Attacking by oblique means and stealthy feints since 2007
I stuck my head into the not-yet-opened Hong Kong Fatburger this afternoon and had a brief chat with some obvious non-locals with an authoritative look who informed that the shop should open by Saturday November 8th. The inside of the shop has really filled out and it looks basically finished.
Calendar circled, fasting begun.
UPDATE: Given that the shop is now open, the Drudge-style siren has been removed.
ODB recently asked why the Chinese spacewalk was getting so much coverage. As usual, a quick look at the China Daily homepage provides the answer:
Aside from the Miss Switzerland pageant, it was clearly the top story of the weekend!
I was curious about the ”763 batches of Chinese milk found chemical free” link, however, so I searched the site for the keyword “milk”. Turns out there has been a lot of news about milk in the past couple of weeks. It’s all terribly complicated, and I’m still sorting out the facts. But these articles, all taken from China Daily and Xinhua, have been particularly helpful:
Here’s a fascinating story from Caijing about alleged money transfers to terrorist groups through Bank of China accounts:
More than 100 terror victims filed a class action lawsuit August 21 against the Los Angeles branch of Bank of China (BOC) for allowing millions of dollars to be wired by Hamas and the Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ). Hamas and PIJ are designated terrorist organizations by the U.S. government, and such wire transfers are a crime under American law…
The plaintiffs allege that beginning in 2003, BOC executed dozens of wire transfers for the Hamas and PIJ totaling several million dollars. These dollar transfers were initiated by PIJ and Hamas leadership in Iran and Syria, were processed through BOC’s branches in the United States, and were sent on to a BOC account operated by a senior operative of the Hamas and PIJ in southern China’s Guangzhou City. If the accusation is true, BOC would have facilitated the funding of terrorist activities.
In 2005, Israel counter-terrorism officers met with officials from the Chinese Ministry of Public Security and BOC regarding these wire transfers. Despite Israeli warnings, BOC persisted in wiring funds for Hamas and PIJ.
If true, this is another example of how China’s “internal affairs” (in this case, corruption and lack of oversight) inevitably become external problems that affect the rest of the world.
Have you ever noticed the “help wanted” signs in China, you know, the ones that say “wanted, female, ages 18-25″? These jobs invariably involve minor clerical or waitress type work. It’s more important that she be a certain height (often 160cm) than to have any formal schooling certificates.
Today I had lunch at the “Steak & Eggs” diner in Shanghai (the American-run restaurant that started in Beijing). There was a new waitress who was very polite, decent, and – most amazing for China – she hustled. I mean, she really moved swiftly around the two story dining room. Judging by her face she had to be at least 35 (though from behind she could pass for 22, ohhh Chinese women…). The main point was not how attentive she was, but that she was “old” for this line of work. It helps that the owners are an American-Chinese mix, I believe, and that they themselves are late middle age. That is, we’d expect less age discrimination in this set up. But it led me to come here to ask what has crossed my mind from time to time. What do these girls do after they hit 28 or so and leave their original job? Obviously some enter the throes of motherhood and homemaker, but what about the rest? What does a woman in China do who has no education beyond high school, doesn’t know English, and doesn’t have tangible job skills?
NATOR ADDS: Hotpoter kind of said it in the comments, but I’ll be more specific: they get married. An American woman in a similar situation would probably think marriage is her best option; the typical Chinese woman will be a lot poorer and thus more likely to look to marriage. Also, China remains very conservative about certain things, and marriage is one of them. (Though I’d add with more emphasis on “till death do us part” and less on ”to love and to cherish”.) And finally, Chinese women are increasingly outnumbered due to the combination of the one child policy and a traditional preference for males. More than ever before, China’s women will be able to “marry up”. So I think Hotpoter’s point is valid. Most of these women are going to want to get married, and they will get married, and they’ll have a better (financial) life than before.
I’m far more worried about China’s men with little education. What will these men–and there are already tens of millions of them–do when they get older and can’t even find a wife?
John McCain says that the US has 21 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, and that exploration and drilling should be opened up in areas where a moratorium restricts disallows it (Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)). This is one of the ways he would respond to high energy prices in the US.
Well, it wouldn’t. And it’s a bad idea.
Bloomberg reported in January ‘08 that worldwide oil consumption is 88 million barrels a day. If you accept the rough math and oversimplification, and you’ll see that this means the US’ proven reserves could supply the world’s need for all of about 8 months.
Does that sound like a lot of oil to you? Does it sound like its worth ripping up ANWR for? And what would it accomplish?
I say it would serve to bring down the price of oil ever so slightly, ever so shortly. And it would the typical politics of ‘give it to me now and pretend there are no consequences.’ And when that oil runs dry quickly, the crisis will be deeper and energy prices higher, and Americans will still need to get off oil. I really hate that about high level American politics. (Obama/Deomcrats are just as bad or worse, his pandering theme this week in Wisconsin is “Change that Works for You“).
If McCain wants to be a leader on this issue, he should be focusing more on how to really bring energy alternatives to market quickly. And if those alternatives can’t be brought about quickly, then I’d like to see the US hold on to ANWR oil for a true rainy day. You know, it could get a lot worse than $4/gallon gas…
Ever think you blogged about something, then went back to find your old post, only to see that you never wrote it? Well, a few months back, a regulation was issued in China that stores could no longer give out plastic bags for free. I was looking for my write up about it then, but it appears that was done in my imagination, or in one of my private love notes to nator. Anyway, the reason is because the cheap flimsy bags clog landfills and drains, etc. So now stores must charge for plastic bags, and they may not bundle the price into other merchandise, i.e. there must be a line item on the receipt. It went into effect on June 1, and sure enough, I had to drop 0.2 yuan (US 2.9 cents) for a bag. I think this is a good measure and support it.
NATOR ADDS: If they’re going to force a policy onto merchants, I’d rather they require that the bags be biodegradable.
Everyone knows that China has been under pressure for years, led by the US Congress, to allow the value of its currency, the RMB or yuan, to appreciate. But the “weak” RMB that hurts American exporters is not likely to be the main issue of concern to American voters. They’ll be more worried about $4/gallon (or higher!) gasoline. And this (Chinese article) is a big reason why. China has price controls on diesel and other fuels, such that there is now an RMB6000 (US$870) disparity between what a ton of diesel goes for in China and what it goes for abroad. Chinese oil refiners like Sinopec are getting slammed, since their costs are rising but the sale price of fuel is controlled by the Chinese government. The government is responding with measures to import more oil to help ease pressures.
Why does China control prices? Well, it’s obviously a good way to spur growth, and it’s been working as the country has been growing at 10%+ for over a decade. It’s also a way to over pollute the country and congest the roads. And it’s contributing to the skyrocketing oil prices worldwide, since 25% of the world’s population, the Chinese, are paying a lot less for the oil they use than everyone else.
SHTig adds (5/28 6:50pm PRC time): Mul called to ask what this means, and nator commented below also asking for clarity. To answer – yes, China buys oil on world markets at prevailing prices. But then, when that oil is sold domestically it is done so at a price lower than the prevailing world price. The government forces Sinopec and others to sell it on the cheap, and makes up for this by subsidizing Sinopec with the difference. This process allows everyone in China to get oil in all forms for less than the ‘true’ price, which results in more oil being consumed in China than what should be. We expect consumption to be inversely proportional to price – and when prices are kept artificially low, consumption is artificially high. With oil consumption artificially high in China, China demands more oil from the world markets than it should from an economic prospective and this is what adds to the upward pricing pressure on oil.
If your taxi driver had to pay the prevailing market price for gasoline, your taxi flagfall would be higher than RMB 11 (as it is in Shanghai), and you’d pay more per kilometer. The ride might cost you 50% or 100% more, and at the margins, some people would opt to take a bus instead. Multiply this behavior by 1,300,000,000 and remember that China is the world’s workshop, and we’re talking about a lot less oil being used, if only they – the end users – paid the prevailing price. That would reduce global demand and thus the price of oil as well, ceteris paribus.
Wonder if John McCain and Barack Obama will talk about this when asked what they plan to do about $4/gallon gasoline? If Chinese consumers paid the same price for fuel as everyone else, it might serve to put them on the same competitive playing field as other countries, and it might also serve to increase efficiencies within China.
Robert Vance of the China Teaching Web wrote a well considered article, suggesting that Japan’s generous support in China’s earthquake disaster and recovery may turn the tide in favor of positive Chinese-Japanese relations from hereon. I’d like to think he’s right, but doubt it. This touching picture of a Japanese schoolgirl and accompanying story have not gotten much attention on the Chinese blogosphere, and to the extent comments have been made about this and similar stories, they are virtually silent about Japan, but rather just remarks of “Chinese unite”. This could be interpreted as passive acknowledgement disguised as public ambivalence (a step forward), or as just ignoring the story and wanting to post “go China comments”. But at least I haven’t seen direct Japan bashing as a result. So maybe Mr. Vance’s theory is correct, but I still think the good will of the Japanese government and people during this disaster will be forgotten in China in very short order. Here’s hoping I’m wrong.
There has been regular information online and television about how to adopt an earthquake orphan. According to this explanation, the Adoption Law of the PRC (收养法) clearly stipulates 4 conditions: the adopter must not have any children, must be able to raise and educate the adoptee, must not be ill or deemed medically unfit to adopt a child and must be at least 30 years of age. An additional stipulation is that if an unmarried man wants to adopt a female orphan, the age difference between the two must be 40 years or greater. (Go ahead, imagine all the dirty-old-men scenarios that could exist around this loophole.)
Orphans are Like Puppies
As for the the comments to this explanation, I’m sure they are well intentioned, but to me they read like requests for a free puppy. Post after post there is a similar theme – ‘I think the law should be amended because I already have a child but want another child of his/her age. , or ‘I want to raise a baby, under 2 years old (the same age as my son/daughter, the same/opposite sex as my son/daughter). Here is my email, please contact me”. Many, many of these comments are confessions from mothers saying that Read the rest of this entry »
On April 6 the South China Morning Post offered the most solid confirmation to date (subscription required) of the recent rumors that China visas are going to be harder to obtain until after the Olympics:
Beijing has stopped issuing multiple-entry visas, risking major inconvenience to foreigners who travel to the mainland regularly, especially on business. Hong Kong travel agents say the ban will stay in place until after the Olympic Games.
Travellers are now restricted to single- or double-entry visas valid for 30 days. Multiple-entry visas that have not expired are still valid. . . . Read the rest of this entry »
