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.
A series of strong earthquakes in Hualien County not only caused severe damage in Taiwan, but also revealed that China’s power has permeated everywhere. A Taiwanese woman posted on the Internet that she found clips of the earthquake — which were recorded by the security camera in her home — on the Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu. It is spine-chilling that the problem might be because the security camera was manufactured in China. China has widely collected information, infringed upon public privacy and raised information security threats through various social media platforms, as well as telecommunication and security equipment. Several former TikTok employees revealed
For the incoming Administration of President-elect William Lai (賴清德), successfully deterring a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attack or invasion of democratic Taiwan over his four-year term would be a clear victory. But it could also be a curse, because during those four years the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will grow far stronger. As such, increased vigilance in Washington and Taipei will be needed to ensure that already multiplying CCP threat trends don’t overwhelm Taiwan, the United States, and their democratic allies. One CCP attempt to overwhelm was announced on April 19, 2024, namely that the PLA had erred in combining major missions
At the same time as more than 30 military aircraft were detected near Taiwan — one of the highest daily incursions this year — with some flying as close as 37 nautical miles (69kms) from the northern city of Keelung, China announced a limited and selected relaxation of restrictions on Taiwanese agricultural exports and tourism, upon receiving a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) delegation led by KMT legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅崑萁). This demonstrates the two-faced gimmick of China’s “united front” strategy. Despite the strongest earthquake to hit the nation in 25 years striking Hualien on April 3, which caused
The Constitutional Court on Tuesday last week held a debate over the constitutionality of the death penalty. The issue of the retention or abolition of the death penalty often involves the conceptual aspects of social values and even religious philosophies. As it is written in The Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay, the government’s policy is often a choice between the lesser of two evils or the greater of two goods, and it is impossible to be perfect. Today’s controversy over the retention or abolition of the death penalty can be viewed in the same way. UNACCEPTABLE Viewing the