|
That's the message I get from Joel Brinkley's PoliticoOp/Ed entitled " Is China Really Such A Land Of Opportunity? " He starts off with this question: If China is such a wondrous land of opportunity, as its leaders sooften proclaim, then why are so many of China s most successfulcitizens suddenly hungry to move to the United States? Several recent internal surveys of China s wealthiest citizensfound that 60 percent to 80 percent of those worth at least $1.6million say they either want to move or are already planning to.And for them, the U.S. is the most popular destination. It's strange, but the first thing that came into my mindafter reading that lede was the debate in the U.S. two years agoabout health care reform. One of the refrains that the opponents ofreform frequently repeated was that the U.S. health care system wasthe best in the world. Their evidence? When Saudi Princes get sick,they fly to the U.S. to go to the Mayo Clinic. You get the(twisted) logic? Brinkley is not making this sort of argument in his Op/Ed, at leastnot explicitly, but whenever I see something about rich Chinesecoming to the U.S., which usually includes a list of what'sgood about the U.S. and bad about China, I feel like it'sHealth Care Debate II. And his main thrust here is quite clear:China can't be all that great a place if rich people arebailing on it. But don't get me wrong. The facts that Brinkley has compiledare not exactly wrong, or even irrelevant. This bit is certainlytrue, for example: The United States is their first choice, followed by Canada. Mostof them say they come to provide a better education for theirchildren, to safeguard their capital and because of uncertaintyabout the nation s future, Yu said. There s no sense ofsecurity. No matter how rich those people are, they always live infear. But the conclusion here that the reader is supposed to draw, Isuppose, is that China is a scary place, and that these successfulentrepreneurs have to flee to protect themselves. Well, there are different ways of looking at this wave ofemigrants. Are they misunderstood businessmen who are looking forfreedom and security? Perhaps, although I'd emphasize the"security" over freedom and note that in this context,security means protecting their financial assets. But I think we miss something if we just consider these guys asthey are at the moment they choose to emigrate — individualswith big bank accounts. The questions "Where did they comefrom?" and "How did they amass their fortunes?"are critical. Wealth, politics and corruption go hand in hand (inboth China and the U.S.), and there's a reason why so many ofChina's wealthiest individuals' fall from graceinvolves a prison cell. To put it another way, China's nouveau riche should not be mistaken for heroic characters in an Ayn Rand novel. The origins of this wealth, which is being used by the way toliterally buy American permanent residency, also tells us somethingelse about the U.S. and China. Brinkley is correct in pointing outincome inequality in the PRC: China is one of the world s most unequal nation s a placewhere rich people can blithely ignore the state s one-child ruleby paying a $9,500 fine for each additional child while nearlyhalf of the nation s poor don t even have access to a toilet. That toilet factoid, which I assume is about flush toilets in ruralhomes, comes off as slightly bizarre (one gets a mental image of apoor farmer with legs crossed, frantically looking around for aplace to pee). That aside, Brinkley's overall point aboutinequality is accurate. But in criticizing China generally, hefails to connect some dots. For example, an unequal society likeChina, while problematic for the majority of the population, worksout very well for rich people. That's not exactly a reason toflee the country. Second, the U.S. itself is not exactly winningany awards these days when it comes to income equality or upwardmobility. So in comparing the U.S. and China, Brinkley seems tobe doing his share of cherry picking. Which brings us back to the title of Brinkley's article,"Is China Really Such A Land Of Opportunity?" For allof these rich emigrants, who Brinkley uses to back up thetitle's implication, I think the answer is actually adefinitive "yes." After all, where was all that wealthamassed in the first place? Which country would you rather be in,China or the U.S., if the goal was to strike it rich? And just whyis it, as Brinkley acknowledges, that these emigrants are holdingon to their PRC passports? So if this wave of emigrants isn't exactly strong evidencefor the case that China isn't the land of opportunity, whatshould we take from it? That the American education system isbetter? That the Rule of Law in the U.S. is more highly developedand that property rights are better protected? OK, sure, I think wecan stipulate to all that. I'll even throw in personalliberty, free speech, etc. (although I doubt that is the overridingfactor for these wealthy individuals). Sounds to me that at most, Brinkley could have just started off bysaying that China is a developing country, and he would havereached the same conclusions. In the end, I'm not sure whatthe point is of yet another laundry list of the political andeconomic challenges facing China. However, if the subtle point is actually the familiar "U-S-A!U-S-A!" then I get it. Saudi princes go to the Mayo Clinic,and rich Chinese move to California and New York to buy houses andput their kids in the local schools. So all that hype about Chinacatching up to the U.S. economically? Nothing to worry about,right?. The e-commerce company in China offers quality products such as Dog Hooded Sweatshirts Manufacturer , Artificial Snow Machine Manufacturer, and more. For more , please visit Dog Hooded Sweatshirts today!
Related Articles -
Dog Hooded Sweatshirts Manufacturer, Artificial Snow Machine Manufacturer,
|
