Thrift versus waste, talking about food

On Saturday evening I went with the family and several Chinese friends to one of those huge Spa places, close to Sihui Metro Station, one famous for its buffet food. The restaurant was fully packed and Chinese were consuming enormous amounts of food in a near frenzy. I saw a lot of food going to waste, as people fill up enormous plates and often fail to finish. It is one of the examples of food being wasted, not just in the official or wedding banquets, where doggy bags are seldom used for obvious reasons.
Not only China Daily but also incoming president Xi Jinping has pleaded for wasting less.
Chinese New Year is one of those occasions were waste of food, useless presents and extravagant packaging are still the norm.
China Daily has published several calls for thrift, such as:
“Thrift is better than an annuity”, by Op Rana. (8 February 2013)
http://europe.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2013-02/08/content_16214356.htm
The article mentions some disturbing figures:
–  According to one estimate, more than 200 billion yuan ($32.16 billion) worth of food is wasted as leftovers in China every year. Others say the amount of food wasted in the country every year is enough to feed 200 million people.
– The Institution of Mechanical Engineers says in its recent report that up to half of the food produced in the world ends up as waste every year. This, according to the UK-based independent group’s report, means that as much as 2 billion tons of food never makes it on to a plate.
– A 2011 study by the Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology – sponsored by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization – which said that about one-third of all food produced (1.3 billion tons) ended up as waste annually, in equal measure in developed and developing nations.
– Up to 30% of the British vegetable crop is not harvested because it fails to meet marketing standards for size and looks.
As I mention in Toxic Capitalism, problems in transportation & storage, unnecessarily strict sell-by dates and buy-one-get-one free offers are to blame. But also consumers’ demand for cosmetically perfect food, along with “poor engineering and agricultural practices” are to blame.
Says Op Rana: “Those indulging in extravagance and exhibitionism should remember another Chinese proverb: A thriftless woman burns the entire candle looking for a match.”

Do we really need so many clothes?

Interesting article in China Daily – as I mention in my book, do we really need so many clothes? So many pairs of jeans, shoes, suits, dresses? Look into your wardrobe and ask yourself how much of all those clothes you actually use, and how often. I always tell family and friends, please don’t buy me more stuff (even if “it was on sales and so cheap”). I think I have enough for a couple of years. Knowing what it takes to get a jeans or even a T-shirt, the need for cotton, other fibers, the water and energy to produce it all. Not even to talk about the factories where workers slave to make it. And are fortunate not to get work-related diseases or die in a factory fire. The point here is not to make them lose their jobs but at least to pay them a reasonable salary and give them humane working conditions. We buy less but pay more.
When less is more: Tiffany Tan explores the “capsule wardrobe”; “With consumerism and fast fashion booming in China, Tiffany Tan susses out if the Chinese are ready for capsule wardrobes – a collection of only a few essential pieces that can be mixed and matched.”
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/beijing/2013-01/22/content_16152664.htm

When China Rules the World

Intro from EUCCC:
On 30 Nov 09 the EUCCC/Britcham invited author and Asia commentator Martin Jacques on the subject of his new book When China Rules the World.
According to even the most conservative estimates, China will overtake the United States as the world’s largest economy by 2027 and will ascend to the position of world economic leader by 2050. But the full repercussions of China’s ascendancy-for itself and the rest of the globe-have been surprisingly little explained or understood.
In his far-reaching and original new book, Martin Jacques offers provocative answers to some of the most pressing questions about China’s growing place on the world stage.
In this work he offers his views on how China will seek to shape the world in its own image, an image that has been shaped by a long and rich history as a civilization state.
He argues that, as a culturally self-confident Asian giant with a billion-plus population, China will likely resist globalization as we know it. This exceptionalism will have powerful ramifications for the rest of the world and the United States in particular. As China is already emerging as the new center of the East Asian economy, the mantle of economic and, therefore, cultural relevance will in our lifetimes begin to pass from London and Paris to cities like Beijing and Shanghai. This transition, Jacques argues, will determine whether the twenty-first century will be relatively peaceful or fraught with tension, instability, and danger.
About the speaker:
Martin Jacques is currently a visiting research fellow at the London School of Economics Asia Research Centre. He has recently been a visiting professor at Renmin University, Aichi University and at Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, and was a senior visiting research fellow at the Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore. He was editor of the highly respected journal Marxism Today until its closure in 1991. He has written for numerous influential newspapers, journals and magazines and is the author of four books of political commentary.
My comments
My friend Curt (big fan of the author!) gave me the book as a present, he signed it and I also asked the author to sign it. I only read part of it, till now.
Martin is a very good speaker; I won’t give here the full report on his presentation, only some (personal) highlights:
– China will be distinctive and different (as a world power and country); it’s a “civilization state” – agree
– China is a massive country but exceptionally unified through its long history and culture that unifies its vast population; Europe is on the contrary much more fragmented – agree
– Mandarin could become the lingua franca in the region – agree but don’t like it
– South East Asia, Australia and other countries have become very dependent on China (economically) – agree
– 95% of the population feels itself as “Han Chinese” despite the many different ethnicities – disagree, they feel “Chinese” but don’t talk in the way to feel “Han”
– the Chinese are overall not very open to different cultures – agree
– the State in China has a near spiritual role to play and in this respect has little competition; the State has a higher state competence than any other country – mostly agree
– we see the beginning of the decline of the USA as the dominant world power (nobody talks much about the EU…) and the emergence of China who however does not yet want to replace the USA in its (present) role – mostly agree (some Americans are going to like the book but could help the paranoid to call for a stronger military…)
– it is the end of the world, shaped by a Western agenda; in the past the shift was from the UK to the USA, but how will the next shift be? – probably right
– Unlike Americans (and other Westerners?) the Chinese do not ask themselves who they really are – they don’t need to do so – mostly right
– the CCP re-invented itself after Mao’s death – mostly agree
– Confucianism: state-centric and focus on good governance – mostly agree
– overall the book touches not so much on China as a society as I try in my (upcoming?) book; it’s more focused on economy and world power / international balance between the major powers.


Now I still need to read the book! But I already know who invented golf…

Chinese IPR hypocrisy

Or call it neo-nationalism.
Recently I had to field a question (as speaker in a seminar) from a Chinese delegate who complained that in Europe some people were fraudulently registering “famous Chinese brands”. I replied that I was having rather fun reading and knowing about that, as in China, every day foreign brands are fraudulently registered and our technologies are openly copied. I told him that now Chinese might start understanding that IPR is not something for foreigners only and Chinese should help to enforce the laws, for their own benefit.
A few days ago US Commerce Secretary Gary Locke appealed to China to help enforce the law, stressing that American companies every year lose billions of dollar due to IP theft. Of course the same for European companies.
Yesterday China Daily showed how pirated copies on Windows 7 are on sale in Beijing (20 RMB). What’s new? Many Chinese will tell you – that’s perfectly “ok”.
Then comes the Chinese cyber-extremist and nationalist gang, attacking Google for unauthorized copying of Chinese books. While later the official complaint was rectified (*), Chinese were complaining that “Google was looking down on the Chinese” by doing it. Ooooooh, I see, the Chinese can promptly copy foreign books and openly sell pirated copies, that’s OK, but the other way around?
I always say, beware of countries who put their national flag everywhere, on each house, cars, buildings, inside offices, on T-shirts, etc. We Belgians are not exactly in that league. Cannot imagine we run around with a Belgian flag on everything, people would rather ask if there was something wrong in our head.
It’s one more item for my book: the one way hypocrisy of Chinese in IPR and neo-nationalism. Robbing foreigners is cool (and justified). But don’t touch Chinese brands, books etc.
The only way they’ll learn is by being served the same treatment.
(*) Stephen Chen wrote in the SCMP on 26 Oct 09:
A Chinese copyright organisation admitted it misled mainland authors last week by using the wrong legal term when it accused Google of infringing its copyright.
The allegation set off an emotional row. The authors, believing that their books were now available for unauthorised downloading from Google’s digital library in the United States – which is not true – levelled harsh criticism against the internet company in the mainland media.
The record was set straight by Jia Jifeng, legal director of the China Written Works Copyright Society, who acknowledged yesterday he had used the wrong term.

Filial piety and U.S. foreclosure victims

I am currently studying as much as I can the impact (or lack of) Confucianism on today’s Chinese society.
Central in Confucianism is the notion of “Filial Piety” – caring for and respecting the parents. While the new generation in China has put the notion a bit upside down – parents now supposed to do everything for the children and grandchildren without much return – the majority of the Chinese still very much adhere to the old principles. The issue is an important component of my book.
I was reading about the never-ending sad story of the U.S. housing market, with the foreclosures that make more and more people homeless.
I had read an article (author Peter Goodman – IHT 20 Oct 09) on the topic, when the starting lines hit me afterwards: a lady (Sheri West) in Cleveland ended up completely homeless, after sleeping in her car, months of sleeping on coaches of friends. She was forced to seek a place in a shelter for the homeless. But…
The article said she is the mother of three grown children, grandmother to six and great-grandmother to one; her husband left her.
So, what are the children doing about that? Apparently nothing.
While we miss here the complete background of the story, in most Asian countries that would be considered as a shame.
For the children.
Some Asian values put our Western world to shame; just hoping China will not copy the West.
Gilbert
Vice Chairman – China First International Chongyang Festival, Beijing 2009 Celebration event of World Illustrious Elderly
International Director, Managing Committee of China Ageing International Development Foundation