| Submit your comments on this article |
| China-Japan-Koreas |
| 1981: China Drops 'Jobs For All' Policy |
| 2008-05-05 |
| By Graham Earnshaw in Peking November 25, 1981 The Chinese government announced yesterday that it will no longer accept responsibility for providing full employment, supposedly one of the main advantages of the Socialist system. In a major policy shift, the People's Daily said that the onus for finding jobs for China's millions would in future be shared by several different levels, including the workers. "We give up. Go find your own jobs!" Individuals will be encouraged to support themselves financially by various legal means, and controls on private businesses will be relaxed even further in an effort to soak up the huge pool of unemployed in China's cities. Ever wonder why Communism started to relax? This is why. The paper stressed the need to expand the self-employed sector of the economy. This means more street hawkers, piano-tuners, shoe-shine boys, rat-catchers, cobblers and other service trades - virtually all of which were abolished under the Cultural Revolution. But many young people, brought up under Chairman Mao to condemn small traders as evil speculators or "bourgeois remnants", are not willing to take such jobs. Yes, small traders, the worst enemy of all. As an added incentive to workers to find work on their own, the new directive suggested that some self-employed people could become eligible to join the Communist Party - the road to real power in China. All workers in China have until now been "assigned" work by the State, with virtually no choice as to what that work may be. There are no unemployment benefits for those not lucky enough to be assigned jobs. An article in the official party magazine Red Flag in June said that there were 10 million people "waiting to be assigned jobs." An official in Shanghai earlier this year said that she understood the number of unemployed to be over 20 million. |
| Posted by:gromky |
| #9 Well, jeez, I thought it was clearly labeled as a story from 1981. Don't know how I could have made it clearer Sorry I was not more clear. Why are you posting articles from 1981? |
| Posted by: SteveS 2008-05-05 20:45 |
| #8 "No Mao, No China" What's the downside? (We already know the downside of Mao. *spit*) |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2008-05-05 19:39 |
| #7 I call BS. Mao died in 1976, over 30 years ago, so nobody under the age of 30 even remembers him. I guess the people who visit China and take pictures of all the Mao posters in Tiananmien Square are bullshitting me, as are all the Chinese people you run into who are apologists for all the things they think Mao did under the excuse "No Mao, No China." |
| Posted by: Abdominal Snowman 2008-05-05 19:24 |
| #6 Proof that the ComChi's are more intelligent and can adapt than the Donks. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2008-05-05 15:50 |
| #5 Well, jeez, I thought it was clearly labeled as a story from 1981. Don't know how I could have made it clearer...a bigger font, perhaps. |
| Posted by: gromky 2008-05-05 14:42 |
| #4 The article was written in 1981. ;-) |
| Posted by: lotp 2008-05-05 14:26 |
| #3 But many young people, brought up under Chairman Mao to condemn small traders as evil speculators or "bourgeois remnants", are not willing to take such jobs. I call BS. Mao died in 1976, over 30 years ago, so nobody under the age of 30 even remembers him. |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2008-05-05 14:13 |
| #2 From the Danwei site: Graham Earnshaw was the Daily Telegraph correspondent in Beijing from 1980 to 1984, and he's been looking through his clippings, which seem to prove both that China has changed completely and also that China has stayed exactly the same. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2008-05-05 11:31 |
| #1 In a major policy shift A major policy shift is certainly interesting, but unless my eyes deceive me, the dateline on this article is 1981 - over two decades ago. Are we having a slow news day? |
| Posted by: SteveS 2008-05-05 10:32 |