We were supposed to visit Entry & Exit in Baoshan on our CNY trip, but they are still closed and we are still stuck in mountains, so settled for phone call with some staff that was in office.
I'm not convinced that the person on phone had it right, but different deal from Kunming seemed to be that instead of fixed 100 000 RMB deposit, they want to see a deposit that equals the living expenses for next 10 years - how ever much or little that would be, in bank for duration of 6 months.
These required living expenses would be calculated from local average or some other offical figure - even if we would be living in Kunming.
Furthermore, because my wife's huokou is not in Baoshan city, but in one of the surrounding counties, the person couldn't say how much the living costs are there. A figure of 1300 per month was thrown out as a guess. Which would be about 160 000 RMB.
We were told that in Baoshan there has been "many" applications, but only 1 succesfull, and warned that it's really difficult to get.
I don't know, but I'm speculating that in the prefectures there may be more mixed marriages from neighbouring countries, and that may contribute to the "many" applications.
Perhaps you have different idea of "countryside" than what constitutes "rural countryside" in China, in Yunnan in particular?
In Yunnan most rural schools will not be able to pay you more than the "rural experience", and even if they had the budget, you wouldn't have the possibilities locally to get more out of it than that. Other than perhaps chasing chicken and dodging goat herds on roads (or often the road), entertainment is limited.
What you probably should want, is looking for opportinities in a city in Yunnan other than Kunming or Dali. There's usually plenty of ads for such jobs on this site, though now those may be suspended also.
I trust everyone on this forum is still healthy, so that's one.
Probably many who take the measures to avoid this virus, will thanking to that avoid regular flu and other illnesses as well, so behind the corona virus figures we might see a healthier nation in the spring. Save perhaps putting on a few pounds from sitting home... and more time with loved ones.
I would say that they don't have to turn everything back to way it was before the epidemic.
For example, there have been lot of articles and commentary urging people to work remotely from their homes or where ever they are stuck, if they can.
Understandably this applies to small minority of work force, but I hope this becomes an increasing trend. Less people commuting and sitting in offices needlessly wouldn't be bad, epidemic or no epidemic.
Probably applies to some other perspectives of the mess as well.
@alienew: "it is precisely money that the poor do not have."
And that is why even 1% taxation of the little they have would have big impact on their awareness of their rights and privileges. In context of OP, it would tell them that they pay for even the limited resources they get, and it would be in their best interest to actually use them.
For example in mountains in Changning, Baoshan, the local government subsidizes roomy tents to families who live in dangerous mudbrick houses or need more space for children but are not financially capable to build bigger and better houses.
But there is psychological barrier to accept such "gifts".
Some go to great lengths to find, borrow and steal the money rather that accept services for free. Some rather leave their children behind and go earn the money themselves from coast. Some rather die quietly in their homes than early enough access even the limited medical services that they are entitled to.
I have personally witnessed all of that within last year.
The state is going to increase financial reach to rural regions in coming years, and as Vicar hinted, trusting the reach-out to public service providers will only go half way. The poor themselves must be activated to ask and accept those services.
I fail to see what exactly you guys disagree with - is it the fact that providing to the poor will be away from your own middle class, or do you have a better idea how to make the poor raise up, or do you not think that they should be let to do it at all?
@tigertiger: "many assumptions and additional requirements (story tellers etc)"
Well the storyteller reference was for a method which I think will not work, and why incentives such as taxation is more effective.
"If we cannot provide the additional resources"
That's exactly the reason why the poor rural residents must learn to ask for better services themselves. The state should cut services from better privileged city dwellers if that's what it takes (by reallocating its own funding and directing private funding through tax incentives) - the resources are there alright, but they are spread unevenly.
This part is actually already reflected in Chinese leaders' most recent public commentary. According to them, Deng said that while wealth is glorious, he never meant the whole country to get wealthy at once. Only few would get rich first, and according to current leaders, it is about time to spread that wealth to the whole nation.
If you simply provide funding to the rural regions, it will accumulate in the hands of those who want it most. That's why the knowledge of availability of such funds and the services they create must be spread to the whole population and not select few individuals.
"Comparing EU farmers, who are business owners who learn to work the system for profit with the rural poor, Is perhaps a case of chalk and cheese"
I don't necessarily agree that they are so different in this view, but even if they are, chalk can learn be better chalk and cheese can learn to be better cheese while both retain their inherently different characteristics.
I am not even claiming that they should use the same methods - that's specifically why Chinese poor must learn through methods that are available to them. They don't have political freedoms, so use money.
@alienew: "Maybe the state doesn't demand taxes from them because they don't want to hear more complaints from them?"
Yes, that's the big question, and I think the only question.
@Dazzer: "poor paying taxes does not mean they will demand better services, just because you a middle class educated person would [...] poor are often ignorant as to h;ow govermwent works"
The only real question in my opinion is, do we (or they) want the poor to learn to ask for better services or not, and do we want the poor to join us in the educated middle class or not.
If we do not, then the discussion is moot.
But if we do (and I obvously think we should), then for the reasons I mentioned earlier in this thread, using finances and taxation as vehicle for that learning process should make sense in China - but not in many other countries, because they should have better methods at their disposal.
Yes, the imporevished are often ignorant, but the whole idea is to get that slowly changed.
Farmers in Europe used to be quite ignorant too, but then came development and finally EU and now they are buried in paperwork for taxes and subsidies while robots feed and milk the cows.
It will not happen overnight, but it has to start from somewhere.
You can send someone to tell the poor how the government works or how they should proceed to acquire better services, but they know their place and if they think they are OK just the way they are, they won't bother with any of that once this storyteller leaves, and nothing changes.
But if they are told that they will have less money to buy cigarettes or alcohol, not to mention paying their children's education, because state will now collect some of it as taxes, they will learn to ask why the state does that and what do they get in return.
But I repeat that the big question in China is, whether the state wants that or not.
Reviews
No reviews yet
Cookie Preferences
Please select which types of cookies you are willing to accept:
Government sues parents to get kids back to school
Posted by@alienew: "it is precisely money that the poor do not have."
And that is why even 1% taxation of the little they have would have big impact on their awareness of their rights and privileges. In context of OP, it would tell them that they pay for even the limited resources they get, and it would be in their best interest to actually use them.
For example in mountains in Changning, Baoshan, the local government subsidizes roomy tents to families who live in dangerous mudbrick houses or need more space for children but are not financially capable to build bigger and better houses.
But there is psychological barrier to accept such "gifts".
Some go to great lengths to find, borrow and steal the money rather that accept services for free. Some rather leave their children behind and go earn the money themselves from coast. Some rather die quietly in their homes than early enough access even the limited medical services that they are entitled to.
I have personally witnessed all of that within last year.
The state is going to increase financial reach to rural regions in coming years, and as Vicar hinted, trusting the reach-out to public service providers will only go half way. The poor themselves must be activated to ask and accept those services.
Government sues parents to get kids back to school
Posted byI believe that I have checked into more reality in the rural Yunnan than most Kunming expats will in their life time.
Government sues parents to get kids back to school
Posted byI fail to see what exactly you guys disagree with - is it the fact that providing to the poor will be away from your own middle class, or do you have a better idea how to make the poor raise up, or do you not think that they should be let to do it at all?
What is it...
Government sues parents to get kids back to school
Posted by@tigertiger: "many assumptions and additional requirements (story tellers etc)"
Well the storyteller reference was for a method which I think will not work, and why incentives such as taxation is more effective.
"If we cannot provide the additional resources"
That's exactly the reason why the poor rural residents must learn to ask for better services themselves. The state should cut services from better privileged city dwellers if that's what it takes (by reallocating its own funding and directing private funding through tax incentives) - the resources are there alright, but they are spread unevenly.
This part is actually already reflected in Chinese leaders' most recent public commentary. According to them, Deng said that while wealth is glorious, he never meant the whole country to get wealthy at once. Only few would get rich first, and according to current leaders, it is about time to spread that wealth to the whole nation.
If you simply provide funding to the rural regions, it will accumulate in the hands of those who want it most. That's why the knowledge of availability of such funds and the services they create must be spread to the whole population and not select few individuals.
"Comparing EU farmers, who are business owners who learn to work the system for profit with the rural poor, Is perhaps a case of chalk and cheese"
I don't necessarily agree that they are so different in this view, but even if they are, chalk can learn be better chalk and cheese can learn to be better cheese while both retain their inherently different characteristics.
I am not even claiming that they should use the same methods - that's specifically why Chinese poor must learn through methods that are available to them. They don't have political freedoms, so use money.
Government sues parents to get kids back to school
Posted by@alienew: "Maybe the state doesn't demand taxes from them because they don't want to hear more complaints from them?"
Yes, that's the big question, and I think the only question.
@Dazzer: "poor paying taxes does not mean they will demand better services, just because you a middle class educated person would [...] poor are often ignorant as to h;ow govermwent works"
The only real question in my opinion is, do we (or they) want the poor to learn to ask for better services or not, and do we want the poor to join us in the educated middle class or not.
If we do not, then the discussion is moot.
But if we do (and I obvously think we should), then for the reasons I mentioned earlier in this thread, using finances and taxation as vehicle for that learning process should make sense in China - but not in many other countries, because they should have better methods at their disposal.
Yes, the imporevished are often ignorant, but the whole idea is to get that slowly changed.
Farmers in Europe used to be quite ignorant too, but then came development and finally EU and now they are buried in paperwork for taxes and subsidies while robots feed and milk the cows.
It will not happen overnight, but it has to start from somewhere.
You can send someone to tell the poor how the government works or how they should proceed to acquire better services, but they know their place and if they think they are OK just the way they are, they won't bother with any of that once this storyteller leaves, and nothing changes.
But if they are told that they will have less money to buy cigarettes or alcohol, not to mention paying their children's education, because state will now collect some of it as taxes, they will learn to ask why the state does that and what do they get in return.
But I repeat that the big question in China is, whether the state wants that or not.