Why are people blind to China's improvements?

Through my brief stay here on this forum, i have found that they is very little people know about China, yet there exists alot of animosity. Now don't get me wrong, China still has a long way to go in terms of Human Rights but it seems as if people are thinking that the Communist Government of China are brutally repressing everyone, hoarding all the money, and killing babies (i'am not kidding).

The point i wish to make is that while China has a long way to go, it has done alot by itself. The alleviation of poverty is real, no matter what type of spin you put on it

United Nations - Progress towards Millenium Development Goals 1990-2004

from United Nations
Estimates of poverty rates released by the World Bank in 2004 for the years 1981 to 2001, show that global trends in poverty reduction have been dominated by the rapid economic growth of China and the Eastern Asia region, where GDP per capita more than tripled and the proportion of people in extreme poverty fell from 56 per cent to 17 per cent over the two decades. ...

Poverty rates will fall fastest in Eastern Asia outside of China, but the huge reduction in the number of people below the $1 a day poverty line in China will dominate the global totals. ...

Between 1990 and 2002, the largest declines in underweight prevalence were achieved in Eastern Asia–a decrease by nearly half (largely due to China). ...

Twenty-two countries, including some of the most populous, achieved reductions of 25 per cent or more over the decade. The largest decline, in Eastern Asia, was due largely to a dramatic improvement in China because of better distribution of food, better health facilities and access to improved drinking water. ...

The Economist: Poverty, April 7th 2004

Nor has the aggregate progress for the very poorest been shared by all regions. The number of people who managed to jump the $1-a-day hurdle in China during this period was also about 400m. So if one focuses on the developing world outside China, the number of poor has changed very little.

In terms of alleviating poverty, China has done more then any other country.

China's Mission in the UN - White Paper

During the Ninth Five-Year Plan period (1996-2000), savings deposits of urban and rural residents more than doubled, and by 2000 had topped 6,400 billion yuan, or an increase of more than five times compared to what it had been eight years previously. The consumption level has been constantly improved, and the average annual growth rate of the volume of total retail sales of consumer goods during the Ninth Five-Year Plan period reached 10.6 percent. ...

Housing conditions have been continuously improved. The living space per urban resident increased from 8.1 sq m in 1995 to 9.8 sq m in 1999; and the living space per rural resident grew from 21 sq m to 24.2 sq m. In 2000, 510 million sq m of floor space of urban residential buildings were completed; and the construction of rural residential buildings totaling a floor space of 850 million sq m was completed. Hence, housing conditions have been further improved. ...

The drastic improvement of the people's living standards has greatly raised the level of the people's health. The death rate of the Chinese population decreased from 33 per thousand before 1949 to 6.46 per thousand in 1999. The people's life-expectancy on average was raised from 35 years before 1949 to 71.8 years in 2000, or 10 years longer than that of the developing countries and reaching the level of the moderately-developed countries.

United Nations - Millenium Development Goals 2003, China's Progress

China's impressive development is borne out by its steady improvement in the UN Human Development Index from 0.522 in 1975 to 0.726 in 2000. In the 2002 report, China ranked 96 out of 173 countries. At the same time, annual increases in the government's health and education budget since 1995 have averaged 14.2%, whereas total government revenue has grown at an annual average of 17.5%. This indicates that social investment has not kept pace with the overall increase in government revenue.

Alot is made of China's double digit growths in the Military Budget, what is never reported is the double digit growth of the health and education budget in the same period.



Using the United Nations purple line, the number of rural poor is higher then the line that the Chinese use. However, there can be no argument that the decline is substantial.

While the issues are complex, one of the best policy instruments for eliminating poverty in remote areas is to foster a considered migration and re-settlement of rural Chinese, most of whom will never be able to earn a living on the small marginal plots of land they now farm.

Recently, a lot of interest has being put on the migration of workers to the cities or areas such as Tibet. As you can see, this is even recommended by the United Nations as a means to reduce poverty.

China is ahead of target in lowering the proportion of people living below minimum dietary consumption levels. The figures fell from 17% in 1990 to 11% in 2000. It is also ahead of target in reducing the percentage of underweight children from 21% in 1990 to 10% in 1998. China’s early economic reforms in the countryside yielded dramatic increases in grain output: The country has achieved food security and nutrition levels have increased steadily. Where agriculture has not been viable, a grain subsidy has been provided to those in need of food through food-for-work programmes. To strengthen environmental protection, marginal arable land has been returned to grassland or forest, while a grain subsidy has been provided to affected farmers.

Subsidies for farmers, increases in grain production has meant that the number of people in China unable to feed themselves has being cut substantially. China is well ahead of the UN targets.

China is ahead of target in ensuring that all children will be enrolled in primary school by 2015, having raised the net primary school enrolment rate (NER) from 96.3% in 1990 to 98.6% in 2002. The gross enrolment rate for junior secondary school was raised from 66.7% in 1990 to 90% in 2002. Although there are still large regional disparities in access to education, areas with lower access are the least populated, easing financial and physical strains on primary education in those areas.

China is moving along to ensure literacy in rural and disadvantaged areas.

China is slightly off track for the girl/boy (g/b) ratio both for primary and secondary school. The primary education g/b ratio is now 90% on a national basis while the g/b ratio in secondary education is 85%. ...

The government has adopted a number of strategies to support women, including the following:
Launching the “Education for All” target of universal 9-year compulsory education with 99% enrolment rate of primary school-aged children and gross 85% of enrolment rate for lower secondary school; ...

China still has work to do in this area but the Chinese government is not discriminating towards women. If anything, the government is trying to overturn centuries old traditions that favour men.

China is on track for reducing infant mortality and under-five mortality. During the 1990s, reported infant mortality dropped from 50 to 30, while under-five mortality dropped from 61 in 1991 to 36 in 2001. Meeting the MDG in 2015 means lowering the under-five rate to 20, which would bring China into the ranks of middle-income countries such as Malaysia.

The maternal mortality ratio is on track, having dropped from 89 per 100, 000 live births in 1990 to 50 in 2001. The proportion of births attended by skilled health workers in hospital increased from 51% in 1990 to 76% in 2001.

China has recently stepped up its efforts to raise HIV/AIDS awareness, and to improve medical care and treatment. These efforts should make an impact on the overall HIV/AIDS situation. Greater efforts will be required for China to be on track for halting and reversing HIV/AIDS by 2015.

Only recently, Yao Ming and Magic Johnson were in China promoting AIDS awareness and Premier Wen Jia Bao shook hands with an HIV sufferer.

Despite strong commitment, China is not yet on track in reversing the loss of its environmental resources. China’s large (and still growing) population, combined with inappropriate land use practices, have harmed the quality of scarce productive land and other natural resources. This has led to various forms of land degradation including grassland destruction, soil erosion, and soil and water pollution, all of which threaten China’s richJand globally significant biodiversity. ...

China continues to demonstrate firm resolve in halting deterioration of the environment. Environmental spending has increased from 0.7% of GDP in 1996 to a planned 1.7% in 2010, and the country has enacted a considerable body of environmental laws and regulations.

This is one area where China really needs to improve, could you imagine if everyone in China had a car? The amount of air-conditioners in China is stupendous, and is becoming like the US where outside temperature could be 5 degrees celsius but the inside will be 20+.

China is determined to reach complete integration with the global economic system. It has met various legal, trading, and financial system requirements as a condition of entering the World Trade Organization, and has maintained effective monetary and fiscal policies to sustain rapid growth in recent years while keeping inflation under control. ...
China’s GDP is number-one in the developing world and sixth overall,

Conclusion of Report:

Generally, the picture that emerges is very positive. It illustrates that China is likely to achieve most of the MDGs. Targets that may require some attention are as follows:

Achieve equal access to primary and secondary education for boys and girls by 2005;
Halt and reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS by 2015;
Halve the incidence of TB by 2015;
Implement national strategies for sustainable development by 2005 to reverse the loss of environmental resources by 2015.

China’s commitment to achieving the MDGs is strong. MDG targets that may not be on track can be put on track with more attention to balanced development.

Human rights is not only about freedom of speech and religion. While China will definitely need to improve in those two areas, China has made leaps and bounds in alleviating poverty and creating wealth. Whether you like if or not, this is mostly due to government policies.

The fundamental human rights of Food, Water, Shelter and Clothes are being improved in China everyday.

So please limit your input on China to constructive criticism and not;

"China is bad because it's got a commie government".

There seems to be an unwillingness to accept that China is coming back to a position she has historically held.

China was a major trading nation for hundreds of years (some estimates say around 25% of world trade for centuries).

IMO China is finally emerging from the trauma of colonialism, the most appallingly crippling war (a war, much longer than 'just' WW2, whos horrors the world has chosen to pretty much ignore) and the totalitarianism which followed it (hardly unique to China and which produced more damaging consequences itself).

But I think it will work out; no doubt there will be those who wish to use issues like Taiwan but China has been around a lot longer than most and I have no doubt they will be reasonable and patient......

......and those attempting to use some of the issues in persuit of the usual expedient short-termism may well regret this over the longer term.

[edit on 23-3-2005 by sminkeypinkey]

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
There seems to be an unwillingness to accept that China is coming back to a position she has historically held.

China was a major trading nation for hundreds of years (some estimates say around 25% of world trade for centuries).

IMO China is finally emerging from the trauma of colonialism, the most appallingly crippling war (a war, much longer than 'just' WW2, whos horrors the world has chosen to pretty much ignore) and the totalitarianism which followed it (hardly unique to China and which produced more damaging consequences itself).

But I think it will work out; no doubt there will be those who wish to use issues like Taiwan but China has been around a lot longer than most and I have no doubt they will be reasonable and patient......

......and those attempting to use some of the issues in persuit of the usual expedient short-termism may well regret this over the longer term.

[edit on 23-3-2005 by sminkeypinkey]

Good Post

Some people need an enemy to justify budget increases. China fits the bill. Also think it's part of a strategy to pressurise N Korea -'you may think you're mate's a big guy but we're bigger than him'

I agree that China has come a long way in a very short time. I also think that the media should stop focusing on only the bad things and the economy. It seems to me that in the West, the only good thing about modern China is the economy.

But I wish China would put less focus on maintaining its borders and reclaiming lost territory. I think China would be stronger as a nation without the "have-not" provinces like Tibet and Xinjiang. They would still be beneficial to China as sovereign states because they still provide a buffer zone. But the case with Taiwan, I agree, China MUST reclaim Taiwan if it is to project itself globally.

Originally posted by JTF2
But the case with Taiwan, I agree, China MUST reclaim Taiwan if it is to project itself globally.

So you agree that China should take Taiwan so it can yell "I am the king of the world" like that wierd dude from Titanic?

There are people living on the island you know. It is not just a thing that you can claim.



[edit on 24-4-2005 by twchang]

twchang - from a military and economic standpoint yes China should. I guess the question you are really trying subtlely to ask is "is it morally right for China to reclaim Taiwan?"

Does China have historic claims on Taiwan? Yes they do, no matter how you try to look at it Taiwan used to be a part of China.

Does China have modern claims on Taiwan? Alittle bit, but not enough for a definite "Yes, China and Taiwan are one and the same".

Do the Taiwanese people want independence? No, about half of the people want eventual reunification but my guess is they are waiting for a strong and democratic China.

Right now in Canada, the province of Quebec has been trying to become independent for many years. If the people in Quebec actually voted to seek sovereignty do you think the rest of Canada would actually allow it? No, even in a western democratic nation like Canada force would be, nay, must be used to keep Quebec in line. For us here in Canada, a seperate Quebec would mean the downfall of the country and that just cannot happen.

Indeed, perhaps in China's economic and military standpoint of view China should take Taiwan, but I am not looking from China's perspective. Also, in the name of economic and military, aggression and wars occur, and since no one thinks war is a good thing, perhaps we should be careful in considering only economics and military. Plus, China does not have to be aggressive to become prosperous. It can become a prosperous nation without achieving this dream of imperial glory.

Perhaps what you should ask is "does PRC have historic claims of Taiwan?" No. The only dynasty in China that has a solid claim of Taiwan is Ching. Also, other than the aboriginal, the first outlanders that actually occupy Taiwan in are the Dutch, not Chinese. Most Chinese came after the Dutch settlement. Should Dutch reclaim Taiwan? Should England gives up Scotland and Ireland, and reclaim North America and Australia? I am sure that would do wonders to England's economics and military.

If it is so sure that Taiwanese want eventual unification, then why did China threaten to sure force when Taiwan wants to have referedum.

Taiwan is a bit different from Quebec because Quebec is already part of Canada, but Taiwan is not part of China now.


[edit on 25-4-2005 by twchang]

Originally posted by twchang
Perhaps what you should ask is "does PRC have historic claims of Taiwan?" No. The only dynasty in China that has a solid claim of Taiwan is Ching. Also, other than the aboriginal, the first outlanders that actually occupy Taiwan in are the Dutch, not Chinese. Most Chinese came after the Dutch settlement. Should Dutch reclaim Taiwan? Should England gives up Scotland and Ireland, and reclaim North America and Australia? I am sure that would do wonders to England's economics and military.

Well, technically, the head of state in Australia, Scotland, Ireland is still the Queen, (oh yeah, also Canada). North America only gained it's independence through a war, England never gave it up.

And no, the Dutch cannot reclaim Taiwan because they lost it in a war to the Ming, who then lost it in a war to the Qing, who lost it to Japan, and then finally given back to the ROC after WWII, the then government of China.

If you look at it from a perspective of law, Taiwan belongs to "One-China", whether the ROC or the PRC, Taiwan has never had it's own independent identity. If you read the ROC consitution, Taiwan is only a province, a provisional capital and the real capital of the ROC is Nanjing.

Therefore in either the ROC or the PRC's consitution, Taiwan is just a province, to change that would mean the altering of the ROC's consititution, which would mean that you are changing the current situation.

Originally posted by rapier28
Well, technically, the head of state in Australia, Scotland, Ireland is still the Queen, (oh yeah, also Canada). North America only gained it's independence through a war, England never gave it up.

Sure, but are US, Canada, Australia belongs to "one UK"?

Right, so have PRC won a war and occupy Taiwan yet? No. So why are they keep pretending as if they own Taiwan, and keeps interfering in Taiwan's international affairs? For example, in Olympic, Taiwan must use "Chinese Taipei." What the heck is that? The team is not just from Taipei.

If you look at it from a perspective of law, Taiwan belongs to "One-China", whether the ROC or the PRC, Taiwan has never had it's own independent identity. If you read the ROC consitution, Taiwan is only a province, a provisional capital and the real capital of the ROC is Nanjing.

Therefore in either the ROC or the PRC's consitution, Taiwan is just a province, to change that would mean the altering of the ROC's consititution, which would mean that you are changing the current situation.

Are you saying that the current situation is ROC occupy the whole China and Mangolia, and its capitial is in Nanjing? Constitution is a piece of paper and it can be changed. It is written 50 years ago and does not reflect the current situation. Laws are written by human and should change when it becomes necessary.


[edit on 25-4-2005 by twchang]

Originally posted by twchang
Sure, but are US, Canada, Australia belongs to "one UK"?

No, but Scotland, Ireland belong to Great Britain, self ruled but not independent countries per say.

Originally posted by twchang
Are you saying that the current situation is ROC occupy the whole China and Mangolia, and its capitial is in Nanjing? Constitution is a piece of paper and it can be changed. It is written 50 years ago and does not reflect the current situation. Laws are written by human and should change when it becomes necessary.

I guess what i'am saying is that Taiwan has never being independent in light of the law, even though it has enjoyed 50 years of de facto independence. The PRC won a civil war to control China, Taiwan was a part of China, so it can be argued that the PRC won the right to control Taiwan. Taiwan is not a country, it was a province, it has never being a country.

Taiwanese independence would be disastrous to China, even if China was now ruled by a non-communist government, it would simply not let go of Taiwan. The reasons are nowdays entirely strategic, not even economical.

Giving up Taiwan would mean the stationing of U.S bombers/fighters/navy at a island so close to China, blocking off all sea routes, completely surrounding China, threatening all eastern sea routes. Considering that the Malacca's can be blocked to stop all oil flow to China, further blockades from Taiwan/Japan/Guam is simply not an option for China.

This is why China would go to war to preserve Taiwan because if it doesn't, it will eventually have to fight a tougher war in the future, when threatened.

[edit on 25-4-2005 by rapier28]

Originally posted by twchang
Perhaps what you should ask is "does PRC have historic claims of Taiwan?" No. The only dynasty in China that has a solid claim of Taiwan is Ching. Also, other than the aboriginal, the first outlanders that actually occupy Taiwan in are the Dutch, not Chinese. Most Chinese came after the Dutch settlement. Should Dutch reclaim Taiwan? Should England gives up Scotland and Ireland, and reclaim North America and Australia? I am sure that would do wonders to England's economics and military.
[edit on 25-4-2005 by twchang]

I really think that you should take some chinese history lessons. Taiwan was firstly spotted by the chinese dating back to the three kingdoms period when Sun quan, the king of Wu sent his navy and envoy to the island, and you could consult it in 24 History, a compliment of history chronicles and biography. Limited by the situation that most guys knowing very limited chinese, I prefer not to point the original text specifically. And then in Tang dynasty, taiwan belonged to the juridiction of one county in Fujian province, which I could not recall in detail. The mongolian Yuan dynasty also established effective sovereignty in Taiwan. Plus, the mongols almost succeeded in vanquishing nippon expect that all the landing ships were blown away by typhoon.
So as you mentioned, The Dutch actually ilegally occupied Taiwan through ignoble deceit and invasion. Then the outlawed Zheng took over the island again by force, and he was namly a Ming lord. And Qing has officially set taiwan as a province in the wake of sino-french war in 1860s.
And this was the basic outline of taiwan. I have not seen much grouded proof in your post, if you are interested, I could locate the chinese source of history to you~

let me ask you something twchang,..

You happy with the status quo as of now between taiwan and China??