Archive for the ‘Current Events’ Category

« Older Entries

China update

March 5th, 2012 by Johanna | Leave comments | Filed in China, Current Events

Exciting time for China right now, with the annual two sessions kicking off today. Here are loosely related tidbits of news, which I hope will form a composite of modern China for you:

  • The National People’s Congress, one of China’s two legislative bodies (i.e., the ones that are meeting right now), is a shining example of democracy in China, according to Chinese state media. What I find ironic is that the article does not itself contain the word “democracy,” nor does it provide details on how these officials are “elected.” Plus, I’m pretty sure “democracy” carries with it some kind of disdain and irony in China, so I’m not sure why Chinese media still try to promote the image that China is democratic.
  • China’s most outspoken economics weekly, Caixin, has declared state capitalism to be “incompatible with … socialist market economy,” “outdated” and “threaten[ing to] Chinese prosperity.” Preach it, sister. China’s economy began its rapid growth under the market principles of Deng Xiaoping, culminating with the break-up and privatization of many of SOEs in the 1990s, before stalling under Premier Wen Jiabao. What you get, in my limited observations as a peon in the state publishing industry, is a colossal amount of waste and idiotic decisions made to impress and boost the egos of clueless higher-ups.
  • American leaders may be wealthy, but Chinese leaders are WEALTHY. American leaders are controlled by corporations, but Chinese leaders control corporations. Both systems lead to corruption and cronyism. Which system is worse?

The richest 2 percent of the NPC — 60 people — had an average wealth of $1.44 billion per person. The richest 2 percent of Congress — 11 members — had an average wealth of $323 million.

It's made of trash!

One China, multiple views

January 11th, 2012 by Johanna | Leave comments | Filed in China, Current Events, Reflections

Sometimes, you can read a really interesting and informative post about China that takes a more nuanced approach to figuring out what exactly China is and isn’t. For an example, see this blog post about the slew of punishments handed out recently, over the holidays, to political activists. It argues that China isn’t necessarily cracking down on dissent more than before, as claimed in the Western press; rather, it could just be following its own policies regarding repeat offenders.

At the same time, you can read super superficial crap in the New York Times, of all places, about all the wonderful offerings of China, written by a recent transplant who sticks to many, if not all, of the stereotypes related to the lost little laowai who couldn’t hack it back home. Teacher? Check. Loves China? Check. Learned a lot? Check. Actually didn’t learn much? Check.

There are just no nuances in that article at all. Here are some of the stupid things he wrote:

  • “China wants you. Job prospects are abundant.” No. China does not want you. China wants your English-speaking and -writing abilities (they don’t even necessarily have to be great!) and your foreign-looking face.
  • “The effects of the Great Recession of 2008 may be felt in the United States for years, but they barely scratched China.” No. China over-corrected for financial crisis with the most giant stimulus the world has seen, and now it is facing rapid inflation and a real estate bubble that has many people (including me) reeling and feeling an impending sense of doom.
  • “China is a nation that unapologetically rejects Western democracy — and yet I am surprised to find that Chinese citizens and the news media have as much freedom as they do.” No. People and media can criticize the government and protest. And they do. But the concept of freedom in China is very tricky to define within a short rebuttal, but suffice to say that it’s much more complex and different than Americans’ simple, idealistic vision of it, which doesn’t exist even in the U.S.
  • “Pollution is bad. Beijing, like much of China, is often enveloped in what local residents euphemistically call ‘mist.’ But there are nice days, too, more than you might think.” Yes, there are nice days. But the point about the pollution is that it’s particularly bad when it’s bad. For days.

Look, there are many reasons to come China (and yeah, the job opportunities are a pretty big deal). I’ve given up on trying to figure out why I wouldn’t want to leave it even if I found a great job back in the U.S. But I’ve settled on this explanation: It’s an extremely complicated society, with some parts that have been explained over and over, and other parts that lurk under all those explanations, and this amalgamation of parts that make up China give so much food for thought and give you a chance to see into a world that is so vastly different than the one you were raised in. The point isn’t to understand why the Chinese, or China, are the way they are, or even to accept the way they do things (which, unfortunately, is what they want — “Zhe shi Zhongguo!” is their favorite way to tell off foreigners unwilling to put up with their bullshit). Rather, just observe and marvel — at their destruction, at their hope, at their chaos, at their absurdity, at their cynicism and optimism — and in the process, refine your own beliefs and truths.

The AP, China and taxes

December 8th, 2011 by Johanna | Leave comments | Filed in China, Current Events, Life

It’s not unusual to find misleading, distorted stories in the media. It’s also not unusual for me to wave off the distortions, because, well, I know better and I can glean something from the story anyway. Today, however, I want to direct you to this AP story about foreigners in China squeezed by pensions, taxes. Or that’s what they want you to think. I know who you’re thinking about now — me, right? I would know!

So: Are pensions and taxes squeezing me?

Not really!

First of all, which is worse to an American: China or taxes? Which is more responsible for our country’s decline? There’s no denying, especially with it perpetually being election season, that there are strong cases to be made for both. But what happens when you combine the two? How much worse is it to be paying taxes to China??? Overly dramatic headline.

Communist China does not take all of my hard-earned RMBs and give it to the PLA to dig a bunch of tunnels for their larger-than-defense-analysts-think nuclear arsenal. At my old job, I gave them less than 10 percent of my gross income (base pay + various stipends). If you’re really interested in how China calculates how much individual income tax to collect from people, Wikipedia has a handy table!

Wikipedia, unfortunately, does not have a handy table about the new tax in question: the Social Insurance Tax. Admittedly, there are still many legal and implementation issues surrounding the tax and the law that invented it. Anyway, here’s what the AP article says about it:

The biggest worry for many is an abrupt order for foreign workers and their employers to start paying up to 40 percent of their wages for pensions and other welfare.

[...]

The pension and medical charges took effect Oct. 15, less than six months after they were announced.

This is not true. The tax was first proposed last year in April (more than 1.5 years ago!), promulgated that October and effective nationwide July 1 of this year. Basically, the law was announced a year ago before they took effect, and the effectiveness was even delayed by a few months from the original date in July — all because foreign companies balked at the idea (when it was pointed out at the end of May by state media) of paying more and stirred up debate.

How much more? Quite a bit! The exact amount is determined locally, but generally:

Based on what applies to Chinese employees, the cost could be 37% of monthly income charged to employers and 11% for employees, up to a threshold amount set locally, according to Christopher Xing, a China tax partner at KPMG. The charge in Shanghai, for instance, is based on a maximum monthly income of 11,688 yuan, about $1,800, meaning a monthly hit of $666 per worker for employers and $198 for each employee. (emphasis mine)

From another WSJ article with more details, in Beijing, the salary cap is 12,603 yuan ($1,981) and individual contribution is just a smidgen over 10 percent.

With soaring inflation and rising costs of living, I could probably use that money. But another 1,500 RMB is hardly being “squeezed.” Sure, employers have to pay about 32 percent more, so I can sort of understand if they feel squeezed. But then the article decided to focus on multinational corporations, and all of my sympathy melted away.

And, hey, look at that part I bolded above: the same tax applies to the Chinese. They pay into the same fund at the same rates. So do Chinese companies that hire foreigners (and they hire quite a few). But you wouldn’t know that by reading the AP article because they talk about it like it’s some racist money-sucking scheme by lumping it with this paragraph:

The changes come against a backdrop of critical coverage by state media of product safety and other complaints against high-profile corporations such as Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and energy giant ConocoPhillips Co. Companies also are uneasily awaiting the release of new patent and copyright rules they worry might push them to hand over technology.

Journalists call this “context” but it’s just not right. There have been loads of stories about how foreign companies feel like China is becoming unfriendlier all the time. I agree! China is hardly innocent when it comes to ripping off foreigners (it’s true, they see us as loaded cash registers — visa fees? giant import duties? beer that is double the price of what it should be?), but it’s just not quite the case here.

Now, the problem with the tax is one most Republicans can relate to (but my problem is based on reality). We foreigners are essentially paying into something that is supposed to provide us benefits but, in reality, probably never will. The five “social insurances,” as the Chinese call them, are pension (think Social Security), medical (think Medicare), unemployment (think Unemployment Benefits), work-related injuries and maternity. Work-related injuries and maternity insurance would be the ones most likely applicable to foreign workers, who often stay for a few years and leave. Because our visas are often tied to our employment, we’re kicked out of the country if we don’t have a job, so it’s hard to think of a case where we could collect unemployment benefits. For medical care, most foreigners would never go to a Chinese hospital for something they need help with payment for. And pensions? Ha. China practically actively discourages foreigners from really settling down here.

Which leads to the second reason a lot of foreigners have a problem with the tax: The law is just not clear. Can we get our money back without excessive bureaucratic hurdles? We just don’t know. Probably not. But I’m not going to squabble about losing a month’s salary’s worth to the greedy Chinese government when I’m already living a comfortable life (as most, if not all, foreigners* are) and don’t need the money.

That is, I won’t miss the money until I do need it to help pay the medical expenses incurred from my Beijing pollution-induced lung cancer. Then I probably will wish I hadn’t been so nice to the Commies :(

*When both Western media and Chinese use the term foreigner, they usually mean rich people from the West. I apply this definition here, knowing full well that there are many foreigners from poorer parts of the world living here.

Pollution: A Western conspiracy?

November 4th, 2011 by Johanna | 1 comment | Filed in China, Current Events, Life

I’ve spent the better part of this week not believing air quality data provided by one U.S. Embassy, as suggested to me by this Chinese official. From Caijing:

“China’s air quality should not be judged from data released by foreign embassies in Beijing,” Du Shaozhong, vice head and spokesman of Beijing’s environmental protection bureau, said in an interview in Weibo.com, the twitter-like microblog in China, referring to U.S. embassy’s monitoring data.

After getting stuck around “hazardous” for a week, it’s back down to a more manageable “unhealthy” level. But they’re probably just trying to make China look bad. Even though China does look bad. I mean, seriously. It’s been this poopy color of grey for a very long time now. On Sunday, flights couldn’t even land (I asked the airline representatives, who dutifully told me the delays were caused by bad weather conditions) and I was stuck at the airport all day, waiting for a flight that was no longer coming until the next day.

But South China Morning Post seems to have uncovered the reason why Chinese data paint much rosier pictures, and why officials have done little to correct this minor environmental problem.

According to the Broad Group, a Hunan-based air-conditioner maker, at least 200 air purifiers are installed inside Zhongnanhai, the top leadership compound where President Hu Jintao, Premier Wen Jiabao and other leaders work and live.

“They are everywhere in Zhongnanhai, from living rooms and meeting rooms to swimming pools and gyms,” the website of one of the company’s Beijing dealers said. “It is a blessing for the people that our purifiers have created a healthy and clean environment for state leaders.”

They even have portable ones that they take around when they have to leave their purifier-fortified compounds. They are so out of touch with reality that they even give air purifiers as presents to visiting officials, as if they need purifiers wherever they’re from.

China doesn’t even measure the most harmful particles, PM2.5, because “the time is not ripe,” (via James Fallows) which is basically the Chinese way of saying, “YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH.”

Sigh. China. It’s like this.

I just ordered the Steve Jobs bio!

October 11th, 2011 by Johanna | Leave comments | Filed in China, Current Events, Miscellaneous, USA! USA!

From Chinese Amazon. Like in the U.S., the book (Chinese edition) has already become the No. 1 seller on Amazon here, with the English version at No. 3, ahead of the Oct. 24 release.

For those who can’t wait that long, I saw a street vendor selling a bootleg copy (or maybe a leaked real copy) earlier at lunch. Yep, I am in China.

Another petty shot from China

August 10th, 2011 by Johanna | Leave comments | Filed in China, Current Events, Media, Reflections

Oh, China, you’re never too quick to point out the hypocrisy of Western media. First, when Rupert Murdoch was getting grilled by Parliament, you pointed out how the News of the World hacking scandal showed that freedom of the press in the West was all a farce. And now, according to you, the Western media is once again showing its bias by calling the London riots, well, “riots” — instead of a “revolution.” In the Global Times:

If it had happened somewhere else, the chaos would have been given a name, such as “chrysanthemum revolution.”  Instead, it was described as overnight violence followed by looting in local media.

The Chinese could provide much needed criticism of the West, but their arguments often fall flat. They miss the point and employ twisted (imaginary) logic that highlights their misunderstandings of Western society (including laws, political systems and culture) rather than enlighten the reader with an alternative appraisal of the West.

For example:

Violence similar to that which London experienced at the weekend can be found in many other places, from Africa to China.

From this premise, the Global Times points out the supposed hypocrisy that the media’s narrative is not focusing on oppression of the demonstrators or framed as people fighting for their rights. It also mentions that British media is not concerned about ethnic tensions or the riots’ impact on authority — traditional narratives employed when recent riots/demonstrations occurred in other countries.

But the Global Times never takes a more nuanced look at the riots in London and how they might differ from the Arab uprisings and the numerous daily demonstrations in China. Instead, it automatically lumps them all in the same category because they share similar violent manifestations, which makes Chinese media just as guilty of what they’re accusing Western media of doing and does nothing to improve their own image.

On the Wenzhou train crash

August 1st, 2011 by Johanna | Leave comments | Filed in China, Current Events

Just wanted to make a quick point on the Wenzhou train crash. People are livid, and government — that is CPC — response has never seemed so inadequate or out of touch. Minitruth directives that have been leaked — and to be fair, all governments try to set agendas and frame news coverage, though they are often more delicate about it — reinforce the stereotype that China is shady and the people are blind followers.

But this may become a potential turning point for China’s social reforms. Despite government attempts to frame and kill news coverage (the angle is “In the face of great tragedy, there’s great love”), many media outlets did not follow orders. Via Shanghaiist, the front pages of some city dailies the day after the crash:

Click to enlarge. (Weibo/lishacn)

Over the following week, several notable people in the state media began speaking out, as well, voicing their disapproval and beseeching the government to answer questions.

Finally, after a late Friday night directive that essentially banned any non-positive story that didn’t come from official sources (i.e., a newspaper’s own investigative reporting) and that led to dozens of papers scrapping hundreds of pages, one leading weekly went ahead with their original copy. The front page featured a letter to the “miracle” child, a 2-year-old girl who was found hours after the government had called a stop to the rescue searches. An excerpt, translated by the WSJ’s China Real Time Report:

To live – to live with dignity – is that rainbow you get to see only after suffering through the wind and the rain. Yiyi, when you’re older maybe you’ll realize that dark night of July 23 was when things started to change. After that day, we won’t simply complain, but instead learn how to advocate and act. We understand that we have rights, we respect these rights and are will spare no effort to protect them.

The Internet has revolutionized the way the Chinese interact with their government and arguably has given them a platform to express themselves more freely. It has led to acts of advocacy in such cases as animal welfare and environmental protection. But whether the Weibo fury over the train crash will translate into real “change” and teach the Chinese how to “advocate and act” won’t be known for a few years.

Cultural dissemination

July 22nd, 2011 by Johanna | Leave comments | Filed in China, Current Events, USA! USA!

New York is turning into Beijing!

From the Times:

People did what they had to do. They sat through movies they did not really want to see. They walked around without shirts beneath umbrellas. Tony Gonzalez, a Manhattan doorman and restaurant repairman, had taken two showers by midday and planned on taking six or seven. Yana Galbshtein had no air-conditioning at her home in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, so she hopped on the subway. She was considering riding it all day.

Hope all you Americans are staying cool! It’s been grey and rainy/storming/foggy for the past 10 days now in Beijing … but still really hot. I miss sunshine and blue skies. Looks like we all have our weather problems.

China is not cheap, part 2

July 13th, 2011 by Johanna | 1 comment | Filed in China, Current Events, Life

China’s rising cost of living has been dominating the news lately, if not overseas, then definitely domestically. First-half figures just released show that food prices alone jumped more than 11 percent over the first six months last year. When I first came to Beijing, my shao bing jia ji dan was 1.5 kuai; it’s now 2 kuai, or 33 percent more expensive. I’ve watched as zha jiang mian at Hai Wan Ju rose from something under 15 kuai two years ago to 16 kuai last year to 19 kuai now. Sometimes I skip meals just to save money (and who am I kidding, also because I’m lazy).

So it really comes as little surprise that Beijing ranks No. 20 on the newly released 2011 Worldwide Cost of Living survey by Mercer. It actually fell four places from last year. At any rate, it still ranks above New York, the only U.S. city in the top 50, Paris and Rome. This makes me feel slightly snobby, and I wonder if this might be the reason why I like living in Beijing, despite how horrible it is. Because it’s expensive. Probably!

Getting stuff done before the dog days

June 15th, 2011 by Johanna | Leave comments | Filed in China, Current Events

Some people (like me) would argue that we are already in the dog days of summer. I dread going outside before 8 at night, so I don’t know what I will do come July and August. You’d think other Chinese might be like me, too lazy from the heat to do anything. But, no, they are just stirring up trouble:

A wave of violent unrest in urban areas of China over the past three weeks is testing the Communist Party’s efforts to maintain control over an increasingly complex and fractious society, forcing it to repeatedly deploy its massive security forces to contain public anger over economic and political grievances.

The most recent protest started Friday in Zengcheng, a factory “town” of 800,000 in southern China near Guangzhou, and lasted until Monday. Security guards personnel clashed with a street vendor couple, claiming the couple had “illegally” set up shop. (Does this sound familiar?) In the kerfuffle, the pregnant wife was pushed and fell to the ground. A large crowd, which the China Daily says was as large as 1,000 people at one point, gathered and turned violent, smashing police cars and throwing stones and bricks at police and the guards. Rumors spread that the wife was injured and the husband was killed (both untrue, says state media), but protests continued through the weekend. The government responded with tear gas, armored vehicles, arrests and an investigation into the incident.

Other violent protests in the past month or so include bombings of government buildings in two cities, which killed five total, ethnic clashes in Inner Mongolia and one in Lichuan after a bureaucrat who was challenging a land deal died in police custody.

Social unrest has grown markedly over the last half-decade, from 60,000 “mass incidents” in 2006 to an estimated 127,000 in 2008. But they are usually isolated, local incidents, and the WSJ article duly notes that the protests this past month appear uncoordinated. In fact, there is almost a cycle to them: a spark ticks off some angry citizens, who protest and are put down by an iron-fisted government.

None of these protests aimed to overthrow the government or Communist Party, and despite similar beginnings — a small protest of the government abuse of power — they did not approach anywhere near the scale of protests in the Middle East. Would they have had they not been effectively squashed by the government? As the WSJ article notes, the Global Times says in an editorial that “China is not a nation where public anger collectively seeks to topple the existing order” (emphasis theirs). My instinct is that they’re right, for now. The government is quick to make amends, by removing officials, launching investigations and bringing fruit baskets to their victims and making a big deal out of that. People here have so far been easily appeased. Life then moves on.

« Older Entries