this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2024

294 points (98.0% liked)

World News

39046 readers

2483 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

quinten@lemmy.world

NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

lemmyAtom@lemmy.world

FlyingSquid@lemmy.world

294

Migrant workers who helped build modern China have scant or no pensions, and can't retire (apnews.com)

submitted 7 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

At 53, Guan Junling is too old to get hired at factories anymore. But for migrant workers like her, not working is not an option.

For decades, they have come from farming villages to find work in the cities. Toiling in sweatshops and building apartment complexes they could never afford to live in, they played a vital role in China’s transformation into an economic powerhouse.

As they grow older, the first generation of migrant workers is struggling to find jobs in a slowing economy. Many are financially strapped, so they have to keep looking.

“There is no such thing as a ‘retirement’ or ‘pensions’ for rural people. You can only rely on yourself and work,” Guan said. “When can you stop working? It’s really not until you have to lie in bed and you can’t do anything.”

She now relies on housecleaning gigs, working long days to squirrel away a little money in case of a health emergency. Migrant workers can get subsidized health care in their hometowns, but they have little or no coverage elsewhere. If Guan needs to go to hospital in Beijing, she has to pay out of pocket.

As China’s population ages, so are its migrant workers. About 85 million were over 50 in 2022, the latest year for which data is available, accounting for 29% of all migrant workers and up from 15% a decade earlier. With limited or no pensions and health insurance, they need to keep working.

top 34 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Joncash2@lemmy.ml 62 points 7 months ago (2 children)

This makes me question what it takes to be a super power. Between this and the leading cause of US bankruptcies being medical related, it's almost as if super powers can only be super powers if they don't give any of their citizens healthcare. It's as if working their citizens to death is the only way for them to maintain their hedgemony.

[–] snooggums@midwest.social 45 points 7 months ago

High levels of growth can be had by extracting as much as possible out of the working population and then not supporting those that are discarded when they have been tapped dry. That is why imperial countries like the Romans, the US, and China can have massive growth at the expense of slaves and immigrant work.

The modern world setting expectations of taking care of the elderly means the US and China will probably decline faster than Rome once the general population pushes back on the exploitation again, then it will likely end up as a roller coaster of growth and decline.

[+] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world -30 points 7 months ago (4 children)

I think there is a disconnect between classical superpowers and modern superpowers. Modern nations use the US and Chinese model of using people as a resource to build as fast as possible with minimal ethics. Classical superpowers, like European nations, use a slow growth and inclusive model that includes a lot of people but takes hundreds of years to establish.

Modern superpowers use capitalism. Classical use a more socially inclusive approach.

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 31 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Is there a bad history community on Lemmy? If so, someone should crosspost this comment.

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No, I think what they are trying to say is that European nation building runs further back so they have more socialized services or something like that. I have no idea.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 13 points 7 months ago

Man just ignored the entire colonial and industrialization period, simple as that.

[–] Bipta@kbin.social 30 points 7 months ago

This is a whitewashing of history.

[–] Sunforged@lemmy.ml 24 points 7 months ago

Uh, I'm gonna have to stop you. Which nations used an inclusive model?

[–] rar@discuss.online 10 points 7 months ago

Ah yes, let's disregard centuries of occupation accompanied by brutal exploitation of the local population, dismantling and dismemberment of native social hierarchy and 'population transfer' for the benefit of the few white man and their collaborators. But hey, they built churches and trains and shit! Let's conveniently forget how countries that barely got their independence had their chance at economical and political sovereignty hijacked from the same colonial masters now dressed in business suit.

Just go fuck yourself.

[–] Bipta@kbin.social 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

If only they had capitalism. /s

[+] TheFonz@lemmy.world -18 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

Do you think China runs a ...capitalist economy? Last I checked, lack of pensions is not an issue in the US.

Edit: for all the triggered ml users: Socialist market economy

China is absolutely not a free capitalist country and I don't know where you guys get this idea. Last I checked, the western capitalist economies do not have governments that set five year plans and funnel economic development into distinct economic sectors.

2nd Edit: I'm not saying China is a socialist country in the classic sense. I'm using terms used by contemporary economists in terms of how they classify china's economy. While a big chunk of china's economy is private the government still plays a pivotal role in planning certain aspects of the economy.

3rd edit: to everyone downvoting, please tell me with a straight face that the entire private sector in China runs completely free of all interference from any governmental actors? Or maybe provide a counter to the general consensus among current economists. Is there something you know that they don't? 😐

4th edit: State Owned Enterprises in china own 22% of the labor force (as recently as 2010). In addition to state owned enterprises, also know as SOEs, the state dips its toes in hybrid business:

They often look and behave like private enterprises, but their ownership pattern may involve a considerable government stake. To complicate matters further, in the official statistics, they may be counted either in the state-owned or in the private sector, -Witt, 2010

[–] Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works 16 points 7 months ago (1 children)

China is literally capitalist my guy.

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world -5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

China is absolutely not a capitalist economy in the same manner most western nations are, and anyone disagreeing is just misinformed. China is a mixed socialist market economy with the government directing development towards certain sectors. Hence why they built a national high speed rail system that is largely unused and other similar projects. That being said, there is no reason they couldn't implement a pension system.

[–] stellargmite@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Go check it out yourself dude. My experience is quite different to what is so often reported - such as your point about the high speed rail. The complaints the people using it make are valid (its very experience for example) but it is far from unused. Getting on the things are almost always a gladatorial survival experience, and there are people standing (or sitting on their bags) in the aisles. All anecdotal of course. I guess your point is to do with the absolute control the state (likes to think it) has, including with large vanity engineering projects, the zero rule of law, loose and unfair regulation if any, zero workers rights and so in. All things which give most shareholders of multinationals a huge case of genital envy. The place is beyond hyper consumeristic. None of our concepts or categories apply neatly, because the place , much like the world, is massive, complex, and diverse, with many challenges. If anything I think of it as authoritarian capitalism. True socialist concepts are long gone in actual practice there.

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Thanks for sharing your experience. This jives a lot with what I've also heard. When I use the word "socialism" I'm not speaking from a leninist theory point but rather the way contemporary economists use to describe planned economies. I don't think China is 'socialist' in the classical sense. I'm speaking strictly through economic theory and how the state operates through SOEs (state owned enterprises) and hybrid business partnerships between the state and the private sector. That's all 🙂

[–] stellargmite@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Understood . Pretty fascinating as a (many times) visitor. But glad its somewhere I could leave for greener pastures. Many there wish they could do the same I’m sure.

[–] boredtortoise@lemm.ee 6 points 7 months ago

China is the goal capitalists elsewhere try to achieve

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

401k! = pension.

Also with the rise in companies going to contractors instead of full time staff there's a not even a guarantee you'll get a 401k

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Is social security not around any more?

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Not a pension either

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Oh? What is it? What should the first google results tell me?

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 7 months ago

That it's an insurance program

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

It's not adequate to live on that alone. Also it's projected to not have enough money in the future.

Also people who have 401ks often find it hard to contribute a lot of money to it.

There are all kinds of issues with retirement in America already. You act like we are all living it up over here lol.

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 7 months ago

Would only run out of money because of limits to how much is taxed and the Republicans wanting to be able to raid it more

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world -1 points 7 months ago

Oh wow. Did I ever claim SS was adequate? You guys here reaching trying to ascribe all kinds of things to me that I did not say. Have a discussion. Listen to other people.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

china hasn't been socialist since the 70s when the ruling party rejected it

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I'm not calling it socialist in the classical sense. Yes, there was a big shift in 78 to open up the markets to western economies and privatize heavily. I'm only expressing myself according to the way contemporary economists classify china. The truth is the government still plays a pivotal role in directing certain aspects of the economy. That's why they were able to build some of the biggest infrastructure projects in the last century. There are entire cities that were built up in days.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 7 months ago

fair point!

[+] phoneymouse@lemmy.world -6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

So much for communism

Edit: lotta Chinese “communists” on here

[–] Psychodelic@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Do you also think the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is democratic or that the National Socialist German Workers' Party was a socialist party in support of workers? lol

[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No but China is run by the communist party. I would’ve thought an organization like that would have had a plan for ensuring everyone can retire. That is the point of my comment.. these Chinese do not seem like true communists. But, no one likes to hear that on Lemmy because everyone licks the boots of Xi apparently.

[–] Psychodelic@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That's a lot to unpack/reply to. lol

All I'm saying is I don't think you should use China as metric for communism. Again, that'd be like calling North Korea democratic simply because they named themselves that.

I'm not a communist, but I think I understand it enough to say China isn't communist. And when I say China isn't communist, I'm saying the policies their government implements are not founded in communist political ideology, which again means something and has been studied by people for a really long time.

[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

I’m not using China as a metric for communism, I’m calling out that Chinese communism is not achieving the goals of what I think a communist country would be trying to achieve. I don’t think we disagree.