30 January, 2010

The rise of Feudal Capitali$m

Single-Party Democracy

By Roger Cohan (NYT)

BEIJING — I’m bullish on China after a couple of weeks here and perhaps that sentiment begins with the little emperors and empresses. In upscale city parks and rundown urban sprawls, I’ve seen China’s children pampered by grandparents, coddled by fathers, cared for by extended families.

Scarcity may explain the doting: China’s one-child policy makes children special. But there are deeper forces at work. The race for modernity has not blown apart the family unit, whatever the strains. After witnessing the atomization of American society, where the old are often left to fend for themselves, China feels cohesive.
It’s seeing that most natural of conspiracies — between grandparents and children — flourishing. It’s listening to young women in coastal factories talking about sending half their salaries home to some village in Guangxi where perhaps it goes to build a second floor on a parental house. It’s hearing young couples agonize over whether they can afford a child because “affording” means school, possible graduate education abroad, and a deposit on the first apartment.

The family is at once emotional bedrock and social insurance. “My” money equals my family’s money. All the parental investment reaps a return in the form of care later in life. “Children are a retirement fund,” a Chinese-American friend living here told me. “If you don’t have children, what do you do in old age?”

The Chinese, in other words, might be lining up to play karaoke after long factory shifts, but they’re not bowling alone American-style. They’re not stressing because they’re all alone. That’s critical. There so much heaving change here — China’s planning to open 97 new airports and 83 subway systems in the next five years — the family strikes me as the great stabilizer (even more than the regime’s iron fist).

As Arthur Kroeber, an economist, said, “High-growth stories are not pretty. If you’re growing at 10 percent a year, a lot of stuff gets knocked down.” It sure does: China looms through the dust. But the family has proved resilient, cushioning life for the have-nots, offering a moral compass for the haves (rampant corruption notwithstanding).

After the emperors and empresses, in my bullish assessment, comes the undistracted forward focus. After a while in Asia, you notice the absence of a certain background noise. It’s as if you’ve removed a negative drone from your life, like the slightly startled relief you feel when the hum of an air conditioner ceases.
What’s in that American drone? Oh, the wars of course, the cost of them, and debate around them, and the chatter surrounding terror and fear.

There’s also the resentment-infused aftermath of the great financial meltdown, navigated by China with an adroitness that helped salvage the world economy from oblivion. In the place of all that Western angst, there’s growth, growth, growth, which tends (through whatever ambivalence) to inspire awe rather than dread. The world’s center of gravity is shifting with a seismic inevitability.

I know, China has kept its foot on the gas of its stimulus package too long and there are bubble signs in housing and labor is no longer limitless, with resultant inflationary pressure. I also know there are tensions between state economic direction and market forces, with resultant waste. But my third bullish element is nonetheless an economy entering a 15-year sweet spot where rising disposable income will drive the domestic market.

Think of what Japan, Taiwan and South Korea went through decades ago, but with a population of 1.3 billion. Think of the 10 to 15 million new urban residents a year and the homes and infrastructure they will need. Think of all the stuff the world demands and can’t get elsewhere with the same quality, quantity and price. Think underlying drivers. They remain powerful.

Of course, political upheaval could unhinge all the above. Given that China’s open-closed experiment is unique in history, nobody can say how this society will be governed in 2050. Immense tensions, not least between the rage that corruption inspires and the difficulty of tackling it without a free press, exist. Still, my fourth reason for running with the Chinese bulls is perhaps the most surprising: single-party democracy.

It doesn’t exist. It’s an oxymoron (although a U.S. primary is a vote within one party). It can easily be the semantic disguise for outrage and oppression. But it just may be the most important political idea of the 21st century.

Rightful resistance is growing in China. Citizens are asserting their rights, not in organizing against the state (dangerous) but in using laws to have a say. Nongovernmental organizations are multiplying to advance agendas from the environment to labor rights. This is happening with the acquiescence of smart rulers.

“They know they cannot manage in the old way,” Ma Jun, a leading environmentalist, told me. “They cannot dam the water, but they can go with the flow and divert it to the places they want.”

Whether that place will ever resemble one-party democracy, I don’t know. But I no longer laugh at the idea. Harmonious discord is an old Chinese idea. The extended Chinese family is a daily exercise in just that.

Some comments from readers:



Xiao Ling Tong
Tianjin

I am an American male who has made China his home for the last 12 years. I can say with absolute certainty that everything Roger Cohen has written is true to the letter. I am glad that someone in the West can see it.

The country changes at the speed of late and yet it remains eternally China. Friendship and family and personal relations can often overcome even the most obdurate problems. Yes, indeed, there are limitations but in in each passing year that I have been here they have decreased. Four subjects remain tabu, not more than that, and they are collectively referred to as the four T's. The social net exists in different ways than in the United States -- there are no food stamps, social security is still in its exception, but there is an abundant end of demand for labor and the retirement age is only 55. People retire and then go to a second job.

Mortgages are made freely available to all and any, under orders from Beijing, and if one purchases an apartment valued at less than $100,000.00 USD, it is not at all uncommon that the monthly mortgage payment is less than $25.00 USD per month. The United States loves to criticize China for its record on human rights but there is one right here still available to all and that is the right to work and to find a job without a problem. An 11% unemployment rate like you have in the States now would case the Central Committee apoplexy.

Another example -- two years ago a major earthquake destroyed most of a major Western province in the city and killed 100,000 persons. The country went into high gear, Beijing sent in the People's Army to rebuild an entire area and 18 months later, the entire province was rebuilt...and I say that to ask you WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN NEW ORLEANS? Last time I was there it still looked like Hiroshima.

Where I live, within five minutes of my house, there is a huge new Protestant church, a new mosque, and an old Catholic church all open and functioning daily. I have ample social benefits on my job, like 4 months paid vacation every year, subsidized housing, subsidized water, gas and electricity, a food allowance, a travel allowance, etc., etc., and I am only a medium-ranking employee.

Yes, the system is highly controlled but it works so well. I have no fear for my person at all and go out at night at all hours. Crime and criminals are dealt with harshly and rapidly and endless appeals for convicted murders just do not exist. When I travel, I rarely take the plane anymore -- I simply go to the nearest train station and get on one of the 300 kilometer per hour bullet trains that link the entire country. They are fast, new, clean and efficient. Etc., etc. Wake up, America, you are starting to look more and more like Argentina if you know what that means.


Dan
London

This article seems to be caught in the same (orientalist?) trap as those of other well-regarded columnists who visit China for a couple of weeks and return to inform us that the way they are doing things is better than us while blithely glossing over the negatives (for other examples, see Thomas Friedman's collected works).

It's akin to understanding the communist era by visiting the Dazhai model village. This is not to deny that China's economic 'miracle' has not been remarkable (although this serves to highlight how bad it's economic performance had been prior to that) nor that we can learn things from it about our political and economic systems but that there is a distinct danger of people losing their perspective on what lessons to take away.

The stuff about family is a prime example. The family unit is a core feature of most societies but it seems that the author's view of the Chinese family is informed more by a lament at what has happened to the Western, or more precisely the Anglo-American, family unit than by an understanding of what is happening in the Chinese family unit. Yes, there is intergenerational living and a sharing of wealth but this is driven, in large part, by economic forces i.e. the lack of a social security system a lack of care homes. It used to be that way in the UK/USA too before the welfare state was created and we were all required to increase our working hours.

Moreover, this phenomenon is already taking place in China - nursing homes are springing up in economically advanced areas, such as Beijing and Shanghai, because people don't have the time to look after their parents they have the money to outsource the care. There have been huge changes that have taken place within family relationships during the period of reform and opening up, such as parents working in different parts of the country to earn money while the children are raised by family relatives, the effect of the one-child policy, the preference for boys over girls in rural areas.

In the main, I share the author's sentiment that strong family relationships are a good thing but it would be better if he could remember that the economic reforms in China are causing changes to the family than are less beneficial.



chenliang
hunan china

I wonder what is personal liberty? I really don't understand why so many people in the world in this 21 century always arguing about those tired topics talked long long ago! No body can give a meaning of liberty accepted by all.We need people who value actions more than words, rather than those always focus on the meaning of a single word!


Catrina Wang
Shanghai, China
The ironic thing is that democracy is written into the Chinese constitution: it states that citizens may exercise their right to vote in a general election every year. For the past 60 years however, this provision of the constitution has gone largely unenforced, like so many other laws. I think the close-knit nature of Chinese families has something to do with the poor rule of law in this country, where, as Mr. Cohen noted, "corruption is rampant" and money regularly buys complicity. If society-wide standards of justice and reciprocity are unreliable, then it makes sense to invest in a strong family unit.



SP
New York, NY
"One party democracy" does not and will never exist. What is in China is an oligarchy composed of corrupted, but yet talented and capable bureaucrats. In essence it is not very different from periods in China's long history when it was ruled by talented and capable emperors. Hopefully China is now on the same trajectory as Taiwan and South Korea some 30 years ago, when economic growth led to the end of one-party rule.


i save the best for last :-) ...

Dong Liu
USA
It is interesting to compare China and US. Both have a single-party democracy that is; both are ruled by a single group of elites. The difference is that in China these elites join the Chinese Communist Party, but in US these elites all work for Wall Street.

30 january 2010

04 January, 2010

Lim Peh

YPAP member: “Blame on your karma or your forefathers…”

Screenshot from YPAP Network Facebook

In case you can’t see it, here is what was posted by Eric How:

Kojat and Friends,

I am not mocking you guys on being banned on your own home ground. In fact, do not think that you can hide behind the keyboard doing all those weird stunts like posting pics of our members etc. I will be monitoring you guys and just be careful if you did infringe any copyrights materials.

Do not be bitter and go on slapping on the Government senselessly because you did not get any fruits or benefits from your forefather. You will have to blame on your karma or your forefathers for not getting all the paths right for their off springs. My folks did the right thing by getting all the stuffs ready for us and we will never ever need to nag about the Government giving jobs to foreigners instead of locals. In fact, we create jobs for others. Our folks even make sure that we guys do not need to squeeze into public transport by getting each of us a personal car.

The job market is an open competition whereby the best person gets the job and not because of nationalities. Buck up and do something right for you’re off springs so that they will be thankful to you and not turn up to be like you guys nagging senselessly.

From: The Online Citizen.

05 january 2010

Up Up And Away...

High HDB prices driven by speculators, hurting genuine home seekers

From: The Online Citizen


The following is a letter to the Today newspaper by Mr See Leong Kit which was “rejected for publication.”

Your report “Asset that keeps growing” (TODAY Dec 30) highlighted Minister Mah Bow Tan’s simplistic and optimistic view that HDB flat values will always go up.

Home prices in Singapore have become “ridiculously-high” for private property and “sky-high” for HDB flats.

Is it financially prudent for our young couples to start their marriage saddled with huge housing debts for something as basic as a roof over their heads?

The broader issue is that land-scarce Singapore must have proper policies to promote an “orderly” property market that is sustainable by economic growth, real demand and especially rising incomes. Such a market with gradual capital appreciation will benefit many Singaporeans from successive generations.

Whereas a “speculative” property market of sky-high prices is largely driven by speculators out to make a quick buck by “flipping a property”. But when the Property Bubble finally burst, both speculators and genuine home owners will be hurt by rapidly falling property values.

During our 1994 Property Bull Run, prices of both private and HDB properties were rising at 30% per annum for three years in a row. But since when has our economy as well as our salaries grow at such a phenomenal rate?

Our 2007 Property Bull Run lasted only nine months, cut short by the US sub-prime housing bubble turning into a Global Financial Crisis that brought recession and job losses to Singapore. But during that nine months, average freehold property value in our East Coast area doubled from $700 psf to $1400 psf.

A property may be “an asset that can be monetised”, but it can also end up as a millstone around one’s neck. High property prices will affect the average Singaporean as follows:

> As a home-buyer. Is it wise to sink so much of your hard-earned monies in a brick-and-cement house with little left over for your children’s upbringing, your own healthcare and retirement needs in old age?

> As an employee. If your employer has to pay high office rent out of its operating budget, can it afford to pay you a better salary,increment and bonus?

> As a consumer. If a shopkeeper or supermarket operator has to pay high commercial rent, will it not charge you higher prices for goods and services?

Finally, two pertinent questions for HDB flat-owners:

Are there not more important things in life, such as good health, close family ties and well brought-up children than this materialistic addiction to “HDB Upgrading Carrots” and “my HDB flat is worth a lot”?

Should you die suddenly from an accident or heart attack, can you take your high-valuation upgraded HDB flat along with you to the next world?

05 January 2010

02 January, 2010

The begining of a new reality


Some interesting responds from the TOC readers. There were 48 comments (and counting) at the time of this writing. I have extracted a few salient ones, un-edited from two respondants which, best summaried my thought on the subject of "...the begining of a new reality."

First, comment by Akazukin

#07
Hi all, I strongly wish to share my ideas across, my lack of English command might cause this to be anti-read proof.


First off, the government’s money is the people’s money. The money is to be used on Singapore’s growth – from police, firefighters to foreign relations. I don’t think anyone have to right to take the money to buy a house for themselves, or to donate it to someone they love. To donate some to neighbour countries when they are facing disaster, yes, that makes sense. It ensure our country’s reputation and growth in the long run. Should we face disaster, the other country donate to us in return.


The bank, similiary, is also the people’s money. We could take a loan, but we must pay it back with interest. If we cannot expect the bank to donate and buy a house for us, How can we then expect to use the government’s money for ourselves? Is building a one-room flat considered a good progress for Singapore?


There are millions of Signaporeans. How many are actually willing to donate $10 to support the homeless? Truth is, not more than 20%. Everyone equally needs money. It is basic human rights. If they have $50 more today, they want to entertain themselves, get a new shoe, or buy a lottery. We cannot say that everyone is ‘bad’ by not donating. We will definately feel something when someone stole $10 or $50 from us. If we feel nothing, we can donate.


How would you feel when your money was taken by the government to buy KFC or McDonald to mr tan XX who is jobless? Won’t you feel pissed off? How about your money was being used to cover the expense of civil defence, development, and building the trust of foreign countries? won’t you feel proud?


It is very simple. The government tax the people so that they will have savings for development. They don’t tax the jobless. And they certaonly don’t tax everyone in order to give it to the poor. If they do, it is robbery.


The people’s money have a much more important usage. Stop looking at those giant figures and wonder why nobody give them to you. If you’re homeless and jobless, it is nobody to blame but yourself. If you think Singaporeans should support each other, You should work on getting donations for yourself, You should try to ask for money from door to door, and not looking and complaining about the collected tax paid by the people. It makes no sense.

#09
I suggest you all stop acting noble and upright. Imagine your 2% GST or income tax was all given to the old man to buy a house.


You’ll be pissed off.


And that old man was aiming at government’s money. It is your tax money.

#16
The problem is, many people are jealous of minister-level incomes. They then feel very discouraged in life. I work so hard to earn 800 hundred dollars, I must pay income tax, pay those people to get high salary.


And also about the giant savings the government had.


Like my argument above, it is to blame on yourself if you’re homeless. In this story, the old man chosed to work as a security guard, and when facing physical problems, he lost his job. What happened to simple McDonald counter service? what happened to the free old folks home offered to him? he refused.


Because why? throughout his life, he is aiming at the big money the government has. He lost respect to small incomes.


There are lots of 1-room flat, and the monthly bill to support it was only <200. But that guy wants the government to build FREE flats for the homeless.


And that money is our tax money.


It makes no sense to me.


I understand how everyone will hate my arguments, but I chose to write in this approach. Because I strongly believe that this "talking" is just a strong piece of white lie. In relaity, if you say Singaporeans should help each other, why don't you let the homeless move in and live with you? why don't you give $400 to the homless every month?


I feel that everyone is jealous of other people's money, which have led to a big mistake. Thus I strongly want to get my idea across. the government's savings is the people's tax for the country's growth. If you go to other country, you have to pay tax as their citizen as well. This ensure economy defense, if we have no savings, how are we going to compete with other countries in the long run?


He is homeless because he chose to be. He can give tuition , given his good level of English, he can do McDonalds, he can go old folks and play chinese chess, but he chose to be homeless, and he kept on dreaming about free houses, just because the government have some savings. Are we stupid enough to support this loser?

And here, in my view, is the respond that best expressed the sentiments of the majority of commentators:

Second, comment by Shan

#46
Hey Akazukin, you have garnered a lot of attention with what you’ve said. You have the right to voice out your views, no matter how heartless it may sound. There’s democracy within the people here and we still respect you.


You are still a human being like the rest of us and must have suffered much in your life. The fact that you say your salary is $800 a month means that you are struggling too. But $800 today cannot get you much so you must be getting help from somewhere. Do tell please. Is the government helping you? Are your relatives helping you? Where are you staying? What is your job? Do you think your efforts are only worth $800 a month?


The government here wants you to only subsist because if you were paid alot then you will be inclined to take breaks from work to enjoy life. If we all did that then the economy would slow down. Well, there’s nothing wrong with that; there’s always opportunity costs in whatever we do. ‘Breaks’ is a good opportunity cost. But it’s good for the people, not the government. The government want to pay themselves millions so they need you to work everyday till you are unable. Hence, they have policies that would not have you earn more than you need.


As for asking people to pay donations to help the poor, I think it’s not right, for we have done alot. Why is it that when there is a social problem the government directs them to the people on the street for help? We have been paying high prices for everything we buy and need : income taxes, transport fares, HDB prices and fees, rental spaces for businesses, road taxes, property taxes, fines for this and that..etc All these monies have been paid by us, so the government should use the money for uplifting society. Instead, they use it to pay themselves millions, and lose billions in bad investments. Still, no one gets punished for bad judement. If we make bad judgements, we are punished severly.


In short, Akazukin, we are pissed with the government for stealing our every breath. The groups of homeless people in Parks are the begining of a new reality. You just wait, Akazukin, there will be many more to come because people like you believe truly, eventhough you are one of the victims, that the government is doing a wonderful job.


We may become neighbours one day in Sembawang Park. Never know.

02 January 2010

A Happy New Year to one and all.