The Sadness of a 1000 Yuan Salary! - China DOS Union Forum

Hearing from people who visited Britain in the past two years: Different from China, in Britain, people hardly ever talk about topics like how to make money and get rich. The most frequently talked - about word among people is "welfare". I know that Nordic countries are called "welfare states". In fact, in Western Europe, especially Britain, the cradle of capitalism, people's concerns are no longer the old problems of "capitalism", no longer labor - capital problems, wealth - poverty problems, nor the theory of surplus value and so on. Instead, it is the topic that originally seemed to belong to "socialism" — welfare.

People demand welfare from the government.

Since the government asks for votes from the people, then "people's welfare" is the duty of the government.

The "bourgeois states" in the West are completely opposite to the "socialist government" in China.

It is really a world - turning and great change of the times. Although the textbooks in our country about Western countries are basically still the same, in fact, they are completely different from what the Chinese think. I heard that in the rich small countries in northwestern Europe, people have no desire to get rich at all. It is reported that Chinese people asked them there: Don't you want to earn more money? They even asked in surprise: What do I need money for?

Listen, they actually said: What do I need money for!

This is what we Chinese can't understand at all.

It is said that they answered: Our living standard is very high, we lack nothing, education and medical care are free, houses are our own, neighborhood relations are very harmonious and so on. If there is some surplus in wages, we will travel abroad and spend the money.

It seems that people in Northern Europe really have no worry about freezing and starving, no threat of hunger, no worry about poverty. What kind of life is this? I really can't think of it. Is it the so - called "communist society" that the Chinese often talked about before?

So in my opinion, welfare can be understood as "people's happiness"; but in the eyes of Chinese economists, it can also be understood as inefficiency, "iron rice bowl", the government's income not covering its expenses, the country being unable to get on...

Not long ago, the French government introduced the "New Labor Law". Due to the strong resistance of trade unions and student unions, the French government, which was initially stubborn, finally withdrew this bill. The people won. A few minutes later, He Liangliang from Phoenix TV in Hong Kong immediately commented: There is no winner in this case in France. Withdrawing the "New Labor Law" will still mean "eating the iron rice bowl", so the economy of France will have no competitiveness and so on.

This is the voice of China's "mainstream economists".

In our country, China is opposite to Western European and North American countries. At present, it has become a country with no people's welfare at all. Except for being related to "welfare" a little bit in disaster relief, the national financial revenue can hardly find any other major expenditures related to people's welfare. For compulsory education, people have to pay tuition fees (now it is said that 9 - year primary and secondary school education will be free, let's wait and see; I think, definitely, primary and secondary schools all over the country will not stop charging fees. The little money given by the state is not enough for the principals and teachers who have been used to spending lavishly nowadays?); for medical care, it is shouted that people's burden will be lightened, but after two years of "things flowing like water and flowers fading away", everything is still the same; welfare housing distribution has long been gone; the state also has no low - cost rental housing, which shows that it is not willing to take out any money to solve the housing welfare of newly employed people; for urban transportation, there are no welfare subsidies either; the welfare of storing Chinese cabbages in winter and so on has certainly long been gone; even for the heating problem in northern cities, the state is going to have no welfare expenditure at all, and the heating cost provided by the heating company is surprisingly high, which is dozens of times higher than the cost of people heating with coal stoves. Does this conform to economic laws? No matter! It seems that the state just wants to save any expenses for "welfare"!

I don't know what the state saves these money for?

Yes, for economic construction, for projects, for high - rise buildings...

With more projects, "a small number of people" will get rich! And the rich people can enjoy high - rise buildings and drive sports cars on the wide expressways. How meaningful it is!

How face - saving China's "reform" must be!

For a society, the biggest problem is that if there is no social welfare expenditure of the government, the life of the poor will be very difficult. This is inhumane, and the society will lose stability because of this. Obviously, people who are completely destitute are very likely to go astray. And if a large number of people who lose their jobs, lose their land and lose their sources of livelihood exist and do not get enough relief and welfare, the prospect can only be that the world will be in great chaos.

I think that the instability in China stems from the fact that the people do not get any welfare.

Some Chinese people may be unconvinced and say that what you said is the situation in Europe. And the ideal of Chinese people is the United States. Americans pursue getting rich, just like Chinese people.

But what is the US government like? It is reported that:

In the United States, the primary duty of the government is to provide safety guarantees for the labor - disabled and the unemployed, to provide medical care for the elderly and the poor, and to provide simple housing and appropriate food for the poor. The US government also spends the most money on social security, welfare and related social undertakings. The second largest expenditure of the government is the defense expenditure. The third is the education expenditure.

So, if we still take "welfare" as a marker of "socialism" as before, we will find that:

Even the United States does not have as little as China's "socialism" today.

In the United States, on the one hand, local governments take care of the poor, and on the other hand, churches and the rich all over the country also vigorously hold charity undertakings. In this way, all aspects are making efforts, and the wealth - poverty problem in the United States is not as acute as in China at all.

In China, on the contrary, the government is constantly canceling various welfare benefits in the name of "reform"; together with them, the rich people in China even claim that they will not give anything to the poor! They seem arrogant and bold.

Many people think that China is socialist, and it is almost the only genuine socialism in the world. So, no matter how China does it, it is socialism; no matter how foreigners do it, it is capitalism! This is actually a great misunderstanding.

So, a friend who has lived in the United States for nearly 30 years said to me: In the world, others are "socialist", only China is not!

So, I think, with the current situation of welfare in China, it is strange that China can be stable!

Floor1　Macadd	Posted 2006-09-17 22:12
高级用户　Posts 168　Credits 638
Monthly salary is 1000, 300 for meals 200 for socializing, 100 for reading and buying pirated DVDs. Clothes, shoes and socks add up to a bunch average 50吧 Smoke "Daji" cigarettes at 2 yuan per pack, half a pack per day Subtract another 30, this 30 can be offset by manuscript fees Still have 350 left to save, 4200 a year Can pay the down payment of a commercial housing in 15 years If the housing price goes up, it will take 20 years In 20 years, if the salary increases a bit, subtract 3 years If sick, have to add 5 years Cold and fever, Contac 10 yuan, Ganmae 12 Penicillin drip 50 Inevitable natural and man-made disasters and misfortunes, 1 insurance order Add another 5 years After 27 years, move into the new home, do not decorate for the time being Monthly loan repayment 1000, must be married by then This 1000 is counted as the wife's. Socializing expenses reduced from 200 to 50 Meals increased from 300 to 500. Must not have children Sell super insurance condoms 50, once failed Artificial abortion 450, if born Monthly milk powder 200, tuition fees 100 after not drinking milk Tuition fees 300, 500, 3000, 5000... If it's a son, don't consider his house If it's a daughter, have to save dowry from the full moon In fact, now, deduct monthly Rent 200, utilities 50 Only 100 can be added to the passbook. And The condition for increase is All unmarried friends must not get married All married friends must not have children All families with children Must not have any mishaps All roads can only be walked, even if Ride a bicycle, can't pump air outside Only then can the number of 1200 per year be maintained And blood pressure rises slowly 10 years 12000, 50 years 60000 60000 is the savings for a lifetime Although for someone, it's just half a car One overseas trip, two plasma TVs Except for the ashes box 200, cremation fee 400 Use the remaining 56000 to buy a piece of wasteland Bury the pain of a lifetime deeply! If the monthly income is 600, then... the ashes box can be saved, pick up a mooncake box left by a rich person, it should be able to hold it too!

Floor3　雨露	Posted 2006-11-30 01:44
管理员　Posts 2,601　Credits 6,215
The person upstairs is like the richest person on Earth, haha! Do you also have this kind of feeling?

Floor4　hnpgj	Posted 2006-12-24 22:18
初级用户　Posts 40　Credits 79
What the hell are you grieving about? I haven't even reached 1000 yet. Depressed.

Floor5　ccwan	Posted 2006-12-24 22:23
金牌会员　Posts 1,160　Credits 2,725　From 河北廊坊
Actually, you haven't noticed yet. There's a calculation error in the first floor: 60000 is the savings for a lifetime Although for someone, it's just half a car One overseas trip, two plasma TVs Except for the 200 for the urn and 400 for the cremation fee Please buy a piece of wasteland with the remaining 56000 60000 - 200 - 400 = 56000???

Floor6　lanjingyun	Posted 2006-12-24 22:44
初级用户　Posts 43　Credits 184　From 福建
I lost my job. Now I don't even have a 1-yuan salary. Pitiful

Floor2　zhoushijie	Posted 2006-11-30 01:22
高级用户　Posts 160　Credits 682

Floor7　DOSforever	Posted 2006-12-25 09:33
金牌会员　Posts 2,239　Credits 4,639
Hearing from people who visited Britain in the past two years: Different from China, in Britain, people hardly ever talk about topics like how to make money and get rich. The most frequently talked - about word among people is "welfare". I know that Nordic countries are called "welfare states". In fact, in Western Europe, especially Britain, the cradle of capitalism, people's concerns are no longer the old problems of "capitalism", no longer labor - capital problems, wealth - poverty problems, nor the theory of surplus value and so on. Instead, it is the topic that originally seemed to belong to "socialism" — welfare. People demand welfare from the government. Since the government asks for votes from the people, then "people's welfare" is the duty of the government. The "bourgeois states" in the West are completely opposite to the "socialist government" in China. It is really a world - turning and great change of the times. Although the textbooks in our country about Western countries are basically still the same, in fact, they are completely different from what the Chinese think. I heard that in the rich small countries in northwestern Europe, people have no desire to get rich at all. It is reported that Chinese people asked them there: Don't you want to earn more money? They even asked in surprise: What do I need money for? Listen, they actually said: What do I need money for! This is what we Chinese can't understand at all. It is said that they answered: Our living standard is very high, we lack nothing, education and medical care are free, houses are our own, neighborhood relations are very harmonious and so on. If there is some surplus in wages, we will travel abroad and spend the money. It seems that people in Northern Europe really have no worry about freezing and starving, no threat of hunger, no worry about poverty. What kind of life is this? I really can't think of it. Is it the so - called "communist society" that the Chinese often talked about before? So in my opinion, welfare can be understood as "people's happiness"; but in the eyes of Chinese economists, it can also be understood as inefficiency, "iron rice bowl", the government's income not covering its expenses, the country being unable to get on... Not long ago, the French government introduced the "New Labor Law". Due to the strong resistance of trade unions and student unions, the French government, which was initially stubborn, finally withdrew this bill. The people won. A few minutes later, He Liangliang from Phoenix TV in Hong Kong immediately commented: There is no winner in this case in France. Withdrawing the "New Labor Law" will still mean "eating the iron rice bowl", so the economy of France will have no competitiveness and so on. This is the voice of China's "mainstream economists". In our country, China is opposite to Western European and North American countries. At present, it has become a country with no people's welfare at all. Except for being related to "welfare" a little bit in disaster relief, the national financial revenue can hardly find any other major expenditures related to people's welfare. For compulsory education, people have to pay tuition fees (now it is said that 9 - year primary and secondary school education will be free, let's wait and see; I think, definitely, primary and secondary schools all over the country will not stop charging fees. The little money given by the state is not enough for the principals and teachers who have been used to spending lavishly nowadays?); for medical care, it is shouted that people's burden will be lightened, but after two years of "things flowing like water and flowers fading away", everything is still the same; welfare housing distribution has long been gone; the state also has no low - cost rental housing, which shows that it is not willing to take out any money to solve the housing welfare of newly employed people; for urban transportation, there are no welfare subsidies either; the welfare of storing Chinese cabbages in winter and so on has certainly long been gone; even for the heating problem in northern cities, the state is going to have no welfare expenditure at all, and the heating cost provided by the heating company is surprisingly high, which is dozens of times higher than the cost of people heating with coal stoves. Does this conform to economic laws? No matter! It seems that the state just wants to save any expenses for "welfare"! I don't know what the state saves these money for? Yes, for economic construction, for projects, for high - rise buildings... With more projects, "a small number of people" will get rich! And the rich people can enjoy high - rise buildings and drive sports cars on the wide expressways. How meaningful it is! How face - saving China's "reform" must be! For a society, the biggest problem is that if there is no social welfare expenditure of the government, the life of the poor will be very difficult. This is inhumane, and the society will lose stability because of this. Obviously, people who are completely destitute are very likely to go astray. And if a large number of people who lose their jobs, lose their land and lose their sources of livelihood exist and do not get enough relief and welfare, the prospect can only be that the world will be in great chaos. I think that the instability in China stems from the fact that the people do not get any welfare. Some Chinese people may be unconvinced and say that what you said is the situation in Europe. And the ideal of Chinese people is the United States. Americans pursue getting rich, just like Chinese people. But what is the US government like? It is reported that: In the United States, the primary duty of the government is to provide safety guarantees for the labor - disabled and the unemployed, to provide medical care for the elderly and the poor, and to provide simple housing and appropriate food for the poor. The US government also spends the most money on social security, welfare and related social undertakings. The second largest expenditure of the government is the defense expenditure. The third is the education expenditure. So, if we still take "welfare" as a marker of "socialism" as before, we will find that: Even the United States does not have as little as China's "socialism" today. In the United States, on the one hand, local governments take care of the poor, and on the other hand, churches and the rich all over the country also vigorously hold charity undertakings. In this way, all aspects are making efforts, and the wealth - poverty problem in the United States is not as acute as in China at all. In China, on the contrary, the government is constantly canceling various welfare benefits in the name of "reform"; together with them, the rich people in China even claim that they will not give anything to the poor! They seem arrogant and bold. Many people think that China is socialist, and it is almost the only genuine socialism in the world. So, no matter how China does it, it is socialism; no matter how foreigners do it, it is capitalism! This is actually a great misunderstanding. So, a friend who has lived in the United States for nearly 30 years said to me: In the world, others are "socialist", only China is not! So, I think, with the current situation of welfare in China, it is strange that China can be stable!

Floor8　zhoushijie	Posted 2006-12-25 09:48
高级用户　Posts 160　Credits 682
In the world, others are all "socialist", only China is not!

Floor9　zengh888	Posted 2006-12-26 02:24
初级用户　Posts 20　Credits 68
Ah Thinking...

Floor10　AlwaysInherit	Posted 2006-12-26 03:39
初级用户　Posts 46　Credits 112
The gap between the rich and the poor doesn't only happen in China. Let it be.

Floor11　zhoushijie	Posted 2006-12-27 09:18
高级用户　Posts 160　Credits 682

Floor12　fish007yu	Posted 2007-01-02 07:02
初级用户　Posts 12　Credits 25
Hey. . . Life is just like this ah

Floor13　9527	Posted 2007-01-04 23:49
银牌会员　Posts 438　Credits 1,185　From 北京
The oil price rises with the international standard, why don't wages rise? Pretending to be high - end.

Floor14　tghksj	Posted 2007-01-06 09:21
社区乞丐　Posts 90　Credits -49
Big chicken cigarette?? Where are you from,楼主???

Floor15　雨露	Posted 2007-01-06 09:50
管理员　Posts 2,601　Credits 6,215
The signature of the person upstairs is a bit indecent. I hope it can be changed.