送交者: gordon 于 2005-5-30, 11:25:11:
回答: You still didn't prove there is a discrepancy 由 skipper3 于 2005-5-30, 09:52:13:
---In contrast to your opinion, many economists believe China's real GDP is larger than what is reported by the government as the government has no means to track the gray economy. It may be very true income for peasants has not been rising for years. BUt it is also true tens of millions of farming household who traditionally rely on growing crops for income now have at least one family member working in the city making monthly salary.---
[ I didnt say GDP growth number is absolutely wrong(actually I tend to believe your statement that we have larger GDP condisering gray economy), though i question the statisitcs in China as a whole. Neither do i doubt any single statisics report. What I want to say(not prove) is that we need to be careful in citing statisitcs.
It's very true that "tens of millions of farming household who traditionally rely on growing crops for income now have at least one family member working in the city making monthly salary." And I believe it's true that "income for peasants has been rising"(however insignificantly), maybe due to going out to work in the city. But you need to consider the expenditure, in education for their children, in medical treatment (sadly, many peasants, if not most, just fight the disease with their immune system, they dont go to hospitals unless they cant fight back the disease). If the earnings are improving slowly, while the expenditure is rocketing ( the unbeable edcuation charge, medicine price, etc), it's no wonder feel financially insecure. With the slightest improvment in the countryside(thanks to Wen Jiabao's tax-exemption policy), many migrant workers from ruran areas go back to their hometown, and in some places, there is now a lack of labor! So if people are forced to leave their homes to earn a living, this is only proof of bankrupt countryside.]
---It's quite normal that income for the majority is significantly below the average when the sample income distribution is highly skewed to the right, which is a known fact in China. You can say using medium income would make more sense but you can't say the average number is wrong.---
[Once again, I didnt say the average yearly income or the per capita GDP is wrong. What you said above is surely scientifically correct! But isn't this a discrepancy? Wont you think that a closer gap between the two numbers is a better sign?]
---what you said about "majority" is based on your own unscientific observation. You can't use that as evidence. It's also understandable for many people to feel unsecured because their iron bowl had been taken away due to the reform even though their income has been rising. Again you can say per capita GDP is not a good metrics to measure progress but you can't say the number is wrong because of that. ---
[Of course "majortiy" is based on all what i know about China, surely not on personal observation. I am only too glad to discuss whether it is a majority or minority of Chinese peasants who are badly off. How many peasants in eastern cost areas? how many in the middle and west parts of China. And peasants in Henan(a central province) is very typical of the whole situation in these vast areas of China.
Here we are talking mainly about peasants (though sometimes apply also to urban citizens, such as high education expenditure), so your mention of "iron rice bowl" is inappropriate. Peasants never had that bowl the past.
Totally agree to this statement of yours:"per capita GDP is not a good metrics to measure progress", and again, as above-mentioned, I didn't definitely "say the number is wrong"]
---Using GDP parity as an arguement for debating currency exchange rate is absolutely LiKe.---
[ Like what? my last paragraph was just for fun, not natually further enhancement of previous argument (do you hold the iview all the paragraphs and sentences should prove a central idea?) So it seems to me you misunderstood every point of my previous msg.]
All in all, what i mean is we need to be careful and even suspicious of statistics from China, whether positive or negative statistics in our eyes, whether they conform to or contradict our views. As for the real situation in the countryside, or even in China as a whole, a serious discussion and even argument is only too welcome. Wihout knowing the situation and also their roots, can we think we have prescritions? Once again, we are talking, just talking, about the situation in China as a whole, not directing to individuals.