- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 1991 Hour
- Reading permission
This post was edited by sfphoto at 2017-12-4 04:28|
Jaaja Post time: 2017-12-3 21:41
I think that my reasons are not ideological but practical. Primarily my concern is where the state gets the money to fund social enterprises.
My view is that taxes on consumption and real-estate assets should pay for social welfare services such as childcare.
In my opinion it should come primarily from commercial care providers (through corporate taxes, income taxes of their employees, and taxation of shareholders' profits). That is why commercial providers should be an important component in providing care (child and other) for the whole population.
My view is that non-profit social welfare enterprises should be funded by both the State and private donations but not taxed.
I am not against state funded care - but that care should be reserved to the lowest income earners.
My proposal is for a graduated schedule of State-funding vs private donations. If the community can be self-sufficient, then the State does not need to fund that community-owned social enterprise.
The system should move wealth from the middleclass and above to lower income population. The wealthier pay for commercial care, and those payments contribute toward funding care to the poorer - both through taxation, and through giving employment to them.
I agree with you on this point because I view non-profit community-owned social enterprises as a way to channel private wealth for social welfare. But I disagree with your view that commercial for-profit enterprises is the best way to provide social welfare.
Do you have your own answer for that - where would the state get the funding for social enterprises?
China should tax conspicuous consumption and real-estate assets to fund social enterpises.
Your opinions look very much like coming from someone who grew up during double digit GDP growth - and you mentioned your current city Chengdu as a fast growing city. You cannot build the welfare system on expectation of growth only - it will end sometime, even in China.
The old model of economic growth is not sustainable because it relies upon 1) capital-intensive infrastructure spending and 2) labor-intensive manufacturing industries. The new model of economic growth should depend upon 1) technology-intensive manufacturing industries and 2) knowledge-based service industries.
That is, unless market economy constantly catches up in new industries, and in that development care industry comes quickly.
With 70% of infrastructure spending now going to inland provinces, the vast hinterland is getting developed at a much faster rate than in the past. As land and labor costs rise in the coastal cities, private Capital is now moving inland while migrant workers are moving back to their home provinces. I have witnessed this phenomenon myself in Quanzhou and Chengdu, where factory owners in Fujian give out recruitment bonuses to hire migrant workers from rural villages in Sichuan. But they're having a hard time finding migrant workers because the GDP growth rate in the inland provinces such as Sichuan are almost twice that of the coastal cities in Fujian but with a higher quality than in the past. I live in the Chengdu Hi-Tech Zone which grew at an annual rate of 20% in the past ten years!!!
Firstly, the qualifications to take care of children are not same as qualifications to teach that to others. Childcare centers should have professional childcarers, but they will come short in having professional teachers.
They could also hire professional teachers to train the community members in childcare services which they need.
Secondly, at least I would not want my child in childcare center to be "worked on" or to function as a "training material" for anyone but the certified staff.
That's only after the community members have been qualified and certified as well. Remember, those community members will be providing childcare services anyway to their own children outside the daycare center because they're the LEGAL GUARDIANS who have the LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY to take care of their own children.
Is your idea that parents/families could go to work to childcare centers and be only limited to working with their own children? This would add more burden to the official staff, because they would have to supervise that parents keep hands off everyone elses children - and that is away from them taking care of children.
No. Community members who want to work in the childcare centers either as unpaid volunteers or paid part-time workers should be given proper training and then certified to perform childcare services to all children in the daycare centers.
Not to mention that families and the staff would frequently have conflicts about the quantity or quality of care that their own children gets. Families are always selfish about their own children, and Chinese especially.
Not really. Families would care more that they have relatives who work in these daycare centers to give more attention to their own children. That's how I view these social enterprises -- as a community resource -- not as a commercial enterprise. The richer members can even donate old toys to these daycare centers after their own children have grown up.
I have not visited a daycare center in China yet, but I have done so on many occassions in my home country. Based on that experience, and your proposals in this thread, I dare to speculate that you are either not informed of the grassroot work there, or your information is from kind of care that needs to reform anyway.
There are several educational companies that operate right in our housing complex here in Chengdu. They offer after-school activities like art classes or music lessions but not childcare. Social welfare is a family affair in China which I have witnessed first-hand from my own relatives in Quanzhou.
Speaking of daycare industry in my home country (and China definitely should look abroad in this matter), we have top quality care in international comparison, to the degree that the quality can be defined by a simple formulla - ratio of children per teacher. Business models or other details are no longer important there.
Traditional Chinese Culture view social welfare as the moral obligation of traditional society which consists of family, clan and village in the past. A community-owned social enterpirse is the modern equivalent of the family, clan and village which support those traditional values. And that's where China should be planning its social welfare industries including but not limited to childcare, elderlycare, maternitycare, etc.