Continuing on topic of cleaning the "business environment", prior to our successful pregnancy we had one miscarriage, and for the cleanup operation we were listed 3 or 4 different prices in same maternity hospital.
The difference came from the technique used, which varies in price and safety. The cheaper ones arguably have heightened risk for further complications which may reduce chance of future pregnancy. Most expensive ones probably medically unnecessary in most cases.
I would expect the government to focus on these details (and put money if necessary), so that hospitals could offer the safer options to everyone, and stop offering things that aren't medically justified.
Another experience on softer side of medicine, relating to bed side manners that are not high on priority in China.
After the procedure we were put to a room to wait and observe that everything is OK. In the adjacent bed there was a girl surrounded by a bunch of female friends.
After we left, my wife told me that she overheard the group speaking with language that made her convinced that these women were working in the oldest profession, which only so many years ago was still quite openly practiced here.
The experience rang a bell in my head, because I had just recently read an article (from another country) describing medical professionals to be wary of not placing patients with unwanted miscarriages in same rooms with people who want to get rid of their babies.
Few years ago we had a foreign visitor staying with us. She was wondering why all over the place, from TV to buses, there are advertisements for maternity clinics (read: abortion clinics), but nothing to advertise contraceptives.
The government may well restrict advertising of abortion clinics, and start revoking business licenses from clinics that may appear profiting from abortions. That it can call "cleaning the business environment", without directly banning anything from the general public.
Well there are lot of places where it is considered religious, anti-so at least. Perhaps also in this area China could do well to utilize religion as a vehicle for the desired effect. Study tour to Texas for example.
Our own Chenggong district was listed as ghost town once. I don't think that it qualifies as such anymore.
In many cities with ghost developments, the improvement has been orchestrated by moving better schools and other middle-class attractions to them, which families with money have followed.
I bet the continuation of this story runs tangential to recent education and child raising reforms, not just financial foes of developers.
On the note of wasted finance, good sign here is that safety of people was put before financial gains.
If the information is to be believed, the development was paused for so long that the foundation work for the houses was damaged - although I bet that some flaws in the original work contributed to putting it on hold in the first place.
In "old China" the construction would have probably went on anyway, and people could have ended up dying or losing their apartments due to unreported damages.
One less thing to cover up in coming years, by transparently blowing up the whole thing.
On our trips to wife's hometown in rural Baoshan, we've pretty much had to spend a night in hotel in Dali on the way, before taking a bus west to Yongping and then shared car south to rural Baoshan in the following day.
Sometimes it's a choice though, because there are friends to see in Dali - but more often necessity.
With this new train, we may be able to take early train to Dali, and have enough time to get to Yongping and to our final destination within same day.
So for us, and I believe many western Yunnanese who make way home, this will mean opportunity to skip more of Dali.
What has probably changed in last few years, is that local authorities are increasingly offering cash rewards to citizens who report any kind of suspicious activities by foreigners - be it drugs, prostitution, or spying.
Overall, my opinion about "socialism with Chinese characteristics" is that the "Chinese characteristics" should be limited to absolute single party rule in Beijing to decide laws and the directions that the country goes.
Implementing those laws should (and are) left to local level governments, and these local level governments should be accountable to the people.
These officials do not need be democratically elected, but they should serve the people democractically.
The people should hold local government officials accountable for implementing the decisions that dictators in Beijing dictate. This is where the democracy in China should thrive. The people should have direct channels to Beijing to report failures of local officials, and Beijing should be quick to respond.
People shouldn't even have a need to go to barricades, if they could trust the supposedly strong central government to deal with issues.
This does absolute not mean that the rule of party would decrease - it would increase, through and for the people. The central government will become stronger, when they don't have to watch inefficient local officials holding posts that they don't deserve.
They implement this accountability retroactively now, and Yunnan is no stranger to this. Development toward society with people first will also mean officials being accountable first and not sometime later.
And I believe that the system will naturally develop to that.
Anti-corruption campaign has changed the picture, where those who want easy life with kickbacks and gifts aim for official positions with capacity to receive them. Increasingly it is so, that those who really want to serve the people even consider these positions.
A smart to-be official like this will eventually perhaps voluntarily ask the people if they want him to take the post to begin with. And that's not far from western-like democracy, even if no formal elections ever take place and the important decisions keep being made by dictators in Beijing.
Foreign observes can keep commenting about those decisions made in Beijing to end of days, while China should ignore that and not fuel the fire by having the decisions (whether good or bad) not properly carried through local levels.
This is increasingly important now, when structural changes (of which many can not be expected to be popular with all components of society) are required to float the ship.
For Chinese, the country being a dictatorship of the party would be better than a being broken dictatorship of the party, that it has been in past.
@nnoble: "Why should anyone assume that China aspire to become democratic or why 'democracy' should be considered a suitable system of governance for China?"
Now you are incorrecly assuming that choice between democracy or any other system is a black and white decision that defines the entire governing system of a country.
Even China does have some democracy in grassroots (rownship etc) levels, and increasing this kind of democracy does not mean abandoning the rule of the party or socialism with Chinese characteristics. The opposite in fact - well measured moves to increase democracy in select areas can strengthen the rule of the party.
Simple truth is that when people get sufficiently fed and housed, their minds start to wander to what else they should or could get.
Should they be wanting KTVs and KFCs, or guarantee that now they have proper housing, they won't have to move again just because some businessman from Zhejiang wants to build a dam or a mine right in that spot - with or without their permission, with or without proper environmental guards.
Also there are some possible positive consequences that could be expected from removing poverty in China. It is clearly an area where the state is putting lot of money and resources, and once that is done, what next?
Optimists could expect the country's self esteem and confidence to raise from "job well done", which could release political will to liberal reforms - further increase rule of law, civil society, or even democracy.
But an unavoidable next step is to build support to the aging population.
So just as important as removing poverty is, possibly even more important is to get it done so the country can move to other things.
Reviews
No reviews yet
Cookie Preferences
Please select which types of cookies you are willing to accept:
Bullet train to Dali to begin running July 1
Posted byOn our trips to wife's hometown in rural Baoshan, we've pretty much had to spend a night in hotel in Dali on the way, before taking a bus west to Yongping and then shared car south to rural Baoshan in the following day.
Sometimes it's a choice though, because there are friends to see in Dali - but more often necessity.
With this new train, we may be able to take early train to Dali, and have enough time to get to Yongping and to our final destination within same day.
So for us, and I believe many western Yunnanese who make way home, this will mean opportunity to skip more of Dali.
A look at Yunnan's evolving anti-drug strategy
Posted byWhat has probably changed in last few years, is that local authorities are increasingly offering cash rewards to citizens who report any kind of suspicious activities by foreigners - be it drugs, prostitution, or spying.
In interview, Yunnan Party chief stresses ending poverty
Posted byOverall, my opinion about "socialism with Chinese characteristics" is that the "Chinese characteristics" should be limited to absolute single party rule in Beijing to decide laws and the directions that the country goes.
Implementing those laws should (and are) left to local level governments, and these local level governments should be accountable to the people.
These officials do not need be democratically elected, but they should serve the people democractically.
The people should hold local government officials accountable for implementing the decisions that dictators in Beijing dictate. This is where the democracy in China should thrive. The people should have direct channels to Beijing to report failures of local officials, and Beijing should be quick to respond.
People shouldn't even have a need to go to barricades, if they could trust the supposedly strong central government to deal with issues.
This does absolute not mean that the rule of party would decrease - it would increase, through and for the people. The central government will become stronger, when they don't have to watch inefficient local officials holding posts that they don't deserve.
They implement this accountability retroactively now, and Yunnan is no stranger to this. Development toward society with people first will also mean officials being accountable first and not sometime later.
And I believe that the system will naturally develop to that.
Anti-corruption campaign has changed the picture, where those who want easy life with kickbacks and gifts aim for official positions with capacity to receive them. Increasingly it is so, that those who really want to serve the people even consider these positions.
A smart to-be official like this will eventually perhaps voluntarily ask the people if they want him to take the post to begin with. And that's not far from western-like democracy, even if no formal elections ever take place and the important decisions keep being made by dictators in Beijing.
Foreign observes can keep commenting about those decisions made in Beijing to end of days, while China should ignore that and not fuel the fire by having the decisions (whether good or bad) not properly carried through local levels.
This is increasingly important now, when structural changes (of which many can not be expected to be popular with all components of society) are required to float the ship.
For Chinese, the country being a dictatorship of the party would be better than a being broken dictatorship of the party, that it has been in past.
In interview, Yunnan Party chief stresses ending poverty
Posted by@nnoble: "Why should anyone assume that China aspire to become democratic or why 'democracy' should be considered a suitable system of governance for China?"
Now you are incorrecly assuming that choice between democracy or any other system is a black and white decision that defines the entire governing system of a country.
Even China does have some democracy in grassroots (rownship etc) levels, and increasing this kind of democracy does not mean abandoning the rule of the party or socialism with Chinese characteristics. The opposite in fact - well measured moves to increase democracy in select areas can strengthen the rule of the party.
Simple truth is that when people get sufficiently fed and housed, their minds start to wander to what else they should or could get.
Should they be wanting KTVs and KFCs, or guarantee that now they have proper housing, they won't have to move again just because some businessman from Zhejiang wants to build a dam or a mine right in that spot - with or without their permission, with or without proper environmental guards.
In interview, Yunnan Party chief stresses ending poverty
Posted byAlso there are some possible positive consequences that could be expected from removing poverty in China. It is clearly an area where the state is putting lot of money and resources, and once that is done, what next?
Optimists could expect the country's self esteem and confidence to raise from "job well done", which could release political will to liberal reforms - further increase rule of law, civil society, or even democracy.
But an unavoidable next step is to build support to the aging population.
So just as important as removing poverty is, possibly even more important is to get it done so the country can move to other things.