A few days after Sept. 11, 2001, a Chinese businessman was interviewed about the events of that day. In broken English, he said something along the lines of, "9/11 bad, but good for business."
The man, a flag manufacturer, was making US flags that US citizens were clamoring to display after the attack on their country. His remark was innocent enough and didn't get much attention. Even though China had a global presence, it still seemed distant and mysterious, and it's opinion on matters of importance to US policymakers was not considered crucial.
That all changed two months later, when China joined the WTO. Some observers greeted this development with exuberance, others with alarm and yet others with casual curiosity. Regardless, it seemed to confirm what many had quietly been saying since the early 1990s: China had stepped onto the world stage.
Fast forward to this year: Everybody is intensely curious about China and almost everybody in the West -- especially in the US -- is concerned. Why? Because of CNN's Lou Dobbs. Well, not really. But he does talk about one of the US' biggest fears: that jobs are going to China.
The rationale for this concern is pretty straightforward. Basic economics says that if a company wants to make a buck, it should go abroad in search of the lowest wages. China has an abundance of cheap labor, the argument goes, so any multinational corporation that wants to stay in the game will locate some or all of its production processes there.
If that's all there was to it, China would never have to worry. But it is concerned right now -- for the first time, foreign investment in its manufacturing sector is starting to decrease. Why? It's because the line of logic just noted oversimplifies corporate mentality. Yes, in the short-run, a company might beat out its competitor by "racing to the bottom."
In the long-run, though, if it doesn't abide by labor regulations, adhere to environmental standards and invest in human capital -- that is, if it doesn't create those conditions in which workers can be productive on a continuous basis -- it'll lose.
And that's why companies are starting to withdraw their investments from China. Labor rights are minimal, hasty urbanization has poisoned its water and air and, perhaps more importantly, its work force is not all that it's cracked up to be.
Paradoxically, China faces a severe labor shortage. A fascinating new book, Fast Boat to China, shows how Chinese workers, fed up with mistreatment and lacking incentives to stay put, increasingly go "job hopping." Many employers are struggling to find and retain workers.
An interesting and important side note: Chinese engineers are not as competitive as some would suggest. Few know English or are business savvy and the vast majority are trained in schools where theory is favored over application. The result? According to the McKinsey Global Institute, only 10 percent of them can compete globally.
Given that China has been able to sustain a growth rate of 9 percent a year for the past two decades, why should this matter now? Simply, because China has accrued just about every possible benefit that it can from manufacturing (the industry that's anchored its growth since the 1970s) and has no choice but to look elsewhere for growth. It's no wonder that Beijing is suddenly stressing the importance of innovation.
People who worry that China is soon going to replace the US as the world's capitalist hub should remember that, from 1950 to 2000, 50 percent of US growth came from innovation.
The point? China has got a lot of work to do.
Ali Suhail Wyne is a student at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry