Chinese Economics Thread

[ZeEa5KPul]

I've been thinking about this visa thing for a while and my opinion has shifted to leaning more towards than against it. I was initially surprised by not conditioning it on employment, but on reflection that's a much better way to do it. It prevents Infosys-like companies from transforming the visa into an indentured servitude scheme. Having new entrants compete on a level playing field by being able to move between companies is the way to go.

I'm ambivalent on the educational qualifications, I would have shifted them to master's degree or higher but I can see the merit to setting them at this minimal level. Frankly, the R visa's requirements are comical, "Oh, you only have one Nobel Prize? Sorry, you're just not R material." What I would have liked to see is an explicit and stringent language proficiency requirement - that would have made it clear who the visa is primarily for without having ethnicity or nationality criteria.

Another thing I hope happens is favoring applicants with STEM subfield specializations like biotech. There hasn't been the big government push into biotech that we see with semiconductors, but the field is ripe for a major boom in China with the emergence of companies like WuXi. The talent rendered jobless in the US by the Trump Purge would be very useful to China now.

 

[Nevermore]

In my view, the K visa remains a rather foolish policy, at least as it currently appears—hasty and vague. I will follow up to determine exactly which universities and research institutions qualify for K visas.

 

[victoon]

How a visa is worded and how it's implemented are two very different things, and countries all have many unwritten rules over their implementation. If the K-visa ends up letting in mostly mid-skilled, young, good-looking single women, would anyone here complain about it? (Not that I think this is a good idea.)

I think it's silly to debate how the visa is categorically right or wrong. Instead, focus on how to implement it to be great for China.

And I agree that we should act with confidence in welcoming some young professional foreigners living and working in China. We are in the Tang dynasty, not Qing after the opium wars.

Also, obviously, being allowed to work and having a job are two very different things.

 

[manqiangrexue]

How a visa is worded and how it's implemented are two very different things, and countries all have many unwritten rules over their implementation. If the K-visa ends up letting in mostly mid-skilled, young, good-looking single women, would anyone here complain about it? (Not that I think this is a good idea.)

I think it's silly to debate how the visa is categorically right or wrong. Instead, focus on how to implement it to be great for China.

And I agree that we should act with confidence in welcoming some young professional foreigners living and working in China. We are in the Tang dynasty, not Qing after the opium wars.

This is exactly my point and I think you put it even clearer. All the visa does is present a pool of choice before China for us to decide whom we want to approve to enter our country. What education, skill, ethnicity, nationality, age, gender, even particular looks, is all 100% up to us to choose from to better our nation. We can decide we didn't like any applicants and reject all applications if we want to. Why do people keep thinking that meeting the minimum stated requirements mean automatic acceptance and stampede of unwelcome people into China?

One of the funnest parts of looking for a tenant to rent a room to is the process of selecting the person whom you like the most. You don't write in the ad, "Looking for patriotic Chinese straight male, at least decent-looking with an affinity to drinking and singing to act as effective wingman at karaoke parties, must be chill to get along with the jive of the house. Show me your WeChat full of girls who like to party and your rent is negotiable. No pets unless in a glass tank in your room. People who are falun gong, libtards, Trump supporters, Hong Kong riot roaches, Chinese but think you're American, etc... need not apply." You'd be an idiot to write an ad like that but if that's what I'm looking for, I say, "Looking for a tenant/roommate for a house currently inhabited young professionals, owner is fluent in Mandarin so language is not a barrier," and let the applications flow in. If they're not what I'm looking for, I say, "Thanks for inquiring, Laquandra! I appreciate your interest and of course welcome your 3 pomeranians and 4 kids because we are a diverse and inclusive group! However, as much as I think you'd be a great fit, to be fair to all, I do have several other applicants ahead of you I need to interview in the order in which they applied. So I will keep you in mind and get right back to you when their interviews are concluded if the room is still available." Keep the ad up for weeks/months if necessary until the right person applies and take him with a bro handshake on the spot. 100% my choice, 100% impeccable ad. That's the difference between how a visa is written and how it's implemented.

 

[victoon]

In addition to what has been discussed. Two background articles:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I do think talent is a bit of a zero-sum. Even if we consider the K-visa on China is net neutral (pro because they bring fresh ideas and con because they take some jobs), it's a net negative for exporting countries. Yes, China's seaturles helped build China's initial tech industries. But I don't think other countries have the environment that someone working in China for a few years can go home to establish their own.

 

[manqiangrexue]

In addition to what has been discussed. Two background articles:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I do think talent is a bit of a zero-sum. Even if we consider the K-visa on China is net neutral (pro because they bring fresh ideas and con because they take some jobs), it's a net negative for exporting countries. Yes, China's seaturles helped build China's initial tech industries. But I don't think other countries have the environment that someone working in China for a few years can go home to establish their own.

Yes but it's a double-edged sword. Draining these talents is a pro for China in the sense that they deplete the pool for America and the EU, our competitors, but really only accept a small cream of the crop because we really don't need a large foreign diaspora in China nor do we want them to take jobs that we have actual local alternatives for, shooting up our youth unemployment. Just take the few we actually need without going so hard to spite others that we inflict serious self-injury with this blade. Self-preservation always before aggression.

 

[styx]

Fewer westerner young people fewer westerner expats in china, it's so simple.

 

[proelite]

2) In demand low-skilled workers and semi-skilled workers (ie caretakers for elderly, construction worker). These type of workers should only be allowed to stay on temporary basis, and be prohibited from bringing family or marrying a Chinese citizen.

Idk, healthy 7+/10 woman with BMI below 30 and at least 5'1" are welcome to marry Chinese men.

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

1. Was China's poverty alleviation so absolute that we don't have enough rural workers to do these jobs anymore? I haven't been back for a while but that's just shocking, in some ways a victim of our own success.

While the rural areas may still have excess labor supply at the current time, we have to keep a few things in mind. Education levels have improved drastically over the past generation in rural areas, and the quality of life has also improved by leaps and bounds, even if income levels may still appear low. The number rural youth willing to work labor-intensive and physically exhausting jobs for a few extra yuan in urban areas (where there actual quality of life will markedly deteriorate, despite the increased nominal income) is bound to decline in the future. Additionally, there are many non-white collar jobs that both require some degree of skill and training and happen to be unpopular among the local populace, resulting in labor shortages (think plumbers earning 150k+/yr in the US). The most pressing example that comes to mind is elder care. In first tier cities in China, the cost of hiring a caretaker (not even full time) exceeds 10k RMB/month.

2. Absolutely, using machines to replace unskilled/semiskilled work while everyone is white collar or above is an ideal future.

Investment should be directed towards adopting and driving down the costs of automation as much as economically feasible. However, the feasibility and costs of automation varies greatly by type of job. Going back to the earlier example: a robot capable of caring for a 90-yr old is going to be a very expensive. Automation also is subject to diminishing returns: the costs of going from 0-80% automation is often cheaper than going from 80%-100%, so some humans (ideally in a higher-skilled higher-value capacity) are still required. For example, highway building is highly automated now in China, but workers are still required (albeit in much reduced numbers).

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

3. "prohibited from bringing family or marrying a Chinese citizen" That's gonna be a nasty one. That reminds me of when Israel was hiring Chinese workers and stipulated they could not marry a local. Not that I'd ever want to but it's pretty offensive, isn't it? And that was decades ago when the world was way less PC. Then some couple's gonna elope, take their wealth abroad and become the hero tale of the West LOL

It does sound bad indeed, but how else to address the residency issue? If residency is prohibited for temporary workers while marriage is allowed: temporary workers will become highly incentivized to marry locals.

Idk, healthy 7+/10 woman with BMI below 30 and at least 5'1" are welcome to marry Chinese men.

In theory that makes sense, but making exceptions for certain demographics (by gender, or even worse by race/ethnicity) is going to result in much condemnation and bad publicity. As discussed in the previous block: restricting marriage universally is already going to raise some eyebrows. Granting exceptions to certain demographics is just going to cause uproar.