9 ms·

Faltering Economy in China Dims Job Prospects for Graduates

41 points by wallflower 13y ago

danso 13y ago
> The Chinese government is worried, saying that the problem could affect social stability, and it has ordered schools, government agencies and state-owned enterprises to hire more graduates at least temporarily to help relieve joblessness. “The only thing that worries them more than an unemployed low-skilled person is an unemployed educated person,” said Shang-Jin Wei, a Columbia Business School economist. Tough situation...subsidizing an excess middle class can't be great in the long term. But what's the alternative? Order people to go work in the fields?
- skylan_q 13y ago
  The damage caused by economic engineering leaves no good alternatives.
  - contingencies 13y ago
    To be fair I think the whole world is facing the reality of increased efficiency requiring less bodies.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
    - maxharris 13y ago
      People are more than bodies - they all have minds, too. While the need for physical labor will continue to decrease, many things that require a human mind to do will still be in demand. The real question is, will we vote to allow those that choose to apply their minds the chance to actually try their ideas in reality? Look at what's happening to Airbnb. What kind of message does that send - "come up with a great new idea, one that provides value to hundreds of thousands, work as hard as you can for years, and watch it get crushed by regulations?" That is the biggest threat to everyone that wants to earn a better life for themselves in the future, not the "rise of the machines," which has only made us more productive, richer. Regulations are a major reason why everyone seems to focus on doing tech startups that don't get too far outside of computing. It's not just a random trend. When we let the best and brightest do their best, a lot more wealth will be created, and you'll see the standard of living start to increase again.
      - eli_gottlieb 13y ago
        With respect, the other reason tech-startups don't go too far outside computing are because that's what we know. Most hackers might have some domain expertise outside computing, but usually not enough to start a complete business in their secondary field of knowledge.
        bad_user 13y ago
        I do not agree. Most hackers can learn the details of any domain-specific knowledge they want and many of them do so, especially those that are working in consulting. To be a good consultant and earn a reasonable monthly revenue, you have to able able to absorb domain-specific knowledge in a matter of days, or even hours and many people do so. The reason for why we aren't going outside computing is precisely because we'd have to deal with stupid regulations and barriers that have been placed to not upset the status quo, whereas computing and the Internet is the most unregulated industry by far. This is why those in power try their best to regulate the Internet and computing and why we get so upset whenever they try.
        rdouble 13y ago
        Also, most other businesses are much more capital intensive. Starting a basic retail store or a bar or even franchising an existing restaurant requires a lot more money than starting a software startup.
  - clicks 13y ago
    That is a pretty naive point of view. I think the exact opposite of what you posit is closer to the truth of things -- a more carefully planned economy would have resulted in better conditions. If China was straight up laissez faire capitalistic economy it would be a total mess right now. Read Albert Einstein's take on this, http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism for why and how (long read, but I promise it's worth it).
    - maxharris 13y ago
      China tried a "carefully planned economy," for decades and it resulted in mass death, poverty, stagnation for hundreds of millions of people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward Einstein died before many of these crucial developments either had taken place, or were widely known in the West. Also, he was a physicist, not a philosopher or historian. He had neither the actual knowledge about the world nor a solid grounding in the humanities to guide his thought in that essay you cite. Before you say that someone has a "naive point of view," you might want to try reading just a little bit of history. And not just from Marxist/socialist authors. There are other perspectives out there, and you might find that they explain the facts of history better than your current view, if you only bother to look.
      - Daishiman 13y ago
        I'm in no way going to defend the Great Leap Forward, but governments can have policies that are better or worse irrelevant of ideology, and such policies can be developed and improved. In hindisight, despite the huge amounts of problems the Chinese society has (some of which are truly scary and may become emblems of future times), it cannot be denied that it is a country that has had a streak of massive, incredible growth and has hoisted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. This does not contradict the fact that the same government had such massive failures in the past. I abhor the current Chinese state, but I really, really doubt that Western Capitalism would have been half as effective, at the very least not without costing the Chinese a huge relinquishment of capital and corporations in the hands of foreign interests, not a favorable position to be in. You can't implement certain policies without having absolute control of some parameters.
kenster07 13y ago
So giving a large swath of your population more education doesn't magically stimulate economic growth. Hm, where have we seen this pattern before?
- chii 13y ago
  the state should be funding huge R&D projects with these educated individuals, instead of priming them for "work in the industry". Think hardcore nuclear research to find methods for fusion, or better energy production. Think genetics research, think materials sciences and more efficient chemical processes, think hardcore robotics. With this goal in mind, the education system should be taylored for basic sciences, and not on "practical" skills that could be learnt on the job. This would naturally gravitate the ciruculum towards teaching creativity, problem solving, not knowledge aquisition. TLDR; i think they've been doing it all wrong, and wasted the time "educating" these now jobless people.
  - dredmorbius 13y ago
    R&D also has diminishing returns to scale. It may well also _lag_ rather than _lead_ economic growth. See Joseph Tainter and Nicholas Rescher. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sres.1057/abstract http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sres.1057/abstrac... For the Chinese: much of what they need has already been invented elsewhere (so IP appropriation _is_ a highly rational activity). They need to be able to apply it. Their bigger problem is going to be in providing energy, cleaning up pollution, and assuring other resources (water is also becoming very highly constrained in China) for a very large population. One that's much _less_ large than it could have been, but large all the same.
thatcherclay 13y ago
I would love to hear the perspective of a native chinese person here - a little hard to take the New York Times as an unbiased source given the tension there lately.
- meric 13y ago
  I have many chinese friends and many of them are pursuing Master's degrees - because a bachelor's degree just isn't enough help towards getting a good job. It seems for many of them to solution of diminishing advantage of education is simply even more education.
  - yen223 13y ago
    A Master's degree also helps fulfill certain visa requirements if you want to pursue a career outside of China.
    - sjg007 13y ago
      as so goes the global economy.
  - roy_x 13y ago
    Given the poor education that most Chinese graduate school provided, it is really a big waste-of-life for many young guys pursuing it. The good thing is that it only cost two years to get a master degree now. 10 years ago, I spent 3 years for it. I wish I had the courage to quit it that time.
- roy_x 13y ago
  A native Chinese is in :-) It is always tough for new graduates to find a good job in recent years. Given the housing cost got really high in big cities like Beijing/Shanghai/Guangzhou, there is a so called "flee-away-from-tier-1-cities-campaign" word made up by new graduates. When I graduated a decade ago, there are a lot of proud new graduates whom sincerely believed that they have a bright future ahead. But nowadays, most young people seems not thinking so anymore. It is difficult to change your social status by education and hard-working. That is something really bad and it is more than faltering economy of this year, it is about the meta-rules of how society running. Most of the traditional Chinese dynasties failed because same kind of problems.
tokenadult 13y ago
From the article: "One response, endorsed by the State Council, is to urge more graduates to take jobs at small, private companies. But a generation of people who grew up under the government’s 'one child' policy has proved risk-averse and slow to join or set up new companies. "'I would not work for private companies, that is not secure — only state-owned ones,' Ms. Yan said." That search for what was called during the 1970s "the iron rice bowl"--a secure job in a state-controlled organization--makes me wonder how much more innovation can be promoted in China's economy. Desiring that kind of security in employment would never make a Silicon Valley happen.
- hkmurakami 13y ago
  Whenever we see very different behavior in other countries compared to that of our own, we should recognize that those people have most likely made that decision for very rational reasons. The decision may be grounded in reasons ranging from monetary to status-driven reasons, but people perceive their environment accurately and made the best decisions for themselves and their families. People in general are not blindly dumb or obtuse. The vast majority of the time, they are making sound decisions for their current and future prospects. I used to think that the "US Way" was the best bar none no matter what the local situation or culture. Working in a different country and then observing the social and corporate dynamics from afar has made me realize that I was wrong. If people in China desire government jobs, it really does mean that that is the best option for them.
  - pyre 13y ago
    No one (at least not in this particular thread) is calling them stupid. The statement was made that when people are risk averse (even if such behaviour is rational), not much innovation (or even a Chinese Silicon Valley) can happen.
  - chii 13y ago
    this line of reasoning is basically what leads to the tragedy of the commons, or problems such as the paradox of thrift (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_thrift http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_thrift), where everyone does what is best for themselves (which is fine in my books), but then leads to the overall decline of the system. The gov't needs to forcast these sorts of situations, and counter it before it becomes a problem.

41 points by wallflower 13y ago

danso 13y ago

> The Chinese government is worried, saying that the problem could affect social stability, and it has ordered schools, government agencies and state-owned enterprises to hire more graduates at least temporarily to help relieve joblessness. “The only thing that worries them more than an unemployed low-skilled person is an unemployed educated person,” said Shang-Jin Wei, a Columbia Business School economist. Tough situation...subsidizing an excess middle class can't be great in the long term. But what's the alternative? Order people to go work in the fields?

skylan_q 13y ago
The damage caused by economic engineering leaves no good alternatives.
- contingencies 13y ago
  To be fair I think the whole world is facing the reality of increased efficiency requiring less bodies.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - maxharris 13y ago
    People are more than bodies - they all have minds, too. While the need for physical labor will continue to decrease, many things that require a human mind to do will still be in demand. The real question is, will we vote to allow those that choose to apply their minds the chance to actually try their ideas in reality? Look at what's happening to Airbnb. What kind of message does that send - "come up with a great new idea, one that provides value to hundreds of thousands, work as hard as you can for years, and watch it get crushed by regulations?" That is the biggest threat to everyone that wants to earn a better life for themselves in the future, not the "rise of the machines," which has only made us more productive, richer. Regulations are a major reason why everyone seems to focus on doing tech startups that don't get too far outside of computing. It's not just a random trend. When we let the best and brightest do their best, a lot more wealth will be created, and you'll see the standard of living start to increase again.
    - eli_gottlieb 13y ago
      With respect, the other reason tech-startups don't go too far outside computing are because that's what we know. Most hackers might have some domain expertise outside computing, but usually not enough to start a complete business in their secondary field of knowledge.
      - bad_user 13y ago
        I do not agree. Most hackers can learn the details of any domain-specific knowledge they want and many of them do so, especially those that are working in consulting. To be a good consultant and earn a reasonable monthly revenue, you have to able able to absorb domain-specific knowledge in a matter of days, or even hours and many people do so. The reason for why we aren't going outside computing is precisely because we'd have to deal with stupid regulations and barriers that have been placed to not upset the status quo, whereas computing and the Internet is the most unregulated industry by far. This is why those in power try their best to regulate the Internet and computing and why we get so upset whenever they try.
      - rdouble 13y ago
        Also, most other businesses are much more capital intensive. Starting a basic retail store or a bar or even franchising an existing restaurant requires a lot more money than starting a software startup.
- clicks 13y ago
  That is a pretty naive point of view. I think the exact opposite of what you posit is closer to the truth of things -- a more carefully planned economy would have resulted in better conditions. If China was straight up laissez faire capitalistic economy it would be a total mess right now. Read Albert Einstein's take on this, http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism for why and how (long read, but I promise it's worth it).
  - maxharris 13y ago
    China tried a "carefully planned economy," for decades and it resulted in mass death, poverty, stagnation for hundreds of millions of people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward Einstein died before many of these crucial developments either had taken place, or were widely known in the West. Also, he was a physicist, not a philosopher or historian. He had neither the actual knowledge about the world nor a solid grounding in the humanities to guide his thought in that essay you cite. Before you say that someone has a "naive point of view," you might want to try reading just a little bit of history. And not just from Marxist/socialist authors. There are other perspectives out there, and you might find that they explain the facts of history better than your current view, if you only bother to look.
    - Daishiman 13y ago
      I'm in no way going to defend the Great Leap Forward, but governments can have policies that are better or worse irrelevant of ideology, and such policies can be developed and improved. In hindisight, despite the huge amounts of problems the Chinese society has (some of which are truly scary and may become emblems of future times), it cannot be denied that it is a country that has had a streak of massive, incredible growth and has hoisted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. This does not contradict the fact that the same government had such massive failures in the past. I abhor the current Chinese state, but I really, really doubt that Western Capitalism would have been half as effective, at the very least not without costing the Chinese a huge relinquishment of capital and corporations in the hands of foreign interests, not a favorable position to be in. You can't implement certain policies without having absolute control of some parameters.

kenster07 13y ago

So giving a large swath of your population more education doesn't magically stimulate economic growth. Hm, where have we seen this pattern before?

chii 13y ago
the state should be funding huge R&D projects with these educated individuals, instead of priming them for "work in the industry". Think hardcore nuclear research to find methods for fusion, or better energy production. Think genetics research, think materials sciences and more efficient chemical processes, think hardcore robotics. With this goal in mind, the education system should be taylored for basic sciences, and not on "practical" skills that could be learnt on the job. This would naturally gravitate the ciruculum towards teaching creativity, problem solving, not knowledge aquisition. TLDR; i think they've been doing it all wrong, and wasted the time "educating" these now jobless people.
- dredmorbius 13y ago
  R&D also has diminishing returns to scale. It may well also _lag_ rather than _lead_ economic growth. See Joseph Tainter and Nicholas Rescher. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sres.1057/abstract http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sres.1057/abstrac... For the Chinese: much of what they need has already been invented elsewhere (so IP appropriation _is_ a highly rational activity). They need to be able to apply it. Their bigger problem is going to be in providing energy, cleaning up pollution, and assuring other resources (water is also becoming very highly constrained in China) for a very large population. One that's much _less_ large than it could have been, but large all the same.

thatcherclay 13y ago

I would love to hear the perspective of a native chinese person here - a little hard to take the New York Times as an unbiased source given the tension there lately.

meric 13y ago
I have many chinese friends and many of them are pursuing Master's degrees - because a bachelor's degree just isn't enough help towards getting a good job. It seems for many of them to solution of diminishing advantage of education is simply even more education.
- yen223 13y ago
  A Master's degree also helps fulfill certain visa requirements if you want to pursue a career outside of China.
  - sjg007 13y ago
    as so goes the global economy.
- roy_x 13y ago
  Given the poor education that most Chinese graduate school provided, it is really a big waste-of-life for many young guys pursuing it. The good thing is that it only cost two years to get a master degree now. 10 years ago, I spent 3 years for it. I wish I had the courage to quit it that time.
roy_x 13y ago
A native Chinese is in :-) It is always tough for new graduates to find a good job in recent years. Given the housing cost got really high in big cities like Beijing/Shanghai/Guangzhou, there is a so called "flee-away-from-tier-1-cities-campaign" word made up by new graduates. When I graduated a decade ago, there are a lot of proud new graduates whom sincerely believed that they have a bright future ahead. But nowadays, most young people seems not thinking so anymore. It is difficult to change your social status by education and hard-working. That is something really bad and it is more than faltering economy of this year, it is about the meta-rules of how society running. Most of the traditional Chinese dynasties failed because same kind of problems.

tokenadult 13y ago

From the article: "One response, endorsed by the State Council, is to urge more graduates to take jobs at small, private companies. But a generation of people who grew up under the government’s 'one child' policy has proved risk-averse and slow to join or set up new companies. "'I would not work for private companies, that is not secure — only state-owned ones,' Ms. Yan said." That search for what was called during the 1970s "the iron rice bowl"--a secure job in a state-controlled organization--makes me wonder how much more innovation can be promoted in China's economy. Desiring that kind of security in employment would never make a Silicon Valley happen.

hkmurakami 13y ago
Whenever we see very different behavior in other countries compared to that of our own, we should recognize that those people have most likely made that decision for very rational reasons. The decision may be grounded in reasons ranging from monetary to status-driven reasons, but people perceive their environment accurately and made the best decisions for themselves and their families. People in general are not blindly dumb or obtuse. The vast majority of the time, they are making sound decisions for their current and future prospects. I used to think that the "US Way" was the best bar none no matter what the local situation or culture. Working in a different country and then observing the social and corporate dynamics from afar has made me realize that I was wrong. If people in China desire government jobs, it really does mean that that is the best option for them.
- pyre 13y ago
  No one (at least not in this particular thread) is calling them stupid. The statement was made that when people are risk averse (even if such behaviour is rational), not much innovation (or even a Chinese Silicon Valley) can happen.
- chii 13y ago
  this line of reasoning is basically what leads to the tragedy of the commons, or problems such as the paradox of thrift (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_thrift http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_thrift), where everyone does what is best for themselves (which is fine in my books), but then leads to the overall decline of the system. The gov't needs to forcast these sorts of situations, and counter it before it becomes a problem.