Menu
close
Anonymous.
Rob_Hugo@PortNWChina's Boom Economy Is Starved for Energy--LA Times, Sept 4, 2004, Bus section
Excellent article describing the boom economy and the shortages in electricity. Industry pays higher prices for energy than citizens in an effort to keep the populace happy. There is no effort being made to conserve and no energy saving requirements on homes. Appliances are not energy efficient and the boom in industry is causing a huge growth in middle class ownership of larger homes and appliance. The growth rate is expected at just under 10% this and next year. Much of the growth is driven by major US retailers like Wal-Mart putting in manufacturing facilities. Example is the Lang Sha Textile Co which makes socks, as in, up to 3 million a day. The electricity interruptions are hurting their production.
Same page/Same issue
US to Consider Petitions Targeting China Textiles
George Bush has suddenly discovered that most of the 345,000 textile and apparel jobs lost since he took office are in the election battleground states of North and South Carolina. So, he is sending a delegation to China in an attempt to restrict their sales of clothing into the US. This comes after petitions from the US manufacturers who fear that China will take over the world market when trade quotas are removed later this year. On the other side are the US retailers and importers who oppose restrictions and say that this will not prevent American jobs from moving to low-wage countries.
I find it interesting that the Times is covering these two issues side by side. They have been doing a lot more Asian news than they have had in the past. Many articles went by this summer. Seems like its becoming a more worthwhile newspaper.
AnonymousThe Great Divide | Talking Back to Power: China's 'Haves' Stir the 'Have Nots' to Violence
December 31, 2004
By JOSEPH KAHN
China is having more trouble maintaining order than at any
time since the Tiananmen Square movement in 1989. :~
Anonymous"Though it is experiencing one of the most spectacular economic expansions in history, China is having more trouble maintaining social order than at any time since the Tiananmen Square democracy movement in 1989."
- Excerpt from NY Times Article "China's 'Haves' Stir the 'Have Nots' to Violence"
I read the article and the quote above stood out to me. The author of the article seems to be implying that even though the economy in China is strong, people are more restless than in the past.
I think that maybe the economic strength and growth are a factor in China having more trouble maintaining social order. I personally feel that economic booms tend to make the wealth gap larger and more obvious to those on the bottom of the economic ladder, which can feel cheated or left out. In China's case, I think this boom has made the lower class more aware of the inequality in their nation. They can see how the economic boom has benefited government officials, the wealthy, but have also seen how their own lifestyles remain stagnant or worsen despite China's economic gain.
Does anyone else feel like me that China's economic gain is part of the catalyst for democratic reform in China or even social disorder/unrest?
I am pasting the link to the article in case anyone wants to read it:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/31/international/asia/31china.html?ex=1105613691&ei=1&en=c6a95837c934cc36
Anonymous"Americans on trial over DVDs" by Elaine Kurtenbach JANUARY 19, 2005
http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,11985923%5e15306%5e%5enbv%5e,00.html
All along we have been hearing and reading about China's problem with bootlegging of DVD's and piracy of software. What I have read usually says that the United States feels that China doesn't do enough to stop illegal intellectual property theft that allegedly costs the US companies billions of dollars annually.
The story in this article is a complete irony. Chinese authorities arrested two American citizens for selling 1 million dollars worth of bootleg DVD's. The state-controlled media was quick to report on the successful arrest, surely to help their anti-piracy sweep which has also included China banning two popular video games in China (Fifa 2005 and The Sims 2) because of piracy concerns. I wonder if China has stepped up its anti-piracy because of foreign pressure or pressure from within. and are "Americans on trial over DVDs"
To add a flair of humor to this, one of the Americans accused of piracy said that he believed he purchased the DVD's from a licensed store. He was selling the DVD's on eBay and Russian websites for about 80 cents a copy. I think China is going to have a tough time prosecuting him with that strong defense.
AnonymousSan Francisco Chronicle - Thursday January 27,2005
"China dismayed by dollar" - Beijing preparing to link yuan to other currencies
China is losing faith in the U.S. dollar. Economists believe the U.S dollar is no longer seen as stable and is devaluating all the time. China wants to broaden the exchange rate for its currency and not have the yuan limited to just the U.S. dollar. They are looking to link the yuan to euros or yen.
AnonymousIt doesn't sound as if the Americans have much of a defense. The Chinese government is stating that they operated without a license. Pleading ignorance doesn't do well in the courtroom, and they are living in a foreign country. Remember that story years back about the teenager who was caned for vandalism? He did not have the protection of the United States government even though his father was a diplomat. Ignorance of the law was not a valid excuse--nor did it get him out of a beating. I guess he forgot that he was a foreigner and that simply being an American does not allow you to operate above the law in any country.
clay dubeThe tragic poisoning of the Songhua River in NE China (see Yahoo/Reuters for one summary, click here for a Yahoo slide show) raises again the challenges of balancing economic development with protecting the environment. It also raises questions of governmental openness and responsiveness. The Chinese government was slow to acknowledge and address the hazards (a reminder of the SARS debacle in 2003 and, some would argue, the US government's failures to respond to Hurricane Katrina in 2005).
Before jumping to condemn the procedures that made this tragedy possible and the criminal addiction to secrecy, the corruption or the ineptitude that followed, we might remember that the US has been shipping our own pollution challenges to China in the form of electronic garbage. (See this Sept. 2005 Xinhua report on such dumping. A People's Daily [Renmin Ribao] story from 2002 notes an incident where the Chinese government blocked the import of such waste. Here's an Oct. 24, 2005 NY Times story on the export of such waste to the third world.)
Click here for the latest Google News index of Songhua River stories.
How can the desire to rapidly industrialize and raise living standards be done satisfied while also protecting the environment so that health risks and degradation are minimized?
AnonymousChina and America? Can we become partners in the 21st century? This new global economy has few historical models; are we up to the challenge of forgeing a peaceful set of partnerships or will we maintain xenophobic compitition with the worlds other economic trade groups. I am hopeful that we can but doubtful we have the right people in positions of power to forge these unions.
We face many issues concerning the changing of our own economic reality. The advantage we had at the close of WWII is over we need to change, be better, smarter and adaptable. It would apear that we are attempting the "Venice model" being the middleman, the trader of the world's goods, but we do not invest in the infrastructure of transport, we have sold and abandoned our ship building industry, are we in a partnership with Korea and China who have a massive shipbuilding industry, Malaysia builds Electronic componets, India does tele-servicing and a lot of programming, China seems to make about everything else, except for cars which Japan out-does the US. These are just a few examples of our global economy, but where does that leave the US?
If we form real partnerships with other countries we can all succeed. But first we need to learn each other's ways. We have much more in common than we sometimes think...find the commonality and work together. It just might work!
AnonymousIn a Wall Street journal article, "Fewer Japanese kids? Honda turns to pets" revealed a somewhat disturbing minivan prototype. This new concept car is designed for the "needs" of dog owners. Honda appears to be going after the growing market of dog owners as "Japanese demographers see a worrisome trend in the decline of the country's fertility rates and a boom in pet ownership". The minivan is a model developed to test consumer reaction at the Tokoyo Motor Show. Scary. Really!
AnonymousChina made front page news (LA Times) today, regarding the abduction of children, especially girls. Apparently the kids are being sold for adoption and even prostitution. I was really surprised, not shocked, to read this. There was even a kidsnatching ring that was prosecuted, they had 28 baby girls stuffed in a duffle bag on a long bus ride.
When American adoption agencies state that they have foreign children do they check this stuff out, or is this practice considered business as usual for them. Although the article did mention that agencies steer away from baby-sellers, I have to wonder what is really happening and where these children come from.
Just a thought,
jem
AnonymousI recently heard a story on NPR which stated that china has the fastest growing economy in the world. Its economy is growing at a rate of 9 % per year.
Because of its huge population China is able to influence world markets. There is a strike in Chile of copper miners. Both owners and strikers are waitng for the Chinese reaction to decide what their next move will be. Apparently, China is dependent on South American copper for construction and industry. It depends which side China sides witht o determine who has the upper hand in negotiations for both workers nad owners. It is interesting to see how a culture half a world away can influence industry thousand of miles away. We truly do live in global society.
dsenteno
AnonymousPollution Darkens China's Skies
China's skies have darkened over the past 50 years, possibly due to haze resulting from a nine-fold increase in fossil fuel emissions, according to researchers from the U.S. Department of Energy.
The researchers, writing in this month's edition of Geophysical Research Letters, found that the amount of solar radiation measured at more than 500 stations in China fell from 1954 to 2001 despite a decrease in cloud cover.
--
Ah, the benefits of increased car ownership! I hope our 2008 Olympic team is practicing in Mexico City, because I'm not sure how China is going to be able to clear out the air pollution in time. Btw, it was my understanding that Beijing's hosting was dependent on a major drop in pollution levels. Has anyone else heard this? And where would the IOC if they don't clean the skies?
Isn't it funny that it takes an international money-making extravaganza to get people thinking about air quality? I guess the human health issues and environmental concerns alone aren't enough.
breathing through gauze,
m@x
AnonymousIf the doomsayers are right, then in the future we will no longer pledge our allegiances to nations, but to corporations (some would argue the takeover has already taken place) and I now am positive that mine would be Google. At first I was disheartened when I heard, but after having read this, I am back in the fold.
it's a google earth,
m@x
Google in China
1/27/2006 11:58:00 AM
Posted by Andrew McLaughlin, senior policy counsel
Google users in China today struggle with a service that, to be blunt, isn't very good. Google.com appears to be down around 10% of the time. Even when users can reach it, the website is slow, and sometimes produces results that when clicked on, stall out the user's browser. Our Google News service is never available; Google Images is accessible only half the time. At Google we work hard to create a great experience for our users, and the level of service we've been able to provide in China is not something we're proud of.
This problem could only be resolved by creating a local presence, and this week we did so, by launching Google.cn, our website for the People's Republic of China. In order to do so, we have agreed to remove certain sensitive information from our search results. We know that many people are upset about this decision, and frankly, we understand their point of view. This wasn't an easy choice, but in the end, we believe the course of action we've chosen will prove to be the right one.
Launching a Google domain that restricts information in any way isn't a step we took lightly. For several years, we've debated whether entering the Chinese market at this point in history could be consistent with our mission and values. Our executives have spent a lot of time in recent months talking with many people, ranging from those who applaud the Chinese government for its embrace of a market economy and its lifting of 400 million people out of poverty to those who disagree with many of the Chinese government's policies, but who wish the best for China and its people. We ultimately reached our decision by asking ourselves which course would most effectively further Google's mission to organize the world's information and make it universally useful and accessible. Or, put simply: how can we provide the greatest access to information to the greatest number of people?
Filtering our search results clearly compromises our mission. Failing to offer Google search at all to a fifth of the world's population, however, does so far more severely. Whether our critics agree with our decision or not, due to the severe quality problems faced by users trying to access Google.com from within China, this is precisely the choice we believe we faced. By launching Google.cn and making a major ongoing investment in people and infrastructure within China, we intend to change that.
No, we're not going to offer some Google products, such as Gmail or Blogger, on Google.cn until we're comfortable that we can do so in a manner that respects our users' interests in the privacy of their personal communications. And yes, Chinese regulations will require us to remove some sensitive information from our search results. When we do so, we'll disclose this to users, just as we already do in those rare instances where we alter results in order to comply with local laws in France, Germany and the U.S.
Obviously, the situation in China is far different than it is in those other countries; while China has made great strides in the past decades, it remains in many ways closed. We aren't happy about what we had to do this week, and we hope that over time everyone in the world will come to enjoy full access to information. But how is that full access most likely to be achieved? We are convinced that the Internet, and its continued development through the efforts of companies like Google, will effectively contribute to openness and prosperity in the world. Our continued engagement with China is the best (perhaps only) way for Google to help bring the tremendous benefits of universal information access to all our users there.
We're in this for the long haul. In the years to come, we'll be making significant and growing investments in China. Our launch of google.cn, though filtered, is a necessary first step toward achieving a productive presence in a rapidly changing country that will be one of the world's most important and dynamic for decades to come. To some people, a hard compromise may not feel as satisfying as a withdrawal on principle, but we believe it's the best way to work toward the results we all desire.
AnonymousGoogle's capitulation to China's censorship as the price of doing business in China should be a great topic for debates on censorship or Socratic Seminars. The Lehrer News Hour on January 25 ( at http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/cyberspace/jan-june06/google_1-25.html )presented the implications of Goggle's move both for business and the internet. Many questions arise: How transparent will Google be about why and what they're censoring? Will this institutionalize/legitmimize censorship? Will the model be applied elsewhere? Will they also hand over information on particular users to the Chinese government? One person interviewed said that censored information, "skews people's outlook on the world when they don't get complete uncensored information." Is Google aiding the Chinese government's need to withhold information that might weaken their control of the population? It does seem to me that Google chose the almighty dollar over the possibility of giving complete information to the Chinese populace.
Google claims that "Filtering our search results clearly compromises our position. Failing to offer Google search at all to a fifth of the world's population, however, does so far more severely." This seems false. Google was being used in China before, but was not very effective because the government censored so much of it. It is not a question of offering Google or not; it is a question of whether Google will accept that as "the way of information" in China. Instead they have agreed to do the censoring themselves, and ,to me, this seems to be condoning the government's censorship.[Edit by="ctchir on Feb 5, 3:56:12 PM"][/Edit]
AnonymousThanks for the info.
Would you know what kind of information is being censored and why?
I really like to know that.