Let’s talk about common prosperity 共同富裕

[FlyingSesame]

I have been having some interesting debates with my British friends here about all the big moves in China lately. Clearly all these changes are prelude to the party’s common prosperity drive, which was revealed by Xi himself last month. But I disagree with them that Xi’s common property agenda is equivalent to Maoism.

 

While the socialist term common prosperity indeed came from Mao, the following generations of party leaders has actually taken widely different approached to it. And their shift in policy mirrors China’s structural and economic transformation.

 

To get a sense of future direction of travel, I also looked into the so-called “three stages of wealth distribution” 三次分配, a concept highlighted by the leadership recently and is expected to be used as a guiding principle for future policy implementation. Specifically, Zhejiang province 浙江省 was named a pilot zone for the common prosperity initiative. The provincial government there recently published a blueprint which one can potentially considers as Xi’s draft version of common prosperity in KPIs.

 

It is no doubt a huge topic - I would like to share my piece here and have a productive debate, as I know many on this forum are long-time China watchers and have insightful perspectives.

 

https://www.flyingsesame.com/chinas-long-march-to-common-prosperity/

[alantin]

Extremely interesting! Thanks for sharing this!

 

I have been wondering what all the recent news mean; the government restrictions for children's gaming, the ban on 996, the restrictions on private tutoring for children, and I heard there is something going on in the entertainment industry too. I thought that it all must be connected, but this gives a good picture of the context.

[adept]

Well written piece!~

The fair distribution of wealth is only a fantasy, and an ambitious attempt by activists in generations, however never tried by the governing class of societies. 

China is constantly seeking ways to improve the wellbeing of its people, but it doesn't mean it could always make the right decision, interestingly, it sometimes 

makes better decisions than most of the democratic societies (this could worth a good discussion point). Common prosperity is one of such decisions where 

the government tried to give what people (from different classes) want.
 

One point worth mentioning is the concept of the 'social responsibility' of a business entity, which is like an invisible force to guide the value of doing business in general.

 

 

 

  

[Kenny同志]

Anyone who buys this should read their history. 

[Kenny同志]

I removed my post. I'm sorry for my self-censorship... 

Edited September 15, 2021 at 12:30 PM by Kenny同志

[alantin]

On 9/15/2021 at 1:00 PM, Kenny同志 said:

Anyone who buys this should read their history.

Could you elaborate, please?

[Kenny同志]

Hi Alan, I'm sorry for creating the suspense but I can't comment further. 

[杰.克]

On 9/12/2021 at 1:01 PM, FlyingSesame said:

But I disagree with them that Xi’s common property agenda is equivalent to Maoism

 

Anyone who wants to say Xi's economic policies are equivalent to Maoism - are clearly not experts in the area. Probably not even worth the conversation. Their is such a tectonic policy difference between Mao economic policy (collectivising everything through land redistribution, 100% central economy,  no private ownership etc) and Xi's common prosperity (wealthy pay more tax, increased state involvement but remains a significant private industry). You could say he is moving closer to Mao in that its a move to the left- but so in that sense is Boris Johnson with his newest social care tax increases. Just like in the Bojo case, its a stupid and reductive point to make.

 

Your article seems really great though!  Guess your UK friends are just making pub conversation though, rather than going as deep as you ,which is fair enough!