Chapter 4 3. Zakaria's problem

Fareed Zakaria (Fareed Zakaria) is a well-known current affairs commentator in the United States and the host of the US cable ace program "Fareed Zakaria GPS".He has a unique perspective and sharp words. On December 3, 2013, at the last discussion meeting of the Beijing Conference of the 21st Century Council, he asked me a rather sharp question: "You say that the Western democratic system is not suitable for China, but why is it not suitable for China? Almost all Asian countries have adopted the Western system?" I asked the chairman of the meeting, should I answer this question in detail or briefly?The chairman of the meeting said that it could only be one minute, because the meeting had already exceeded the time limit by a quarter of an hour.I said: "I only need half a minute, that is, in one sentence: In the past 20 years, China's achievements have surpassed the sum of the achievements of other Asian countries. Behind it is that China's system is relatively successful, so we are confident in the system. We welcome The political system competition, including the competition with the American political system.” Regarding the comparison and transcendence of the Chinese and American systems, I plan to discuss in detail in Chapter 3, and here I only talk about China’s “catch-up” from the perspective of international comparison.

Whether we talk about "catching up" or "surpassing", we need to make some horizontal international comparisons to see and explain clearly.Over the past 20 years, the number of people we have eradicated from poverty, the number of people we have newly added to the middle class, and our contribution to world economic growth have indeed exceeded the sum of the achievements of other Asian countries.We can also compare China's achievements with other countries in the world on a larger scale.We might as well divide countries in the world into three categories: developing countries, countries with economies in transition, and developed countries, and then conduct cross-border international comparisons.

First, compare it with other developing countries.The biggest challenge facing developing countries is poverty eradication. China's achievements in poverty eradication surpass the sum of the achievements of other developing countries.Over the past 30 years, 80% of the world's poverty alleviation has been achieved in China.World Bank President Jim Yong Kim said on April 19, 2013: "In the past few decades, one of the main driving forces for the great achievements in global poverty reduction has been China. China has successfully helped 600 million people out of poverty." Bill Gates In April 2013, at the Boao Forum, China’s poverty alleviation experience was evaluated as follows: In just 30 years, China helped about 600 million people get rid of poverty.In the past 20 years, China's grain productivity has increased by 2.6% per year, farmers' income has increased by 15 times, and China has become the first country to achieve the United Nations Millennium Development Goals and halve the proportion of poor people.In addition, China now has the most smartphones in the world, and its technological breakthroughs can help the poorest people in other parts of the world live healthier and more dignified lives.He very much hopes to use China's experience and intelligence to help Africa get rid of poverty.

Some people say that although we have made great achievements in poverty alleviation, we still have hundreds of millions of poor people, so we cannot be complacent.I agree with this statement. Our poverty alleviation is still at a low level in many places, but we must also see that from a global perspective, our achievements are still very remarkable. In November 2011, the Central Poverty Alleviation and Development Work Conference made a decision to set the per capita net income of farmers at 2,300 yuan (approximately US$380) as the new national poverty alleviation standard. The number has increased to more than 90 million now. With the development of China's economy, poverty alleviation standards will continue to increase, so that more low-income people can be included in the scope of state and social assistance.But the situation in China is very special. We are a socialist country, and we are one of the few countries in the world that have carried out land reform. Today our farmers have land and houses.If we count not just monetized income, but also the land and property that Chinese farmers actually own, the situation will be completely different.If we convert the land and real estate of farmers in China's impoverished areas into currency, then in my own judgment, many farmers in our impoverished areas, if placed in India, Indonesia, and most African countries, would belong to the middle class.I once met an Indonesian scholar who visited poverty-stricken areas in Guizhou. He said that your poverty is a completely different concept from ours. In addition to having their own houses, your poor people also eat three dishes and one soup. The impoverished population has no food to eat and no house to live in.I myself have always advocated that we should formulate standards based on China's national conditions and conditions. Using standards formulated by the West or international organizations based on Western theories will often lead to large deviations in horizontal international comparisons.Of course, the Chinese have a tradition of strict self-discipline. Our culture is characterized by seven points and only three points. This makes our rise very determined. From this perspective, modesty is not a bad thing at all.

Second, compare it with countries with economies in transition.Countries in transition generally refer to countries that have shifted from a centrally planned economy to a market economy, including China, the former Soviet Union and its various republics, as well as former socialist countries in Central and Eastern Europe.This concept is not very comprehensive, especially it cannot accurately summarize China's socialist market economic system, but for the convenience of discussion, we will borrow this concept that is widely used in the world.Compared with these countries, I can also say that China's achievements over the past 30 years have surpassed the sum of the achievements of all other countries with economies in transition.A simple calculation method is the multiple of economic growth. In the 30 years from 1979 to 2009, China’s economy increased by about 18 times, while in the same period of time, the economic growth of the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe was about doubled. Of course, Most transition economies start from a higher starting point than China.Before the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the economic scale was larger than that of China, but now the scale of the Chinese economy is more than four times that of Russia, and the economic structure of China has undergone earth-shaking changes: most industries in China have grown from scratch or grown from small to large. Rapid development, while Russia's economic structure is still similar to that before the disintegration of the Soviet Union, and what can be sold is military industry and energy.

In the past two or three decades, almost all other countries in transition have followed this path: first, the privatization-based "shock therapy", resulting in a sharp decline in the economy, and then a slow recovery, and then unfortunately caught up with the United States. triggered the financial crisis and the debt crisis in Europe.Almost all Eastern European countries immediately fell into serious fiscal deficits, especially Romania, Bulgaria and the Baltic countries, and the sovereign credit ratings of many countries were downgraded to junk status.The total external debt of Central and Eastern European countries is about 1.7 trillion US dollars, which exceeds the sum of the GDP of the region. So far, most Central and Eastern European countries have not recovered from the crisis. Therefore, when China extended a helping hand, the China-Central and Eastern European countries were established Leaders meet regularly, and are willing to provide up to 10 billion US dollars in special loans and a package of large-scale project cooperation (including cooperation in the fields of high-speed rail, nuclear power, finance, logistics, etc.). China's initiative was immediately warmly welcomed by Central and Eastern European countries.Leaders of the 16 Central and Eastern European countries who participated in the 2013 China-Central and Eastern European Summit jointly stated: "Central and Eastern European countries cherish the traditional friendship with China, admire China's development achievements, and believe that China's further expansion of reform and opening up will open up broader prospects for bilateral cooperation. "

The third category is developed countries.Although we have made great progress, when it comes to developed countries, many people's gut reaction is that we are still far behind.I have lived in Switzerland and France for more than 20 years and visited all developed countries. I think we can compare in many aspects.I pointed out in the book "China Shock" that China has formed a "quasi-developed plate" with a population of about 300 million, which is already comparable to that of the United States. Such a large population size must have a global impact.Behind this sector is a vibrant "emerging economy sector" with a larger population. These two sectors have formed a high degree of benign interaction, achieving a situation where 1+1 is greater than 2. This is the rapid rise of China. It has provided a strong and continuous internal impetus for China to "surpass" the West.

In early 2011, I had a conversation about the Chinese model with Theo Sommer, the founder and editor-in-chief of the German magazine Die Zeit in Hamburg.He said that he just came back from Shanghai and felt that Shanghai is more and more like New York. Does it mean that there is no Chinese model, only the American model.I said that you may not have looked carefully enough. If you observe carefully, you will find that Shanghai has surpassed New York in many aspects.Shanghai's hardware surpasses that of New York in an all-round way, whether it is high-speed rail, subway, airport, dock or even many commercial facilities.What's more important is the key indicators of some software, such as life expectancy-Shanghai is 82 years old, 3 years higher than New York; infant mortality rate-Shanghai is lower than New York; social security is better in Shanghai than New York-girls at night You can take a walk in the street at 12 o'clock.In other words, what I want to tell this German scholar is that our vision has gone beyond the American model and the Western model.We have learned a lot from the West, we are still learning now, and we will continue to learn in the future, but our vision has indeed gone beyond the Western model.In a sense, we are exploring the political, economic, social, and legal systems of the next generation, and China's "developed plate" is playing a leading role in this regard.

At the end of 2012, the Kunshan Municipal Government of Jiangsu Province invited me to participate in a discussion to discuss the development level of Kunshan.The goal proposed by Jiangsu Province is to take the lead in basically realizing socialist modernization in China, and Kunshan is the first of the top 100 counties in China. Kunshan also proposed to take the lead in basically realizing socialist modernization in Jiangsu Province.We have read a lot of materials on Kunshan’s economic and social development, and also visited Kunshan’s government departments, schools, communities and enterprises, and then sat down to discuss. I said that whether it is Kunshan or Shanghai, its overall development and governance level must exceed Italy.

Some people say that you use the "block interpretation method", but the whole world uses the "per capita interpretation method", so you can't use it?I said that the "per capita interpretation method" must be used, of course it can be used, but if you want to accurately judge China's real development level and the real living standard of the people, it is best to consider the following three points: First, use "purchasing power parity" (PPP) The method used to calculate the GDP of China and other countries and then compare them is more realistic than the figures converted from official exchange rates.The second is to incorporate "average life expectancy" because it is a comprehensive indicator that can best reflect a country's quality of life and health. China's average life expectancy reached 75 years in 2012, much higher than other developing countries. The "per capita life expectancy" of China's developed sectors is comparable to that of the United States. The average life expectancy of Shanghai, Beijing and other cities is higher than that of New York, and New York is the place with the highest life expectancy in the United States.The third is to use the method of "household net worth" to calculate the actual wealth of Chinese people, because most Chinese people have their own real estate today, and they have actually experienced a wealth revolution.Although many Chinese complain that housing prices are too high, the lowest estimate of China’s urban home ownership rate is over 80%, and that in rural areas is close to 100%. That is to say, China’s home ownership rate today has surpassed that of all Western countries.Nowadays, many young people cannot afford houses, but almost all of their parents already own houses, and these houses will be passed on to their children in the future, so these young people are no longer poor in this sense.Like other issues, on China’s housing issue, I advocate first affirming and then improving, that is, first affirming my own great achievements, and then confidently solving existing problems. China’s problems are clearly explained, and China’s problems have untie.

I often take taxis in Shanghai and chat with taxi drivers. Almost everyone over the age of 40 has a house. I estimate that they have an average of 1.5 houses per person, and their net assets are at least 2 million yuan, or even 3 million yuan. % of Americans are richer than 50% of Europeans, and a lot richer.The median household net worth in the euro zone countries is 109,000 euros (according to the statistics of the European Central Bank in 2013), which is approximately equal to 920,000 yuan. The United States is far from reaching this level.Despite this, taxi drivers in Shanghai still generally consider themselves a vulnerable group.In short, if the "household net worth" method is used to include the real estate of Chinese people, many rankings about China will undergo huge changes.Regarding the comparison of "household net worth" between China and the United States, I will discuss in detail below. Most international economic institutions now tend to believe that even at the official exchange rate, the size of the Chinese economy should surpass that of the United States within about 10 years.Some people say that this is nothing special, because China's population is four times that of the United States, so China's per capita GDP will still be only 1/4 of that of the United States.The key is the huge change in economic aggregate and comprehensive national strength, and this change may be irreversible, all of which will profoundly change the future of the world.In addition, I personally estimate that by that time, the number of Chinese middle class should be about twice that of the US population.I use an economic standard acceptable to both Americans and Europeans to define the middle class—because there is no uniform standard for the middle class in the world—my economic standard is a relatively stable job, plus a set of property rights Housing, including all "housing slaves", because the proportion of housing slaves in the United States and Europe is higher than that in China.In the West, if a bank can give you a mortgage, it is an affirmation of your middle-class status.I estimate that in ten years, the number of middle class in China will reach more than 600 million, while the population of the United States is more than 300 million.At that time, the situation will change dramatically.The West today is still unwilling to recognize the Chinese model, the revolutionary significance of the new China in 1949, the role of the Chinese Communist Party, and China’s political system. This has nothing to do with it. We have patience.But at that point, if you still don't acknowledge all this, you can't explain China's success.Of course, at that point, we don't care if you admit it or not.Let's be honest, we don't even care now.Conversely, at that time, we will have to question your system. In fact, we should question it today. Is your American democracy considered a democracy?Is it the "money owner"?

---

Notes: