A Chinese report, supposedly by State Council, CASS and Party School Research Office, claims 90% of China’s millionaires are the children of party officials. h/t China Digital Times. Interestingly, the last crackdown on corruption focused in Shanghai (2004) snagged “red princelings” like Cai Xiaohong, whose father was a Justice Minister. This time the first guy nabbed was a self-starter, Zhang Rongkun. I guess if you want to build a new dynasty, you gotta start with a hereditary aristocracy monopolizing everything…
Here is Forbes China 400 Richest List. How many of these guys are little princes? First ten:
# Wong Kwong Yu
# Xu Rongmao
# Larry Rong Zhijian
# Zhu Mengyi
# Yan Cheung
# Zhang Li
# Shi Zhengrong
# Liu Yongxing
# Guo Guangchang
# Lu Guanqiu
Full CDT article below. Sina article here [zh]. 世界ç»?ç?†äºº magazine also wrote about it according to CDT but I don’t have time to find the article here.
According to a research report, 90 percent of China’s billionaires are children of senior officials. There are about 2,900 senior officials’ children in China, with total wealth amounting to two trillion yuan. Their businesses mainly cover 5 areas: finance, foreign trade, land development, large-scale projects, and bonds and securities. They either own their businesses or are senior managers in big companies.
Hong Kong-based Singtao Daily published the results of the research, which it said was conducted by the Research Office of the State Council, China Academy of Social Science, and the Research Office of the Party School.
The World Executive (世界��人), a Chinese-language magazine, also quoted the report, saying that by March of 2006, 27,310 people own private property worth more than 50 million yuan, and 3,220 own more than 100 million worth. Of the latter group, 2,932 out of 3,220 are children of senior officials. They are spread in eight provinces: Guangdong: 1,566; Zhejiang: 462; Shanghai: 225; Beijing: 195; Jiangsu: 172; Shandong: 141; Fujian: 92; and Liaoning: 79.
The main sources of those billionaires’ wealth are:
1. Legal or illegal commissions from introducing foreign investments
2. Importing facilities and equipment with above-average prices. The import prices are usually 60 percent to 300 percent higher than market prices.
3. Exporting domestic resources and merchandise that they monopolize
4. Developing and selling land with bank loans and zero costs. Twelve large property developers in Guangdong Province are owned by senior officials’ children. In Shanghai, nine of the ten largest property developers are owned by senior officials’ children. In Jiangsu, children of senior officials control the 22 largest property developers and the 15 largest project contractors
5. Smuggling, tax evasion. About 30,000 to 40,000 cars are smuggled every year
6. Obtaining and pocketing loans from banks without collateral. This is one of the main reasons for the mounting non-performance loans in China’s banks
7. Contracting large-scale infrastructure projects. Eighty-five percent of freeways were contracted by private companies, which were owned by children of senior officials. One can reap seven million to eleven million yuan from constructing one kilometer of freeway
8. Appropriating from public accounts to private accounts, usually with the help of financial institutions
9. Monopolizing stock markets, generating false information
1
By Ivan
Well, a few threads down (on Jeremiah’s most recent thread), “Jing” accused us of being “bourgeois.”
(And I’ve been crying in my pillow all day because of that.)
So, I guess Jing and other Communist Apologists and Whores who occasionally come around here, would say it’s OK for China to be governed by a dictatorship of venal, plutocratic, hereditary Communist Party Princelings, as long as they’re not “bourgeois.”
November 4, 2006 @ 3:49 pm | Comment
2
By davesgonechina
@Ivan: if Jing is claiming we’re bourgeois capitalist roaders and Ames thinks we’re godless communists, my guess is that we’re right in the moist and chewy center of critical thinking goodness.
November 4, 2006 @ 5:51 pm | Comment
3
By Ivan
Dave, if we’re in the moist and chewy centre, then Jing is in the centre of “Anthrax Ripple” and Ames is in the centre of “Crunchy Frog.”
November 4, 2006 @ 6:05 pm | Comment
4
By Ames Tiedeman
Is anyone surprised?
We have gone fromt the family members of Party Bosses getting American Express cards in the 1980’s to easy millions with government help in business in the 2000’s.
China is as corrupt as corrupt gets.
November 4, 2006 @ 7:33 pm | Comment
5
By davesgonechina
@Ivan: I had to look it up, but did you remember where the frogs come from when you wrote that? That truly is the White House tasty treat.
November 4, 2006 @ 7:36 pm | Comment
6
By Ames Tiedeman
Dave:
China is a Communits state that has learned how to exploit its cheap labor to make Billions and soon Trillions. It is that simple. This shift from 1970’s thinking to the Colonization of Africa in the 2000’s for natural resources was strategic and real. In the 1970’s if China set up shop in Africa it would have butted heads with the West. China can do it today as it looks like pure capitalism, i.e. drilling for oil. China is building dams, roads, and schools in Africa as it drills for this oil. It is a Communits base station, plain and simple.
China is not some inward thinking peace loving country. They think long term, and they have a plan to take all the power from the West over a period of decades. They are doing it with our money too. We are stupid enough to trade with them. Or should I simply call it buy from them. Trading is when you have a balance. We have a deficit with China so you can really only say we buy from them. It is hardly trading. We are trading nothng but our weakening dollar for their goods.
November 4, 2006 @ 7:44 pm | Comment
7
By davesgonechina
@Ivan: it’s in Italian, but Ames reminds me of this Monty Python skit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtQQ5OQ3Gdw
November 4, 2006 @ 8:13 pm | Comment
8
By richard
Wow, Monty Python in Italian – and it still comes across loud and clear. They really were geniuses.
November 4, 2006 @ 10:58 pm | Comment
9
By Fat Cat
Ivan and Dave,
I don’t exactly know what “Anthrax Ripple” and “Crunchy Frog” are, but I can have a lucky guess. All I want to say here is: you two are nuts. Have you had a chance to sit down and compare notes about Monty Python yet? Once that’s done, let me know who’s got the best memorabilia collection. I may want to borrow it for an exhibition.
As for Jing and Ames, Yeah, I agree that they’ll make a lovely couple.
November 4, 2006 @ 11:35 pm | Comment
10
By davesgonechina
@Fat Cat: Ivan is the one with the MP instant recall. I have to google to figure out which one he’s talking about, but chances are I’ve seen it and immediately remember it.
@Richard: They were Gods amongst us when united and unbroken. Unfortunately, after Graham Chapman died, the magic was lost and they became extraordinary mortals instead. All of them still do interesting stuff, even Terry Jones did that awesome Crusades documentary.
November 5, 2006 @ 1:29 am | Comment
11
By OtherLisa
“NOT the comfy chair!”
November 5, 2006 @ 3:25 am | Comment
12
By Ames Tiedeman
I give up!
Take care everyone.. It has been interesting..
Have a wonderful week…
Regards
November 5, 2006 @ 6:12 am | Comment
13
By Hunxue'er
And George “W” is NOT a princeling????
And non-bid Halliburton contracts is on the level???
And the American people are getting value from their tax dollars today???
And the Triangle Sweatshop Fire incident in early 20th century NYC is not an example of exploiting workers???
It’s just China’s time…let them enjoy and mire in it until the peasants choose to rise again. If they dare.
November 5, 2006 @ 11:42 am | Comment
14
By davesgonechina
@Hunxue’er: The difference is in America only the rich can afford to run for office, whereas in China those who are in office use it to become rich. Let’s see if Cheney returns to Halliburton in any capacity or if Rumsfeld takes over Blackwater. Then the comparison gets closer.
November 5, 2006 @ 12:20 pm | Comment
15
By Ivan
And – entirely unlike the Communist Party – George Bush and the Republican Party don’t claim to represent the “dictatorship of the working class.”
November 5, 2006 @ 1:50 pm | Comment
16
By Priemier Chu Kee Liang II
It is a shame. The corrupt Soong Dynasty all over
again. Imagine 800 million poor Chinese do not even have basic clean water today after 5000 years of “Civilization”, whilst the corrupt feast themselves to death and stare at empty pottery art.
Loyal Chinese
Priemier Chu Kee Liang II
November 5, 2006 @ 3:28 pm | Comment