait. When they fall behind their competitors, they would bury their head in the sand and say we are not doing so bad. When all else failed, then they embrace populism and blame everything on others.

Sorry to say I wouldn't support any government that bury its head in the sand and hope all problems go away. Government exists to make difficult decisions not to play populism. Government exists to make progress not to maintain a status quo. Qing Dynasty was very good at maintaining status quo but the world left it behind. And we all know what happened.
 

broadsword

Brigadier
Lee Kuan Yew once said

Three women were brought to the Singapore General Hospital, each in the same condition and each needing a blood transfusion. The first, a Malay was given the transfusion but died a few hours later. The second, an Indian was also given a transfusion but died a few days later. The third, an East Asian, was given a transfusion and survived. That is the X factor in development.
Lee Kuan Yew further said

Any doctor will tell you in our hospitals, that even if you just touch an Indian with an injection he is howling. The Chinaman isn’t. He has got a very high tolerance for pain …

Did he actually say these things or were they purely somebody's inventions?
 

kentchang

Junior Member
Registered Member
You can't be serious. China spent the best part of the past 60 years trying to reduce its population so as not to burdened it with hunger and poverty. And now you're advocating a policy guaranteed to burden China with poverty and hunger.

There is an optimum level of population. I think I read somewhere a long while ago. That China's is somewhere between 600 billion to 800 billion (don't quote me on it).

China still have a long way to go before it needs to encourage any more babies. This is why I think the policy to relax the one-child policy is a right one. But let's leave it at that for now, and maybe encourage a third child in twenty years time.

No developed countries have succeeded in convincing women to have more births and I don't see how China can be an exception so I don't think it makes any difference if China promotes two or three per family. Some countries openly practice eugenics by providing tax benefits/subsidies if a mother has college education and charges extra taxes if a woman does not (google "Singapore Eugenics"). Verdict is still out there on what people will choose to do given free will. As people get more prosperous and a good social welfare system in place, money is much less an incentive. To travel and have more fun in one's 30's and 40's sound like a much more attractive deal.

800 million is indeed a very livable population level for China. Some projections put China on the path back to 800 million in less than 100 years' time and I hope China levels off around there. However, the current demographic distribution for China is not good and China will face a labor shortage after 2035 while providing for the elderlies. Automation can only go so far by then. You don't need to make more babies if immigration is relaxed. Like the wife shortage problem China is facing, Vietnam and North Korea (even Ukraine) are good sources for both wives and workers. Perhaps Southeast Asian countries will promote senior resort-like living for wealthier Chinese like what Florida and Arizona are in the U.S.

The point in promoting more child births is to flatten the demographic curve, not to increase the population. A population of 1.4B is sustainable with current technologies and there are more downside to a fast graying society so maintaining the same population level by more child births is viewed as lesser of two evils vs a declining population.

Over-population is no longer a huge global concern as it was in the 1970's. Back then Club of Rome worried about everything. Modern farming techniques including emerging ones like vertical farming have dramatically increased yield (per unit of land) while reducing water wastage.
 

localizer

Colonel
Registered Member
No developed countries have succeeded in convincing women to have more births and I don't see how China can be an exception so I don't think it makes any difference if China promotes two or three per family. Some countries openly practice eugenics by providing tax benefits/subsidies if a mother has college education and charges extra taxes if a woman does not (google "Singapore Eugenics"). Verdict is still out there on what people will choose to do given free will. As people get more prosperous and a good social welfare system in place, money is much less an incentive. To travel and have more fun in one's 30's and 40's sound like a much more attractive deal.

800 million is indeed a very livable population level for China. Some projections put China on the path back to 800 million in less than 100 years' time and I hope China levels off around there. However, the current demographic distribution for China is not good and China will face a labor shortage after 2035 while providing for the elderlies. Automation can only go so far by then. You don't need to make more babies if immigration is relaxed. Like the wife shortage problem China is facing, Vietnam and North Korea (even Ukraine) are good sources for both wives and workers. Perhaps Southeast Asian countries will promote senior resort-like living for wealthier Chinese like what Florida and Arizona are in the U.S.

The point in promoting more child births is to flatten the demographic curve, not to increase the population. A population of 1.4B is sustainable with current technologies and there are more downside to a fast graying society so maintaining the same population level by more child births is viewed as lesser of two evils vs a declining population.

Over-population is no longer a huge global concern as it was in the 1970's. Back then Club of Rome worried about everything. Modern farming techniques including emerging ones like vertical farming have dramatically increased yield (per unit of land) while reducing water wastage.
Raising a kid to compete in the developed world is difficult especially when Chinese parents like to have high expectations
 

ZeEa5KPul

Colonel
Registered Member
You may not agree with the current political situation in Taiwan but if you study how smoothly and how peacefully Taiwan has transitioned in the last 30 years, you'll wish the same can happen in China someday (not in 30 years).
Get the idea that the CCP one-party system is some "transitional" phase until China crosses some magic per-capita GDP number and becomes a liberal democracy out of your head. That will never happen and should never happen. The Chinese system is the most advanced and effective form of governance ever devised in human history and if it's to be replaced by something, it's something that exists only in science fiction - not some liberal democracy circus.

Frankly, it's insulting to even suggest that China should aspire to such baseness as Taiwan or South Korea or whatever else. How repugnant.
 

Chin evan

New Member
Registered Member
All the so called developed countries have reach a stage they can't get past, and even regressing right before our eyes in 1 generation, China doesn't look much difference in the future it will probably go further with a better system in place.
A transition to something else is needed to go beyond to a star trek like human society no matter how u see it money needs to be taken out of the equation for that to happen.
 
Top