Should term limit for China's presidency remain the same, be extended, or eliminated?

related to the above post:

I was now cooking spaghetti, and the biggest commercial TV station here was on, prime time news;
to my total surprise, #2 item, after several minutes, was info about Mr. Xi
(#1 item was a report from country regions about how much money is left at various Road Directorates after the winter, to use that money for repairs;
#3 I think about how two million dollars of oil burnt during a mishap in some electric power plant)
 

Ryz05

Junior Member
I would not give up anti-corruption powers either, until I know that future successors will not turn the system against the family
 
now inside
China Focus: China's national legislature adopts landmark constitutional amendment
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:

"A revision to a clause concerning the Chinese President and Vice President's terms of office was also incorporated. "It is a key measure to improve the state leadership system," Shen told the conference."
 
Just some of the major Chinese government reforms that are being undertaken, little wonder presidential term limits were removed as a show of support for the central leadership in making these reforms and seeing them through.

China to merge regulators, create new ministries in biggest overhaul in years
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


China plans new competition, food watchdog in government revamp
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


China to improve veterans' care after protests with new ministry
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


China says new agency will improve foreign aid coordination
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


China shake-up gives climate change responsibility to environment ministry
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

supercat

Major
While I agree with the author's view that economy and political and legal institutions can co-develop in China, I doubt the "hukou" system will be some unsurmountable obstacle to China's future development - it probably will be abolished in due course.

I also disagree with the following:

Still, my hunch is that something will have to change eventually. A two-tier system in which almost half the population enjoys Western levels of wealth while the rest have no right to health care or social security cannot survive another 15 years. And if this is obvious to me, then it must be obvious to the Chinese leadership, too.

This will not happen. At least 95% of Chinese already has basic health insurance coverage. Chinese government is also in the process of implementing a national retirement pension system modeled on America's Social Security system. Eventually, even western China will be developed and becomes rich, just like in the U.S.

Missing the Forest for the Xi
Mar 12, 2018
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


For the past month, Western commentators have been wringing their hands over Chinese President Xi Jinping's strengthening hold on power, which contradicts the long-held assumption that China would eventually embrace Western democracy. But just as China's economic-development model has proven the West wrong, so, too, might its political model.

LONDON – In recent weeks, Western media commentators have focused extensively on the Communist Party of China’s (CPC) decision to abolish presidential term limits, which will allow Xi Jinping to remain in power indefinitely. Unsurprisingly, they have generally responded to the news with disappointment and skepticism about the Chinese political model. What is surprising, though, is the claim that China is reneging on some implicit promise to become more like the West.

Many observers assumed that China would inevitably embrace Western-style liberal democracy. But even though I, too, was slightly taken aback by the CPC’s latest decision, I never considered that simplistic interpretation of modern-day China to be particularly sensible.

Now, let me be clear: I am not going to argue that unelected strongman leadership is superior to Western-style democracy. If I believed that Xi was preparing to rule China with an iron fist for the next 20-plus years, I would share the doubts of many other commentators.

But allow me to suggest a more open-minded interpretation. For starters, as Yuen Yuen Ang of the University of Michigan reminds us in her excellent book
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, China has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty without adhering to the conventional Western approach to development.

In fact, a young Beijing-based entrepreneur I met recently estimates that at least 20% of Chinese – over 250 million people – are now making $40,000 per year. Besides the United States, no other country in the world has that many people generating that much individual wealth. Whether Westerners like to admit it or not, that is a remarkable achievement.

But even more remarkable is the fact that it has happened under a non-democratic system, and that Chinese citizens appear to be rather content. Although small-scale protests are not uncommon, even among those in the top 20%, they tend to be scattered and fleeting.

Now, think about this. If China can sustain 5.5-7% annual economic growth for the next 15 years, the number of Chinese earning $40,000 per year could more than double. In that case, they probably will not be particularly concerned that Xi is still their country’s anointed leader.

This brings me to a second point. Contrary to the pessimists who have long been wrong about looming threats to China’s GDP growth, I suspect that China’s ultimate undoing could actually be its hukou (household registration) system. This is the arrangement that allows migrants from rural areas to work in cities across China, but does not afford them the same rights as urban-born dwellers. My guess is that very few of these Chinese are among the top 20% of earners.

Although the CPC has experimented with scrapping the hukou system in smaller cities where it wants to promote growth, it has refrained from doing so in the big cities. Based on private discussions I have had with Chinese policymakers, I know that they see the current arrangement as a major problem. But they do not want to confront it. Their reasoning is that abandoning the system altogether would impose an unsustainable burden on megacities such as Beijing and Shanghai.

Still, my hunch is that something will have to change eventually. A two-tier system in which almost half the population enjoys Western levels of wealth while the rest have no right to health care or social security cannot survive another 15 years. And if this is obvious to me, then it must be obvious to the Chinese leadership, too.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


There is no telling when an overhaul of the hukou system will come. But when it does, as I think it must, it will probably be accompanied by a dramatic shift in political governance. Given this, I can see why the CPC’s upper echelons would want to be particularly careful about leadership changes in the years ahead.

And lest we forget, when Xi came to power in March 2013, some at the top of the party tried to resist the changes he was bringing. Ten years may be a long time, but it probably isn’t long enough for fundamental questions about the future of the country and the party to be laid to rest.

So, my third and final point for consideration is that the CPC elites do not want a permanent Xi presidency so much as they want to avoid a forced change of leadership in 2023. My recommendation for Western commentators, then, is to focus on how the Chinese economy evolves in the meantime. Commentary examining growth in Chinese private consumption as a share of GDP, or potential changes to the hukou system, will be far more edifying than that devoted to the personality and ambition of Xi Jinping.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

solarz

Brigadier
While I agree with the author's view that economy and political and legal institutions can co-develop in China, I doubt the "hukou" system will be some unsurmountable obstacle to China's future development - it probably will be abolished in due course.

I also disagree with the following:

Still, my hunch is that something will have to change eventually. A two-tier system in which almost half the population enjoys Western levels of wealth while the rest have no right to health care or social security cannot survive another 15 years. And if this is obvious to me, then it must be obvious to the Chinese leadership, too.

This will not happen. At least 95% of Chinese already has basic health insurance coverage. Chinese government is also in the process of implementing a national retirement pension system modeled on America's Social Security system. Eventually, even western China will be developed and becomes rich, just like in the U.S.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Judging from the quote you provided, the article is disingenuous. The author tries to portray China as this two-tiered society where half the population enoys wealth while the other half is dirt poor. This is not just a lack of understanding, this is crafting an entirely misleading narrative using a carefully selected fact. It is obviously deliberate.

That China, according to the author, has almost half its population enjoying Western levels of wealth is astounding, because less than a decade ago, it was certainly a much smaller proportion than half. Two decades ago, it would have been an even smaller fraction.

The author deliberately ignored this trend of rising economic prosperity, and the resulting narrative is utterly false.
 

hkbc

Junior Member
Judging from the quote you provided, the article is disingenuous. The author tries to portray China as this two-tiered society where half the population enoys wealth while the other half is dirt poor. This is not just a lack of understanding, this is crafting an entirely misleading narrative using a carefully selected fact. It is obviously deliberate.

That China, according to the author, has almost half its population enjoying Western levels of wealth is astounding, because less than a decade ago, it was certainly a much smaller proportion than half. Two decades ago, it would have been an even smaller fraction.

The author deliberately ignored this trend of rising economic prosperity, and the resulting narrative is utterly false.

You're not reading the article properly or didn't read the article, what the author is saying is that migrant workers in the cities lack equal access to health and social amenities because of the hukou system, which is true, reform of the system is necessary but the government is treading carefully to avoid to quote 'unsustainable burden on megacities such as Beijing and Shanghai'.

Unless development becomes more equal reducing the need for workers to migrate en-mass then it is a two tier system, however, astounding the growth is, because if you're lucky like my relatives you can build flats on former farm land rent it out to the migrants collect the rent and retire, or if you're not you're the migrant worker living hundreds of miles from home in order to have a share in the Chinese dream. It's commendable that the Chinese people have the get up and go to make such sacrifices but fair it is not!

You've taken perfectly reasonable commentary and made a big fuss about nothing
 

solarz

Brigadier
You're not reading the article properly or didn't read the article, what the author is saying is that migrant workers in the cities lack equal access to health and social amenities because of the hukou system, which is true, reform of the system is necessary but the government is treading carefully to avoid to quote 'unsustainable burden on megacities such as Beijing and Shanghai'.

Unless development becomes more equal reducing the need for workers to migrate en-mass then it is a two tier system, however, astounding the growth is, because if you're lucky like my relatives you can build flats on former farm land rent it out to the migrants collect the rent and retire, or if you're not you're the migrant worker living hundreds of miles from home in order to have a share in the Chinese dream. It's commendable that the Chinese people have the get up and go to make such sacrifices but fair it is not!

You've taken perfectly reasonable commentary and made a big fuss about nothing

I find nothing reasonable about a deliberate misrepresentation of facts.

China is a society in transition. It is indeed disingenuous to take a snapshot of China and extrapolate an entire narrative from it. Fifteen years ago, Western academics were convinced China's migrant workers would cause the collapse of the CPC. What is happening right now is not what will happen even 5 years from now.

As for fairness, life isn't fair. If fairness was all that mattered, China would still be trying to make communism work. Instead, the Chinese government deals with the realities of lifting more than a billion people out of poverty. To that end, Deng Xiaoping laid the ground plan: let some become rich first, and others will follow.

China is "two-tiered" right now because there are still a lot of people that needs economic opportunities. That's why China built the HSR and invested heavily in tier-2 cities. By improving transportation, China effectively expands the radius of its economic centres. When people don't need to congregate to the same few cities, hukou becomes a non-issue.
 

hkbc

Junior Member
I find nothing reasonable about a deliberate misrepresentation of facts.

China is a society in transition. It is indeed disingenuous to take a snapshot of China and extrapolate an entire narrative from it. Fifteen years ago, Western academics were convinced China's migrant workers would cause the collapse of the CPC. What is happening right now is not what will happen even 5 years from now.

As for fairness, life isn't fair. If fairness was all that mattered, China would still be trying to make communism work. Instead, the Chinese government deals with the realities of lifting more than a billion people out of poverty. To that end, Deng Xiaoping laid the ground plan: let some become rich first, and others will follow.

China is "two-tiered" right now because there are still a lot of people that needs economic opportunities. That's why China built the HSR and invested heavily in tier-2 cities. By improving transportation, China effectively expands the radius of its economic centres. When people don't need to congregate to the same few cities, hukou becomes a non-issue.

China has been two tiered for over 30 years not 'right now' it's been in transition just as long saying that at some point the present system of hukou will not suffice is not a disingenuous extrapolation. Reiterating past achievements is no indicator of future success are you arguing that the present system can be maintained as China transitions? Well evidently not since since you say the houku won't matter in the future well it will only not matter when it's repealed when it's no longer necessary like the one child policy, So how exactly is what the commentator saying disingenuous or misrepresentations which set of words, since you both seem to arrive at the same conclusion?
 
Top