The Urban - Rural Divide...

[rogerluli]

Perhaps the most unsettling negative trend in China is the widening gap between the growing middle class of the cities and the stagnating fortunes of the rural population. Estimated at 700 million this is no small problem. From corrupt local officials who illegally appropriate rural land and sell it to developers, to the out of balance sex ratio that is most keenly felt in the countryside, the country in China is getting the short end of the bamboo stick... .Rural people do not even own their property while city people do. The best and the brightest in rural China often leave for the cities to make their fortune, leaving behind the old and the less capable.

 

We watch Hunan news almost every night and we have seen a lot of programs devoted to this problem. They have filmed swaps of city and country students and teachers and then followed each as they go about their very different lives. Schools in the countryside are often ramshackle affairs with few book or other resources while in the cities students are dressed in neat uniforms in well equipped, modern, bright, classrooms One rural teacher broke down and cried when telling city teachers how poor his school was...

 

The following artcle is from The Economist...

 

 

 

BASKING in its 2008 Olympic glow, no longer shy at counting itself among the world's greats and blessed with a still booming economy, China looks the coming power. And so it is, up to a point. Yet as the Communist Party's bigwigs assemble behind closed doors in Beijing for their five-yearly congress, it is China's frailties, not its strengths, that preoccupy them.

 

Not for the first time, Hu Jintao, the party's boss and China's president, rightly picks out two big problems: the widening gap between China's mostly urban rich and its mostly rural poor, and the party's lack of ¡°internal democracy¡±¡ªcomrade-speak for accountability and the courage to question and debate. In other words, neither China's Communist Party nor its village dwellers are keeping up as the rest of China changes fast. None of the 1.3 billion ordinary Chinese gets a vote in the party's secretive conclaves. But among more than 700m left-behind peasants, frustrations are building.

 

As in any fast-developing economy, for all its successes China's breakneck growth masks a multitude of problems, from rampant corruption and devastating pollution to a frail banking system and the lack of independent courts to uphold the rule of law. Meanwhile, three decades of ¡°get rich quick¡± advice from party central have left the country divided between a richer coast and still impoverished interior, between upwardly mobile city dwellers and stagnating rural communities. These days, the income disparity between China's richest few and poorest many (peasants, migrant workers, pensioners) would make many a modern capitalist blush.

 

 

 

From communism to carpet-baggers

Mr Hu has tried to accommodate some demands for change. Most recently, a law was passed that for the first time enshrines private property rights¡ªa huge ideological leap for a party with its origins a long march back in Mao's communes. But like much else in China, these new rights will benefit mostly city-dwellers; a growing urban middle class will now be able to buy and sell their homes or businesses. In the countryside, where peasants are able only to lease their land, not own it (and not even use it as collateral for loans), the new law will do nothing to rectify the landgrabs orchestrated by venal local officials, who turf people off the land so as to do lucrative deals with carpet-bagging developers.

 

In this and other ways, the reforms that Deng Xiaoping first launched in China's countryside 30 years ago have now left its peasants in the ditch. But village dwellers have not only seen their city compatriots get richer quicker; increasingly, their own concerns have also been neglected. Since 1989, when disgruntled workers joined student democracy protesters and it all ended in bloodshed on Beijing's Tiananmen Square, a ruling party fearful of any further challenge to its power has paid better heed to the grievances of China's urban masses. Urbanites have won greater freedom to spend their rising incomes as they wish, while much ballyhooed experiments in greater village democracy have gone nowhere. With access to the internet and mobile phones, China's middle classes can organise themselves to oppose, say, the siting of an unwanted chemicals factory and thus draw government attention. Despite many thousands of village protests each year against corrupt officials, poor medical services and bad schools, China's peasants¡ªmore dispersed, less organised and therefore more easily ignored or suppressed¡ªcan usually do little but seethe.

 

Mr Hu bemoans China's widening inequalities, but has so far done little to bridge them. In fact there is much that could improve the peasants' lot. Growth at any cost has led to a tax system that unduly favours the wealthy regions that generate their income through industry. Central government could adjust that. It could help further by shouldering a much bigger share of the costs of basic health care and education in the rural areas. Of the five tiers of government, a couple could be stripped away and not be missed. Indeed, thinning the ranks of idle cadres with their fingers in the coffers would ease the financial burden on China's hard-pressed villagers.

 

 

 

Shooting for trouble

Are such reforms too extensive and costly for a still developing country such as China? No longer. Four years ago, China put its first man in space (only the third country to do so, after Russia and America), at what true cost the government will not say. Now it is aiming for the moon, at a cost of many more billions: its first (unmanned) moon-shot is expected to take place soon. Like the Olympics, China's space programme is an expensive publicity stunt, designed to encourage nationalist fervour in a population¡ªand a party¡ªlong since bored with the maxims of Marx, Lenin and Mao.

 

Another way in which Mr Hu and his comrades could help the peasants would be to divert some of the double-digit annual increases in defence spending to help the estimated 40% of China's villages that have no access to running water. The trouble is that China's military build-up has become the measure of the party's commitment to another nationalist cause that it has stoked in an effort to bolster its tattered credentials: the eventual recovery, by persuasive hook or military crook, of the island of Taiwan, which China claims as its own.

 

So far the combination of this appeal to nationalism and the pursuit of economic growth at almost any price has helped the party maintain its grip. But just as China's periodic shrill threats to Taiwan threaten the stability of the wider region, so the plight and growing anger of China's peasantry are a harbinger of potential trouble ahead at home.

 

It is trouble that China's Communist Party is increasingly ill-prepared to deal with. For all Mr Hu's rhetoric about greater internal democracy, the party is too fearful for its own survival to open itself up to a genuine clash of ideas. Although a few brave voices have called for that there has been no open debate in the run-up to the congress about how to address any of China's pressing rural problems. To add to their burdens, China's peasants are saddled with a ruling party that is too worried about its own survival to spend more than a little lip-service on theirs.

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

Sounds like an algore-rithm; lots of air, but no validity. I wonder sometimes Roger if you like anything about any country.

 

Edited October 12, 2007 by ShaQuaNew (see edit history)

[David&Wendy]

In this and other ways, the reforms that Deng Xiaoping first launched in China's countryside 30 years ago have now left its peasants in the ditch.

 

This is coming from my experience living in Shenzhen, China. Deng Xiaopeng changed this city from a sleepy fishing village to a LARGE thriving metropolis that is every day getting closer to being a true rival to Hong Kong. They revere Xiaopeng with a respect that we give to Abraham Lincoln. TIME Magazine did a story on him

[rogerluli]

Sounds like an algore-rithm; lots of air, but no validity. I wonder sometimes Roger if you like anything about any country.

 

 

Hold on a sec Jesse... You find "no validity" to the claim that there are tremendous problems in the countryside in China??? Well dude all I can say is that you must not watch as much Chinese news or read as much about China as I do... or you simply have your head buried somewhere...

[Guest Rob & Jin]

Sounds like an algore-rithm; lots of air, but no validity. I wonder sometimes Roger if you like anything about any country.

 

 

Hold on a sec Jesse... You find "no validity" to the claim that there are tremendous problems in the countryside in China??? Well dude all I can say is that you must not watch as much Chinese news or read as much about China as I do... or you simply have your head buried somewhere...

 

 

Umm, I think just driving through the country side makes it pretty clear theres a difference

[griz326]

The disparity in urban vs rural life is global. It is true even in the US.

 

However, the US went through the change over an extended period while China is going the change in a compressed time frame. ...and the population of China dwarfs the population of the US.

 

The Chinese people I have met in the countryside have always appeared to be happy and healthy - even on my first trip to China in 1978. Poverty does not always imply poorness of life.

 

There should be no illusions: there will always be a disparity between urban and rural life globally.

[rogerluli]

The Chinese people I have met in the countryside have always appeared to be happy

 

The Chinese are masters at crying on the inside and laughing on the outside...

Especially a laowei that they encounter will not be seeing their true face...

[Jeikun]

The disparity in urban vs rural life is global. It is true even in the US.

 

However, the US went through the change over an extended period while China is going the change in a compressed time frame. ...and the population of China dwarfs the population of the US.

 

The Chinese people I have met in the countryside have always appeared to be happy and healthy - even on my first trip to China in 1978. Poverty does not always imply poorness of life.

 

There should be no illusions: there will always be a disparity between urban and rural life globally.

 

 

The "disparity" between Rural and Urban USA is negligable when compared to the chasm that exists in China. We're not talking about big screen vs 27", BMW vs Chevy, or caviar vs mashed taters here... We're talking about 2007 vs 1905.

 

Rose colored glasses make the world look nice and all, but don't do much for your vision.

[david_dawei]

In this and other ways, the reforms that Deng Xiaoping first launched in China's countryside 30 years ago have now left its peasants in the ditch.

 

This is coming from my experience living in Shenzhen, China. Deng Xiaopeng changed this city from a sleepy fishing village to a LARGE thriving metropolis that is every day getting closer to being a true rival to Hong Kong. They revere Xiaopeng with a respect that we give to Abraham Lincoln. TIME Magazine did a story on him

but Shenzhen was hand picked to be an economic zone... it's proximity to HK and (GUZ) should come as no surprise in that regard. Now I hear they want to bridge Shenzhen and HK closer.

 

I think the question would be, what's the rural parts of the country getting out of this? Shenzhen is getting tons of migrant workers for sure.

Edited October 12, 2007 by DavidZixuan (see edit history)

[Don]

I agree this might be the greatest problem for china to over come. They have many issue that are all tied up in this one problem.

 

 

 

1. National ID or health system. (I am talking simply here, just SSN cards)

 

2. Migrant works.

 

3. few poor women to marry poor men.

 

4. lack of infrastructue in rual areas. (just take a car ride between two rual cities) Okay roads from rual city to big city, but rural to rural is very bad.

 

5. Poor farmers.

 

6. corupt local officals.

 

7. corupt company owners.

 

8. Millions of undocument people (many more than we have).

 

 

 

So many issue, and no way to fix any one without small gains in all areas. These issues need to be fixed and will require masive investment.

 

 

 

Many here might not think this is their problems, but when the 700 milllion army takes over than we will all learn that small help could make a difference. Just remember the communist reveloution was won by this same group. A leader emeraged that knew how to control this group and he carreid his cause forward. The same could happen again. I think the current group of leaders understand and fears this. I am not sure what we can do to fix these issues, except try to make others understand including our own polictal and corperate leaders.

 

We are a unique group with our feet in both cultures.

 

 

 

China has it work cut out for it.

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

The Chinese people I have met in the countryside have always appeared to be happy

 

The Chinese are masters at crying on the inside and laughing on the outside...

Especially a laowei that they encounter will not be seeing their true face...

 

Now hold on thar pardner. I do, of course. Many of the sights and sounds of China can make a strong man weak. It's very sad to see. I'm with you on that part. What happens so often though is that laowei comes in with guns blazing pointing out how they do things back in the US. It's no mystery that they need help, but in my most humbleist of opinions that some of this information may be misperceived. That's all.

 

[Joshua + Wang Zhuo]

The Chinese people I have met in the countryside have always appeared to be happy

 

The Chinese are masters at crying on the inside and laughing on the outside...

Especially a laowei that they encounter will not be seeing their true face...

 

Now hold on thar pardner. I do, of course. Many of the sights and sounds of China can make a strong man weak. It's very sad to see. I'm with you on that part. What happens so often though is that laowei comes in with guns blazing pointing out how they do things back in the US. It's no mystery that they need help, but in my most humbleist of opinions that some of this information may be misperceived. That's all.

 

 

 

I think if you look deeper you will find the Economist to be one of the most unbiased news sources out there. I highly recommend you check it out.

 

Joshua

[jim_julian]

All I can do is report my personal experience ... Lao Po's extended family is about half city half farm. On the "high" end are Army officers, (one of whom drives a Mercedes), police officers, and one ex-restaurant owner who married me and moved to the US. On the "low" end are two family farms with multiple folks living and working them. In the middle are hotel employees, drivers, building trades, and factory workers.

 

They all seem to be pretty happy despite major differences in what we would call living standard. They all help each other out and at the big family gatherings there appears to be no friction between the haves and have nots.

 

I don't want to minimize the differences in Chinese economic classes but in my small sample it seems to have less of an effect than a westerner might imagine. One of the mitigating factors is the strength of the Chinese extended family. But I really only know one family well so I prbably don't know what I'm talking about ...

[skibum]

The country people have always got the short end of the stick. Through out China's history they have been the ones supporting the rest of the country. They made the silk that was a staple of government as well as feeding everyone. When the revolution ended, Mao told everyone to leave the cities alone as that is where most of the wealth came from. Most of the government industry settled in large cities and they had the most perks such as retirement and health coverage as well as free housing.

Not so many years ago the country people were not allowed to move from their villages. Now that that has ended, the country population has dropped as the city population has gone up. I will guess that since 2000 300,000 have moved to the cities. Many are illegal as they don't have ID cards as they were born someplace where they should not have been. Ever since Mao ordered every one to have more children and the population doubled from about 1949 to 1985 (from memory) population numbers have been the biggest problem. He did not use them in wars like he thought he would.

 

The voting process in the cities is nothing to make you move for. Generally an offical in the work group is elected to elect somebody else who goes to the convention and votes for whoever is going to be elected. In the villages there was a movment several years ago to let the farmers vote for whom they wanted as their leaders but I think that went back out several years ago.

 

All the land in China belongs to the govt. You may own the building that is on it for so many years. Every time the Emperor changed, the farm layout was changed to what he thought was the best and would produce the most food and silk. Does anyone have experience with farm wives raising silk worms now?

 

I don't believe we have anything to fear from China. What would they gain by going to war with us. They have always feared the USSR more than the US. The problems they have are theirs to fix.

[rogerluli]

 

All the land in China belongs to the govt. You may own the building that is on it for so many years.

 

All the land in China DOES belong to the government. Leases are given to developers for usually 70 years but can be for less. The lease date starts when the development is okayed by the local government. When you buy your house from the developer you get the rest of that 70 year lease. At then end of that time leases are renewed for a small fee of like 1000 RMB.