Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

China's poor pose threat to wealthy future
BBC News ^ | 03/08/06 | Chris Bowlby

Posted on 03/09/2006 9:30:25 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster

China's poor pose threat to wealthy future

By Chris Bowlby

Analysis, Radio 4

Look at China from a distance, and those huge new skyscrapers in places like Shanghai may dominate the view.

They symbolise rapid recent growth, glitzy cities and factories flooding the world with consumer goods.

Look beyond, however, and another China comes into focus - where hundreds of millions still live in poverty, and where a communist government struggles with the contradictions of running a capitalist economy.

Last week the Chinese premier, Wen Jiabao, warned the National People's congress in Beijing of "deep-seated conflicts" and promised to spend more to ease the urban-rural divide.

Resentment and assertiveness

Oxford political scientist Steve Tsang says China is a "brittle" place.

There are fears that China's going to become the first country to get old before it gets rich Anthropologist Elisabeth Croll

It looks strong from the outside but "the situation can disintegrate very quickly".

The communists hope continued rapid economic growth will permit their continued hold on to power.

But they are now caught between the resentment of those left behind by the boom and the assertiveness of a new middle class.

Political freedom

Take Beijing's recent deal with Google.

On the one hand, a symbol of China continuing to embrace the global economy.

But Google had to agree to block access to politically sensitive websites, something the government's 30,000 "Online police" struggle to do.

Chris Berry, a specialist on the Chinese media, points out that there are an estimated three million Chinese bloggers.

Their writings are full of criticism of official corruption and environmental cover-ups.

Economic freedom granted by the government encourages political freedom, which Beijing finds highly embarrassing.

Safety net

Pressure of a different kind comes from rural areas.

Anthropologist Elisabeth Croll, who has been visiting China regularly for several decades, says around 400 million Chinese are still living on $2 a day.

Migration and TV have made them more aware than ever of how their richer compatriots are prospering.

Demography is also posing problems.

The notorious 'one child' policy has left a population rapidly ageing.

There are fears, says Professor Croll, "that China's going to become the first country to get old before it gets rich".

Because of all this, the government dare not expose many state-owned enterprises to the rigours of the free market, as they provide not just jobs but a vital social safety net too.

They remain a huge drag on the economy.

China's impact

Chinese people, says Mr Berry, are divided between those who think their future is Californian and those who think it will be more like Russia - a place where the transition from communism has been far from happy.

Pessimists see a Chinese state ever more unstable, perhaps resorting to nationalism if it feels its power slipping and old tensions with neighbours like Taiwan and Japan come to the fore.

Some foreign investors, says Goldman Sachs chief economist Jim O'Neill, "wouldn't want to go anywhere near China", while others feel "you just can't ignore it and you have to be there".

Such is China's size that, if its growth continues smoothly, it will continue to have a huge global impact.

But its impact might be very different if the Chinas of rich and poor, young and old, communist and capitalist cannot be reconciled.

'Analysis - China's Challenge'. Broadcast on BBC Radio 4 at 8.30pm on 9 March, repeated at 9.30pm on 12 March


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: china; economy; growth; resentment; risk; ruralpoor
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 03/09/2006 9:30:27 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster; maui_hawaii; tallhappy; Dr. Marten; Jeff Head; Khurkris; hedgetrimmer; ...

Ping!


2 posted on 03/09/2006 9:31:15 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Duh!


3 posted on 03/09/2006 9:31:36 AM PST by yldstrk (My heros have always been cowboys-Reagan and Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Either let everyone be equally poor, or allow at least some to lift themselves up.


4 posted on 03/09/2006 9:33:04 AM PST by mc6809e
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Eat the poor.


5 posted on 03/09/2006 9:34:42 AM PST by printhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: printhead
Re #5

The trouble is that the poor will eat you in the end. There are just too many of them.

6 posted on 03/09/2006 9:37:02 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

If the Party comes to this conclusion, they will arrange for there to be a lot fewer "poor."


7 posted on 03/09/2006 9:37:16 AM PST by Little Ray (I'm a reactionary, hirsute, gun-owning, knuckle dragging, Christian Neanderthal and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
Well gosh darn those ole poor people. Maybe they should just kill em or starve em to death. Poor people are just Soooo inconvenient.
8 posted on 03/09/2006 9:38:46 AM PST by garyhope (In vino veritas. Ars longa, vita brevis, too brevis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mc6809e

.....lift themselves up......


Maybe they should try out for Chinese Idol


9 posted on 03/09/2006 9:39:11 AM PST by PETEPARSLEY ("He Who Farts In Church.....Must Sit In His Own PEW")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: garyhope

The soviets did in WWII


10 posted on 03/09/2006 9:39:35 AM PST by PETEPARSLEY ("He Who Farts In Church.....Must Sit In His Own PEW")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PETEPARSLEY

And not just in WWII.


11 posted on 03/09/2006 9:41:04 AM PST by garyhope (In vino veritas. Ars longa, vita brevis, too brevis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray
If the Party comes to this conclusion, they will arrange for there to be a lot fewer "poor."

Perhaps..., by herding them into "Human Waves" for assaults in a war against one of China's neighbors (a "tried and true" technique.......)!

12 posted on 03/09/2006 9:42:53 AM PST by ExSES (the "bottom-line")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
another China comes into focus - where hundreds of millions still live in poverty

Wait, I thought that communism created a worker's paradise and it would erase poverty. How can there still be poor people in China?

13 posted on 03/09/2006 9:42:53 AM PST by Diva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PETEPARSLEY
RE #10

Some die for their motherland while others die against it. When they are done, China may not in one piece afterwards.

14 posted on 03/09/2006 9:43:20 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy

15 posted on 03/09/2006 9:51:41 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

The rich-poor gap in China does not mean the poor are getting poorer, but rather that some people are getting richer. China this year has 400 million cell phone users. That's a big number, but it also means there are 900 million Chinese without cell phones.

Having everyone being dirt poor is not the solution for China. BBC sometimes sounds really socialist.


16 posted on 03/09/2006 10:07:28 AM PST by gogoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Not being one piece (by that I mean the provinces are made into independent or semi-independent states) might be good for China as a whole in the long-run. Some Chinese provinces have 80, 120 million people. That's the population of France or Germany. If China can produce a dozen South Koreas, then it would be vastly more powerful than it is today.

Economic and cultural productivity in Chinese history flourished during fragmented periods, not during strong dynasties.


17 posted on 03/09/2006 10:13:20 AM PST by gogoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: gogoman
Yep. To creat 200-300 million middle class folks in two decades (or in the last five years to me) is quite a feat. I would say they have 700 million more people to go.
18 posted on 03/09/2006 10:16:26 AM PST by Fishing-guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: gogoman
Re #16

I hear that things are getting more expensive while wage is lagging back. Besides, land disputes and widespread pollutions cannot be just brushed aside. China is just milking vast pool of dirt cheap labor and land. It is way beyond what happened in other E. Asian countries during their initial economic take-off. People are quite expendable, unless you are not really connected to government power. It is such a condition which creates these problem.

China intends to stay as a large state as it is, and wants to grow really fast. This is not sustainable.

Most importantly, there are rampant corruptions. Much of wealth were amassed in a corrupt manner. Financial system has been thoroughly corrupted. However, such corruption made small number of connected folks spectacularly rich. Other well-off ones are feeding from these guys in a sense.

Such a rampant corruption and arbitrary use of government power to push corrupt deals are making peasants angry. It is not just mere income gap issue. The gap has been made so wide thanks to power abuse and corruption.

19 posted on 03/09/2006 10:23:02 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: gogoman
Re #17

It is one thing to advocate several Chinas, but those in power and many Chinese are not keen on it. While it may be true that more prosperity were seen during divided periods, Chinese has a cultural reflex against it.

They will fight it. That is their problem. Forcing a civilization to be a nation state. This one-China mentality cost astronomical amount of blood in last 2,000 years. Chinese population regularly collapsed to one-third of the previous peak level. The worst seems to be drop from 60 million to 8 million some time after late-Han. That is a spectacular collapse. All because they spared nothing to be the ultimate hegemon of all China.

20 posted on 03/09/2006 10:32:57 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson