Home » Opinion » Opinion Columns
Crackdown on lavish feasts will dampen skewed consumption
By Wan Lixin |
April 4, 2013, Thursday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
THE Nanjing Daily published on March 27 an article headlined "Central government crackdown on feasting at public expenses dampens consumption, raising NDRC's concerns."
NDRC refers to the National Development and Reform Commission.
According to the article, for the first two months this year, China's exports and investment had grown apace at 24 and 21 percent respectively, compared with last year, but consumption growth - at 12 percent - is lackluster. Significantly, high-end consumption in restaurants is registering obvious declines. That's mainly attributed to the decline in lavish official feasting.
Chen Xinnian, an NDRC expert, concluded in the Nanjing Daily report that control over feasting at public expenses has dampened overall consumption.
Although I do not know if the NDRC is really concerned about the impacts of the bans on lavish official consumption - some newspapers increasingly use sensational headlines as a ploy to boost sales - we are a little bit concerned about official obsession with growth.
It must be owned that some officials have made indelible contributions to consumption, whether at home or abroad.
Some of them have multiple, high-end properties, some keep several houses, some have children or spouses studying or living in expensive capitalist countries.
There have been fears (or threats) that if all officials are required to honestly report their holdings in property (and presumably be forced to disclose sources of financing), the real estate market will crash.
And that end-of-the-world scenario is compelling injunction that any measures governing official property disclosure must proceed with maximum caution.
There have already been signs of the effectiveness of curbs on runaway public expenses.
Xinmin Evening News reported on Tuesday that tea producers in a village in neighboring Suzhou in Jiangsu Province ask only 1,000 yuan (US$161) for every 500 grams of a kind of tea.
"In the past the chief patrons of the tea are from government organizations. This year, given the campaign for frugality and against wastefulness, there have not been as many buyers as before, hence the lowered price," explained one villager.
I do not know how many honest Chinese would pay 1,000 yuan for 500 grams of tea, though that price is only half the price it could fetch last year.
Xinmin Evening News also reported on Tuesday that on March 21, the price of 500 grams of the daoyu, or knife fish in the Yangtze River, now stood at 1,500 to 1,600 yuan in Nantong. That was only a small fraction of the fish's previous price. At one time a large fish weighing half a kilo could cost 6,000 yuan.
It is explained that lack of official demand for the fish has significantly dampened the demand for the species.
I do not know if that's cause for celebration or grief, but if the government is really earnest in cracking down on consumption at public expense, then overall social consumption must inevitably suffer.
That only means that the consumption figures some officials tend to make a fuss about are contributed, to an extent, by corrupt officials themselves who also steal state or people's assets.
The government had started the campaign against wining and dining at public expenses while I was very young, and I did not remember that the campaign needed to be justified again, now on economic grounds.
In the future probably the only persuasive reason we can cite against such feasting is the health of the officials, for many of them, perennially in an inebriated state, are prone to diseases associated with high living. Some, cut down in their prime, are prevented from enjoying the many perks the people willingly offer them.
Still, a commentary in China Youth Daily (March 29) tries to justify the injunction's economic correctness.
In affirming the government mandate for frugality, the commentary had to go into, needlessly, statistical details to show that the bans on feasting at public expenses would not make a serious dent in the overall consumption figures.
While consumption is good, it should not be used as a pretext for a few corrupt officials to steal, rob, pollute, or cheat.
Hopefully, cracking down on extravagant official consumption would fuel domestic demand, by making some items less pricer, so that more people can afford them.
NDRC refers to the National Development and Reform Commission.
According to the article, for the first two months this year, China's exports and investment had grown apace at 24 and 21 percent respectively, compared with last year, but consumption growth - at 12 percent - is lackluster. Significantly, high-end consumption in restaurants is registering obvious declines. That's mainly attributed to the decline in lavish official feasting.
Chen Xinnian, an NDRC expert, concluded in the Nanjing Daily report that control over feasting at public expenses has dampened overall consumption.
Although I do not know if the NDRC is really concerned about the impacts of the bans on lavish official consumption - some newspapers increasingly use sensational headlines as a ploy to boost sales - we are a little bit concerned about official obsession with growth.
It must be owned that some officials have made indelible contributions to consumption, whether at home or abroad.
Some of them have multiple, high-end properties, some keep several houses, some have children or spouses studying or living in expensive capitalist countries.
There have been fears (or threats) that if all officials are required to honestly report their holdings in property (and presumably be forced to disclose sources of financing), the real estate market will crash.
And that end-of-the-world scenario is compelling injunction that any measures governing official property disclosure must proceed with maximum caution.
There have already been signs of the effectiveness of curbs on runaway public expenses.
Xinmin Evening News reported on Tuesday that tea producers in a village in neighboring Suzhou in Jiangsu Province ask only 1,000 yuan (US$161) for every 500 grams of a kind of tea.
"In the past the chief patrons of the tea are from government organizations. This year, given the campaign for frugality and against wastefulness, there have not been as many buyers as before, hence the lowered price," explained one villager.
I do not know how many honest Chinese would pay 1,000 yuan for 500 grams of tea, though that price is only half the price it could fetch last year.
Xinmin Evening News also reported on Tuesday that on March 21, the price of 500 grams of the daoyu, or knife fish in the Yangtze River, now stood at 1,500 to 1,600 yuan in Nantong. That was only a small fraction of the fish's previous price. At one time a large fish weighing half a kilo could cost 6,000 yuan.
It is explained that lack of official demand for the fish has significantly dampened the demand for the species.
I do not know if that's cause for celebration or grief, but if the government is really earnest in cracking down on consumption at public expense, then overall social consumption must inevitably suffer.
That only means that the consumption figures some officials tend to make a fuss about are contributed, to an extent, by corrupt officials themselves who also steal state or people's assets.
The government had started the campaign against wining and dining at public expenses while I was very young, and I did not remember that the campaign needed to be justified again, now on economic grounds.
In the future probably the only persuasive reason we can cite against such feasting is the health of the officials, for many of them, perennially in an inebriated state, are prone to diseases associated with high living. Some, cut down in their prime, are prevented from enjoying the many perks the people willingly offer them.
Still, a commentary in China Youth Daily (March 29) tries to justify the injunction's economic correctness.
In affirming the government mandate for frugality, the commentary had to go into, needlessly, statistical details to show that the bans on feasting at public expenses would not make a serious dent in the overall consumption figures.
While consumption is good, it should not be used as a pretext for a few corrupt officials to steal, rob, pollute, or cheat.
Hopefully, cracking down on extravagant official consumption would fuel domestic demand, by making some items less pricer, so that more people can afford them.
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
