Disclaimer: This book was sent to me for review by the publisher.

I think I can safely say that this book, Living Abroad in China, will be of little to no use to nearly all of the readers here. That’s because it presumes you know next to nothing about China and are going there totally green.

If, however, you really are going there with little or no knowledge of the trials, tribulations and joys of daily life in China, then this book would be an excellent tool to take along. I wish such a book had been available when I went there in 2002. I found similar books back then, but nothing as broad-ranging and specifically focused on survival in China. For that, it’s quite valuable.

The book is written by a husband and wife team, Stuart and Barbara Strother, who went there to live for a year with their two young children. Their effort will appear hopelessly superficial to any China hand, but again, for the beginner I’d strongly recommend it. It gives an overview of how to set up your life in various big Chinese cities and provides useful factoids about looking for property, getting a hand phone, paying taxes, finding a maid, picking a school to learn Mandarin, etc. The timing is good for me – superficial as it is, there is still plenty of stuff in here I can use as I relocate in just a few weeks.

Useful, but far from perfect. For example, it claims broadband is better and more ubiquitous in China than in the US. The ubiquitous part is probably true, but the “better” is not. Everyone going to China who is used to broadband elsewhere will be shocked at how slow Web surfing there can be. There are several other examples of the book glossing over problems you’re likely to encounter, and along with that there’s tons of “D’oh!” stuff (the Chinese are enigmatic to us Westerners, if you didn’t know). But the majority of the information is useful if on the sketchy side. And it has to be sketchy – it covers a huge range of topics and places. Despite that, I’m glad I’ll have it with me for quick reference. If you are going for the first time, I definitely recommend it.

The media and the blogosphere have been alive this week with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Fed Chariman Ben S. Bernanke’s trip to Beijing. Washington still feels the best way to quiet the clamor over the trade imbalance with China is to pressure Beijing to raise the value of the yuan. This week’s Economist chimes in arguing that revaluation of the yuan is not the solution that American policy makers seem to believe and furthermore might have unintended consequences both in China and in the US.

Mr Paulson has taken the rather unusual tack of pleading with the Chinese to come to his aid against protectionist factions in America. Citing “resistance in both our countries to greater integration into the global economy”, he called for tangible results “on the most important issues facing our nations.” This is code for allowing the yuan to appreciate, and other measures to rein in the massive trade imbalances between the two countries. China’s cheap currency is the prickliest issue, at least in the public mind. A Democratic senator, Chuck Schumer, along with a Republican, Lindsey Graham, have been pushing a scheme to slap penalties on Chinese goods if China’s currency is not allowed to appreciate. Given the composition of the incoming Senate such actions are, worryingly, starting to look more possible.

But China’s leaders have big political concerns of their own, notably the millions of underused workers in state-owned firms, and the huge numbers each year who join China’s workforce. A booming export sector is helping to absorb many of these workers, so the last thing China wants is to slow sales of its goods abroad. Nor would the government be at all inclined to defer to the demands of China-bashing American politicians. In her statement to the summit, Ms Wu said that America misunderstands the situation in China, and that change is coming as fast as it can. The yuan has already been allowed to appreciate by about 6% since the middle of last year, which is more than many observers expected.

But Messrs Paulson and Bernanke say that letting it rise further will benefit China as much as the United States, by putting its growth on a more sustainable footing. China’s economy grew by 10.7% in the first nine months of the year, fuelling worries about inflation and an overheating economy. Given the fragile state of many Chinese institutions, particularly its banking sector, an unsustainable boom could lead to a nasty bust, which would please nobody except possibly Ohio’s steelworkers.

Still, the very fragility of those institutions limits how quickly China can move. No one is quite sure what a big and sudden shock to the system would do, and they don’t particularly want to find out. And at any rate, letting the yuan appreciate might not help as much as everyone fancies. Much of China’s manufacturing consists of assembling parts made elsewhere; a rising yuan would make those inputs cheaper, limiting the price impact on its exports. Moreover, the American economy seems to be relatively insensitive to currency fluctuations, which means that it will probably take more than a somewhat cheaper dollar to adjust its enormous current-account deficit.

Admittedly I’m not an economist. I got into the history game because, in the words of Chevy Chase/Gerald Ford, “I was under the impression there would be no math.” But on a personal note, as part of a couple who receives grant support and fellowships in dollars and euros respectively but must pay our bills and rent next year in RMB, I’m not crazy about watching the yuan rise any faster. In the words of St. Augustine, “Lord, grant me chastity. But not yet.”

cross-posted at Jottings from the Granite Studio

Interesting back-and-forth in the British magazine Prospect between Will Hutton, the author of The Writing on the Wall: China and the West in the 21st Century, and Meghnad Desai. a former director of the Centre for Global Governance and an emeritus professor of economics at the LSE and a Labour peer.

Hutton leads off:

It is a commonplace to observe that the rise of China is transforming the world. Extrapolate from current growth rates and China will be the world’s largest economy by the middle of this century, if not before. If it remains communist, the impact on the world system will be enormous and very damaging. Britain and the US are, for all their faults, democracies that accept the rule of law. This is not true of China. If an unreformed China takes its place at the top table, the global order will be kinder to despotism; the fragile emergence of an international system of governance based on the rule of law will be set back and the relations between states will depend even more nakedly on their relative power.

All that, however, is predicated on two very big “ifs”—if the current Chinese growth rate continues, and if the country remains communist. I think there are substantial doubts about each proposition. What is certain is that both cannot hold. China is reaching the limits of the sustainability of its current model, and to extrapolate from the past into the future as if nothing needs to change is a first-order mistake.

Our concern in the west should be to help China face its enormous challenges without damaging us in the process. If Chinese communism can transform itself, then China could, like Japan before it, smoothly integrate into the world power system. If not, severe convulsions lie ahead.

To which Professor Desai responds:

For a liberal pluralist, you sound oddly like a monist, if not a monotheist. For you, there is only one road to capitalism—the western one—and only one political system—ours.

China has a lot to learn about macroeconomic management, but its failings have nothing to do with totalitarianism. India is also shy about liberalising its capital account. The Asian financial crisis of 1997 taught China and India to keep a pool of liquidity handy, even at the cost of forgoing a better use for the money.

Yes, there is a Leninist party in power within a state capitalist system. But capitalism has no unique path, nor does it require a liberal democratic infrastructure to flourish. Japan’s economic rise took place without a fully liberal infrastructure, and most European states, including Britain and Germany, were capitalist before they were democratic. What the most recent phase of globalisation has shown is that capitalism requires neither the Weberian Protestant ethic nor liberal democracy; any country with a decent savings rate, mass education and access to western markets can “do” capitalism. It is not a western Christian monopoly. Indeed, some Asians are proving better at it than the Europeans.

It is a rich exchange and there is much with which to agree and much which needs to be challenged. I myself hew a bit closer to Hutton’s view in that I believe that China’s current problems are deep and systemic and cannot easily be solved without calling into question the whole system. These weaknesses jeopardize China’s continued economic growth, perhaps not in the short-term, but unless the CCP finds its way to resolving key issues of environmental degradation (Anyone want to buy a baby blue dolphin olympic mascot keychain? Anyone?), endemic corruption, and a creaky banking system, the long-term future of China’s economic miracle is uncertain to say the least.

Towards the end of the exchange, however, Professor Desai gets in this parting shot:

I do not defend the inequities or brutalities thrown up by China’s growth. But I don’t think they are a sign of weakness. Despite similar problems in most other economies in the past, none collapsed because of excessive growth. The USSR died because of stagnation.

You see the inequities and brutalities of China’s growth as unique to China’s communist system, and it offends your liberal sensibilities. You want these inequities and brutalities to be swept away. I see them as part of the historic path of rapid accumulation that many economies pass through. This is how income growth occurs in capitalism. What’s new?

Much to discuss here.

via Arts & Letters Daily
cross-posted at Jottings from the Granite Studio

I’ve been exchanging emails with a reader who harbors some interesting points of view on life in China. I told him if he wrote some of these things up, I’d post them as guest contributions, and this is what he sent me. While his views don’t necessarily reflect my own – I don’t know enough about the Chinese law in question to agree or disagree – I think he raises some fascinating questions.
——————————————————————————————————————-
Does the rule of law in China support Lawful or Unlawful acts?

By Guy

Reading the news in China recently, a man is driving his car down a main road in Beijing. He follows the rules, drives carefully, isn’t speeding, however a pedestrian decides to jump over the central reservation (the barrier that separates the lanes on busy roads) this is in direct disregard of the local traffic rules. When jumping over the reservation he jumps directly into the way of the car and as such is run over and killed as the driver of the car has no chance to react. However the driver is found guilty and has to pay compensation to the family of the killed man of about 150,000 RMB. How can it be right for an innocent driver to be penalized for following the law? I understand that this rule has been changed in Shanghai recently, such that the driver is not automatically found guilty, but in many parts of China this still appears to be the case.

In the event of an accident the police will come along, take pictures and then tell the people affected to talk to each other to arrange who pays for what. The driver normally will be expected to pay for all medical expenses, repairs to the other vehicle and also for the time off work of the injured party, even though they did nothing wrong. Even then, once an agreement is reached the police don’t give any advice to the injured people (assuming they were not killed) about how dangerous it is for them to behave that way on the road. I have been informed by local Chinese that whatever you do if you drive a car in China, and you hit an old man or woman, make sure they are killed in the accident. It sounds callous, but the reason being if they are alive it will cost you a lot more money as they will go to the doctors and come back with fees for every thing wrong with them, whether this is caused by the accident or not.

Why is it that such gross stupidity and ignorance is rewarded in China? Why is no money spent on educating the drivers of mopeds and bikes as well as normal pedestrians in China? Especially since the majority of road accidents seem to involve them. Almost all of them are not even insured .
—————————————————————————————————————————-

Back to Richard… Well, I’m not so sure about the last paragraph; should you really have to spend government money to educate pedestrians not to walk across highways that are forbidden to pedestrians? If they are that mind-numbingly stupid that they would even consider doing such a thing, would some public service announcements really convince them to alter their behavior? In any event, this brought back memories of an old blog post that I found one of the most interesting ever; here’s the part it reminded me of:

This idea is sometimes taken to its logical, but most grotesque end. At accidents that occur at places and times where there are no witnesses, but one of the drivers is injured, the other driver sometimes intentionally hits the other person again to kill him. Why? Because if he stayed alive the other driver would be responsible for his medical bills, but if he’s dead then he doesn’t have an impact on the other driver’s life or pocketbook. Pause and consider the twistedness of that. Then pause again to consider that such stories are common enough to make it onto CCTV.

So what’s the reasoning behind a legal system that permits – no, encourages – such inanities? What’s the logic? Is it grounded in any philosophical or legal argument, or is it simply a matter of pure insanity? I really wonder. I really want to know what’s behind it.

I’m finding this site really useful, and enjoyable, too. (Thanks, Sinosplice.) The post on assigning each tone an emotion is awesome. I’ve employed a similar system myself, but never really formalized it like this. (One day, when I get lots of courage, I’ll post about my own experiences learning Chinese, a topic I studiously avoid in order not to set myself up for mockery from those who are already fluent.)

Relatedly, some friends have recommended the Pleco dictionary as a tool for looking up Chinese characters I’m not familiar with. But before I order it I have to get a PDA, and that’s where I’m hoping some of you have a suggestion. A friend here is telling me to get this Taiwan-made Dopod, which has a phone, video camera, keyboard and every conceivable bell and whistle. He says I can use it to surf the Web in WiFi hot spots, post to my blog at Starbucks and write way faster thanks to the keyboard, as opposed to tapping or writing each letter with a stylus. If anyone has thoughts or suggestions, I’d love to hear them.

I knew Beijing’s air was filled with poisons, but I didn’t know it could be this bad.

Via CDT, a powerful argument by Bruce Jacobs, professor of Asian Languages and Studies and director of the Taiwan Research Unit at Monash University, Melbourne. Jacobs insists that the US and its key allies must give Taiwan standing in international organizations like the WHO and desist from seeing it as a province of China. The world would be a safer place, he says, if China would renounce its false historical claim on Taiwan.”

The recent close mayoral elections in Taipei and Kaohsiung, Taiwan’s two largest cities, remind us that Taiwan remains a thriving democracy. Along with South Korea, Taiwan is one of two former Asian dictatorships that have made a true transition to democratic rule.

This democratization has won Taiwan many friends around the world, including the United States, Australia, Japan, and Britain. But this support doesn’t change the fact that Taiwan faces a severe threat from China.

At this moment, China has more than 800 missiles aimed at the island. Its military often conducts exercises relevant to an invasion of Taiwan. That kind of power makes some observers in government, business, and academic circles wary of upsetting China. Yet China has shown that it respects strong, principled stands rather than a submissive, begging attitude.

The US and other democratic nations must stand up for Taiwan’s right to determine its own future without China’s military threats. Taking this stand means welcoming Taiwan’s representation in more international organizations – and yes, rethinking their approach toward the so-called One-China policy, which declares Taiwan to be part of China.

Definitely read it all. Jacobs appears to carefully avoid calling for independence outright, but it’s not so hard to read between the lines, based on the parallels he draws between Taiwan and East Timor.

Howdy everyone, OtherLisa here.

I’ve gotten a number of responses since I started commenting and guest-posting on Richard’s blog. Some of them have been positive (and for those of you who have complimented me, I deeply appreciate it. Thank you). Others, well, not so much. But of the criticisms I’ve received and the names I’ve at times been called, I don’t think I’ve ever been accused of rudeness (or not too much, anyway). Which is why I feel qualified to write this brief note.

Lately a lot of comments here have been, well, rude. It seems to be a cyclical thing, and we are in one of those name-calling cycles again. It needs to stop, or at least die down to a reasonable, low-level flame.

What do I mean by “rude” and “name-calling”? I’m not referring to vigorously expressed differences of opinion. I’m referring to personal attacks these differences of opinion sometimes prompt.

It’s a personal attack when you call somebody a “fat ass” or “stupid” or a “hack” in response to a disagreement. It’s a personal attack when you call somebody a racist unless you have very good evidence to support that opinion. It’s perfectly okay to say, “this comment strikes me as racist,” or “this opinion is ill-informed” – even “stupid.” But that doesn’t make the person who made the comment either a racist or stupid by definition. And it’s not “trolling” to disagree.

It’s hard to judge what’s in other peoples’ heads and hearts. We’ve all got to allow each other room for mistakes of expression, for errors of ignorance. We’ve got to give each other room for growth.

I’m not saying there aren’t times when somebody deserves to be slapped down, and hard, but it seems to me that we’ve set the bar pretty low here lately. The blog and the comments are supposed to be a forum of discussion, for exchange of ideas, for socializing, etc. They aren’t for engaging in juvenile pissing contests.

I’m speaking on Richard’s behalf on this general topic because he’s got way too much on his plate to deal with this right now, but the specific opinions I’ve expressed here are my own, so please direct flames at me rather than him.

(one more note: I rarely edit comments. When I do, I will put my name in the edited comment so you’ll know it’s me)

In many ways, Taiwan is a sad place right now (and not just because they know I’m leaving). There’s a sense among so many I speak with that they’ll never spread their wings again and soar. That they’ll always be in China’s shadow, and that China will continue to chip away at Taiwan’s businesses, which simply can’t compete with prices in the mainland. Everywhere you look in Taipei, there are long lines of taxis. Lots of taxis. Few passengers. A taxi driver was telling me just the other night how hard life has become for him and his family. What can you do? They always ask me when me I think things will turn around, when Taiwan will “bounce back.” I don’t know what to say.

In every industry, multinationals are cutting their budgets in Taiwan and other relatively small markets as they focus on the “BRICs” (Brazil, Russia, China and India), those as yet untapped markets that seem to hold so much promise, and you wonder how the other markets will cope. I want to think there’s still a lot of hope for Taiwan. There”s so much wealth here and so much success, and a visit down any of the main streets will tell you that people here are still buying. But everyone’s nervous. Just about all the young people I meet have plans to study abroad. The mindset is that the only way to survive is to get out, to master English and perhaps find a job in China. English schools are everywhere, and they, too, are thriving. English is thought to be one of the keys to getting out, or at least to getting a better-paying job. And it’s true. Jobs are scarce, but there’s a serious need for competent people who speak fluent English. If you can read and write English, you have a tremendous advantage.

Still, I think it’s important not to get sucked into the trap of feeling grief and pity for Taiwan. As I said, there’s still a huge amount of wealth and opportunity here. It’s still one of the most vibrant places I’ve ever seen, and there’s a lot here to love and enjoy. And I know very soon I am going to miss these things terribly.

First, there are the people. The Taiwanese are truly a class act – gracious, polite, willing to stop and help strangers, always putting their best face forward even in hard times. And even the aforementioned taxi drivers – they, too, amaze me with their kindness and honesty and refusal to sacrifice their morals. At least three times, including just this past weekend, I’ve gotten into a taxi not knowing my destination was just around the corner, and they dropped me off and refused to take any money. (In Shanghai, I’ve been driven literally a few inches and paid the full fare, though the driver could simply have pointed and said, “It’s right across the street, over there.”) And the taxi drivers, and just about everyone else here, are just so nice, so decent and caring. Quite a different story than in Hong Kong. Similar to what I often experienced in Singapore, but no where else in Asia (or the US, for that matter).

I don’t think I love the people of any other country more than I love the Taiwanese. I can tell story after story about good Samaritans, delightful conversations with strangers, offers to help from out of the blue. And just thinking about it now, knowing I will be here only another five or six days (three days this week, and a couple days in January when I return and gather my stuff), I am filled with a sentimental mixture of sadness and appreciation and respect. I know I am going to miss these people soon. Very soon.

There are lots of little things that make Taiwan so magical. The throngs of people lining the main roads like Zhongxiao Dong Lu all through the night, even at midnight, shopping and eating and drinking. The immaculate subways and an infrastructure that really works. The courtesy of the drivers, who actually stop as the light turns red and always yield to pedestrians. The odd weekly ritual when seemingly everyone in the neighborhood gathers on the street to socialize with one another as they wait for the garbage truck to come and take away their trash. (There are almost no public wastebaskets here, and getting rid of garbage is a social event – you really have to see it to understand and appreciate it. Literally hundreds of people pour onto the street to participate, carrying their plastic bags of carefully separated recyclable and disposable rubbish.) The gorgeous mountains that surround the city, leading to the hot springs of Beitou. The boisterous night markets where the vendors never push you to buy and the prices are fair (bargaining doesn’t seem to be part of the general culture here). The little alleys that wind around the major streets filled with small shops and restaurants. Honest landlords who go out of their way to provide excellent service. Even honest real estate brokers. I know there must be crime and dishonesty here, but I’ve never seen it.

I’ve made it something of a Friday night ritual after work to eat at the TGI Friday’s at Zhongxiao-Fuxing, where I regularly meet up with employees of the AIT (the equivalent of the US State Department, which we can’t call the State Department because we don’t recognize Taiwan as a country) and other expats. The staff knows us all by name. They know I like my ice cream served with a long spoon, and that I want my salad dressing on the side. They help me with my Chinese characters and even send me text messages asking when I’ll be back. I am going to miss them like you wouldn’t believe. They offered to throw a party for me my last night here (I’m not much into parties and told them I’d rather keep my exit low-key).

Yeah, there’s a lot about Taiwan that is absolutely first rate. I’d recommend it to anyone considering living in Asia, especially if you have a family. It doesn’t have the sense of the unexpected that Hong Kong and Shanghai do, that sense that just about anything can happen as you walk into the night. It’s not a city of surprises. But it’s anything but boring, and I’d rate it high above Singapore in terms of things to do and see (though that’s not setting the bar very high, come to think of it). I know there will be moments in Beijing when I will look back longingly and wonder, Why on earth did I ever leave Taipei, where you can wear a short-sleeved shirt and no jacket in December, and where people walking in the pedestrian lanes aren’t considered moving targets? I know, Beijing has its own qualities, and comparisons like that aren’t fair; but they are inevitable.

So thanks to the people who brought me out here, especially Jerome Keating and Bill Stimson, without whose urging I would never have come. It was more than worth it, and I will have the fondest memories of this place and its people for the rest of my life. I’m trying to savor every moment I can as I prepare my belongings for the shippers and get ready to say my farewells. It’s when you prepare to leave a place that you suddenly realize all there is that makes it so special, and you feel the twinge of regret for the places you never got to and the people you never called. But Taiwan will still be here, and I know I’ll be back. And for all the angst and uncertainty, I think they will do okay. God knows they deserve to, and I believe a people as smart and motivated as this can’t be put down for too long. I can’t tell my friends when Taiwan will “bounce back,” but I can honestly say I believe it will.

I didn’t really know what this post was going to morph into as I started it, I just knew I wanted to tell the world how much I love Taiwan before i depart. Now that the post is written, I’m a little embarrassed at its meandering and occasionally mawkish tone, but its completely from the heart. So let me say it one more time: I love Taiwan.

I really hope people take a look with a critical eye at this article featured prominently in Yahoo’s headlines. It’s all about the terrible risks we all face next year because of sophisticated and ruthless hackers. It quotes one expert after another, each offering a grimmer and more sensationalist/alarmist scenario.

Who are these experts? Two are with Trend Micro and one is from McAffee. And what do these companies do? They make a living by scaring us into buying increasingly expensive security solutions. They are the ones who are always quoted when a new virus hits, whipping up as much fear as possible.

Internet threats are real and we all need anti-spyware and virus protection. But this isn’t news. It is pure public relations, and a damned good piece of work at that. The only ones quoted are those who directly and significantly profit with every new nervous reader. It’s a coup, especially with it landing in the little headlines box on Yahoo’s home page. As journalism, however, it truly sucks. Never is it mentioned that those quoted stand to gain by the perception of cyberthreats. There is no balance anywhere. I especially liked this quote:

“The attacks are becoming more sophisticated,” said Dave Rand of Internet security firm Trend Micro. “It’s all about making money. And they’re making a lot of it,” he told Reuters.

Yes, they certainly are. Reuters should be embarrassed.