Actually, Ryan, China does have minimum wage laws that vary from province to province (and in some cases city to city). According to Wikipedia, the low end of the spectrum is around 600RMB, or about $95, in poor provinces like Jiangxi. In richer areas near the South coast, such as Shenzhen, the minimum wage is much higher at around 1300RMB, or about $200.

Of course, that is merely the law. I am sure there are massive numbers of people who are cheated out of their wages.

Tsuguri is definitely right, in terms of the amazing lives of the rich Chinese. They truly can do just about anything they want, as long as they are relatively quiet about it. Still, I think they like to send their children to Western universities (for the bragging rights, at the very least), and I have heard that some of them have money stashed away in the West for quick escapes.

nice how the topic changes from islands to minimum wages. :)
i'm no good at politics, but of course i support my motherland's (China) claim to the islands. :P

The topic was not so much the islands as how the disputes highlight the at times fractious nature of Asian politics, they highlight the tensions between so many of the countries in the area. And allow other states like the U.S to get involved - by supporting it's former colony The Philippines and generally trying to shore up a pro-U.S block in the region to counter the growing influence of China - etc etc.

A thread asking who owns which island(s) would be a bit boring imo - "It's ours!" "No it's ours!"

But I introduced them in the topic title as they perfectly highlight that Asian international politics has fault lines.

To get back to the islands, are there "official" owners of these hunks of rock? Perhaps the UN has it's official opinion on the matter?

I think the U.N is too diplomatic for that John.

Ok then, if the islands are officially "owned" by no country, then why do Chinese nationalists get arrested by the Japanese Coast Guard, while Japanese nationalists are not interfered with?

Slow down John. You asked about the U.N and I said I doubted they would have an official position considering that body consists of member states who each have a different idea.

So let's begin with the first islands - Sensaku/Diaoyu islands. These are owned mostly by a Japanese business man who has recently agreed to sell his islands to the government of Japan to add to the island that the Japanese government already owns. The islands are currently administered / controlled by Japan which is why the Chinese were deported.

Dokdo/Takeshima this island is currently occupied by South Korean police, two permanent residents and some government staff. As such the South Korean prime minister and Korean swimmers were able to visit the island.

The Spratly and Paracel archipelago - not as familiar with this area but to the best of my knowledge it is mostly not occupied by China - more so China claims it and so asserts it's right to do things like fish in the area, this is what is mostly bringing China into direct conflict with the other states who occupy or assert their rights in the area. Such as the recent stand-off between the Philippine coast guard vessel and the Chinese fishermen and naval ships.

South Korean President of course! Not Prime Minister.

what a silly discussion, cabo verde is the biggest asian power

Heh myhand you were right - it took longer than you thought but the idiots have arrived.

today im in one of those days... just need to say useless things, proceed as if i hadnt been here
PS: warlight is where i come to avoid any kind of credibility

To reply to Kusanagi:

I've never visited China and dont have any chinese friend so what I said is just a generalization from my experience and observation in Vietnam. But I believe there is a real similarity between China and Vietnam society.

In Vietnam and China, there are two types of rich people, those who have political connections and those who dont. And the rich people who can live like kings in China and Vietnam obviously belong to the first group.

The other group of rich ppl consist of those who are experts in some fields and those who can game the system. But without political connections, these people always feel insecure and difficult to live here. In Vietnam (and I believe in mainland China as well), the competition in mostly everything is about who your parents and relatives are, meaning that only those from the right families can succeed. Even if you work hard and keep improving yourself, you will still have little chance to move upwards. And if you have any conflict with someone who has more political than you do, you will be in big trouble. I myself currently can be considered as the 1% in my country, but most of my income come from my dirty businesses instead of my legit job.

Thats why rich ppl with political connections will enjoy living here because they can do mostly whatever they want. And those who dont have political connections want to move out to enjoy the security and fairness ( in a higher level) in western countries.

Cont'd

About the modern skyline and the giant buildings in China cities, Im not surprised about that. I can make a safe bet that China's economics depends a lot of the construction and real estate industry. I can also make another safe bet that every major economical player in China is into the real estate business. And of course, the government is the biggest real estate capitalist.

Thats why its not a surprise to see a lot of giant buildings in China cities. And I believe, in the future, there will be even more giant buildings. And I m pretty sure that the developers of these buildings are real estate investors. The developers’ motive is actually no secret to industry insiders. First of all, these giant buildings raise the price of land and apartments in its neighborhood. Moreover, the local governments, who can give developers cheap land, love to have more giant buildings in their territories. Giant buildings are a symbol of local economic success and serve the officials’ vanity well.

But one problem with these buildings is, what is the occupancy rate of these buildings? Are all offices, rooms and apartments in these building in used? I myself seriously dont think so.

I agree with Alababi's ideas about the 1%, connections, and real estate, and also think Vietnam and China are comparable both socio-economically and politically.

To rank these countries based on current 'power' or economic projections is a bit odd. Asian countries' demographic situations; political, economic, and legal systems; levels of industrialization and interconnectedness with the global economy (and the consequent bell jar effects: http://www.thepowerofthepoor.com/concepts/c2.php); developing welfare states; environmental situations; progress with respect to 'democratization' (with respect to civil rights and how much influence citizens have on public officials); and the overall transparency (http://www.imf.org/external/np/speeches/2005/012705.htm) of the above factors are in such a state of flux that (a) nobody really knows enough to rank these countries objectively and purely based on reality and (b) future projections become outdated almost as quickly as computers do.

For example, who among us knows with any degree of certainty what the effects of Japan's aging population will have on Japan, the region, and the world? Who knows how the coming election in the Philippines will affect it?

When I was in China in 2004-5, I thought the imbalances and inefficiencies of China's development were such that a major collapse within ten years would not be a surprise. Later, I discovered Michael Pettis' blog (http://www.mpettis.com/) on China's financial markets and have noticed that he thinks the same way I do, but with an economist's jargon. If I only looked at skylines, infrastructure, and the rich Chinese I saw and met when my rich friends took me out, I'd be convinced that China is the richest and greatest country on earth.

Bump

THE ISLANDS ARE CHINESE!!!! PISS-OFF JAPS!

facepalm.

this general arun is an imposter

AI please stop saying that. We all know that. (no offense)

3 cheers for the U.S.A.!