Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
one thing: it will boost 3rd tier cities that have strong tech sectors like Wuxi, Changzhou, Xuzhou, etc for average manufacturing workers.
Let's say you have an associate degree (大专) holding mechanical engineer with 6-8 years of experience in automotive or electronics, making 10-12k RMB per month. Not an extraordinarily gifted person, but still a STEM talent. Wouldn't letting a few million people like this settle in decent tier 3 cities for free be a great boost, rather than have them try to save tons of money for a house, or go home, or go elsewhere?
Its not just about turning farmers into low tier workers, its about turning low tier workers with little security who have to save, into mid tier workers with good security who can spend money.
In4ser
Junior Member
Downside it will likely aggravate lower birthrates, as the top reason for lower birthrates aside from contraception and female empowerment is urbanization. Higher burdens from cost of living and decreased advantages of labor pushes families to have less kids in cities.
I kind of covered this category in my previous post but did not make it clear.
Basically anyone who has something in demand, i.e. the money to invest or the desirable talent/skills, can already relocate without worrying about hukou. For the rich, it's obvious. For anyone else, it has long been as easy as getting a job then a temporary residence permit (暂住证) to settle down. In most cases, the employer will help with the permit. This is in fact how China is able to urbanize hundreds of millions without scrapping the hukou system first.
But if one lacks either the money or the talent/skills, it will be difficult for him to relocate anyway whether or not hukou is required.
To the work age group, hukou has lost most of its appeal. And this is the group that the cities are trying to get.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
The different between "effective" and "really effective" is completely made up by you. I don't know if you are trying to weasel out of something or if this is the extent of your English, but it sounds like absolute nonsense on par with someone saying he's not really hungry, then listing 7 things he'd like to eat now, then saying there's a difference between hungry and "really hungry" and he's hungry but not "really hungry."
My advice for you as you continue to type in English is that the word "really," when used as a qualifier, basically has no meaning. It does not differentiate anything in a serious context.
FriedRiceNSpice
Captain
Focusing on developing 2nd / 3rd tier cities is a great policy. As costs in 1st tier cities rise, investment should be channeled to 2nd / 3rd tier cities in order to create jobs and increase consumption in these cities. This will drive up demand for goods/services and address most of the potential economic obstacles and societal issues facing the nation today.
Hukou reform by itself may be not enough. Actual investments in non first-tier cities need to be made in order to create jobs and encourage people to move to those cities. Spreading high paying jobs to cities with lower housing and living costs will have a greater effect on driving up demand, which in turn also will create more jobs for workers without high demand skills/talent, further driving up consumption and demand. Focus should be expanded beyond the top talents and high skilled workers, as increasing incomes and wealth of common workers is going to have a much larger impact on consumption and also staves off societal concerns.
Urbanization is counterpriductive to child-bearing. I think it is much more easier to boost birth rate in rural area instead. Urbanization is all about consumerism and individualism.
This is really backward thinking like Pol Pot.
The key is education. Not urbanization. The two are associated, to be fair, but not necessarily the same.
If you want people to have kids, you need to stop having them in schools during the years when they're most sexually active. From 17 to 30 is when most people would be most suited to have kids. Yet they're in school for much of that.
If you want people to have kids, you need to stop having them in schools during the years when they're most sexually active. From 17 to 30 is when most people would be most suited to have kids. Yet they're in school for much of that.
How a doctor think: Patients need more access to hospital to reduce mortality rate.
How an economist think: Actually according to our statistical analysis most people die in hospital than anywhere else. Hospital is harmful to human health therefore all needs to be demolished.
Deflation here is the hospital. Instead of blaming the cancer (big Japanese bubble) the hospital is to be blamed.
How an economist think: Actually according to our statistical analysis most people die in hospital than anywhere else. Hospital is harmful to human health therefore all needs to be demolished.
Deflation here is the hospital. Instead of blaming the cancer (big Japanese bubble) the hospital is to be blamed.