liuzhou Posted March 17, 2012 at 01:52 PM Report Share Posted March 17, 2012 at 01:52 PM Please don't take 2 paragraphs and combine them randomly and distort my meaning. Take each paragraph as a paragraph and an idea! I didn't. I took one sentence. Your opening sentence. Which was a gross generalisation, inaccurate and offensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gato Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:08 PM Report Share Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:08 PM Not true anymore. Even in the pasty, it was a select minority (similar to the percentages of 8 month abortions you hear about). Very few were fired, typically, penalties were pay stopped increasing for a few years or you were denied promotions. See these: http://zhidao.baidu....cid=792&index=2 国家公务员超生一个孩子会受到什么后果？ http://www.gzmama.co...873600-1-1.html 国企员工，偷偷超生的话单位会开除吗？ Here's a government worker trying to have an extra child under a relative's name: http://zhidao.baidu..../105304971.html 北京公务员超生的后果是什么？ 2009-7-8 15:40 我们夫妻都是北京公务员，现在怀了二胎，可以靠关系网把孩子的户口落在亲戚的名下，生孩子的时候，可以在私立医院找关系，以亲戚的名义超生，孩子出生的父母也都是亲戚的名字。这种情况还算是超生吗？如果有人举报的话，会被法院强迫做DNA鉴定，认为是超生吗 2009-7-8 18:00 《行政机关公务员处分条例》规定，行政机关公务员违反规定超计划生育的，给予降级或撤职处分；情节严重的，给予开除处分。 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yialanliu Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:09 PM Report Share Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:09 PM How was it offensive and how is it a gross generalization and inaccurate? Please explain? Oh and you did take 2 paragraphs and tried to combine it. The one with regular jobs like myself and expense accounts of the rich and trying to tie it together which is doable, but you were extremely misleading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yialanliu Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:10 PM Report Share Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:10 PM Here's a government worker trying to have an extra child under a relative's name: That's the key. He's breaking another law as well to cover up the first. It's not as cut and dry as having an extra child. 国企员工，偷偷超生的话单位会开除吗？ That's interesting, never seen that until now. Definitely something new for me though but all my cases have only been a legal/extralegal 2nd birth (recent ones), so didn't know about that until now. The past ones were only 2 cases personally, my exgf's best friend who's parents were fined and my aunt whose parents were college educated stopped receiving bonuses until their pay came in line with high school educated pay and both of these cases were with 国企 companies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liuzhou Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:20 PM Report Share Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:20 PM It is offensive to my many friends who struggle with China's inflation and live on nothing more than their salaries, finding it hard to make ends meet. It is a generalisation because you present it as a universal fact, but 99% of people in China live on their salaries alone - when they are lucky enough to have one. And it is inaccurate because you categorically stated that for Chinese people their salary only accounts for 10% of their income. That is patent nonsense. Except for a few. And I'm sure those waitresses are delighted to be housed in miserable, damp dormitories as part of their "benefits". They won't find that patronising at all. You seem to think that the middle class you exist in is China. It ain't. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yialanliu Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:26 PM Report Share Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:26 PM It is a generalisation because 99% of people in China live on their salaries when they are lucky enough to have one. They live on their income, not their salary. salary alone isn't enough hence all the 补贴 hence why I am trying to make this distinction. I agree salary is too low. But due to the way certain things are calculated, a proportion of your salary isn't the same as income. Whether or not you can make ends meet is a different discussion however. And it is inaccurate because categorically stated that for Chinese people their salary only accounts for 10% of their income. That is patent nonsense. Except for a few. That was for my father. I posted my numbers which were different. And I'm sure those waitresses are delighted to be housed in miserable, damp, dormitories as part of their "benefits". They won't find that patronising at all. Miserable, damp, dormitories apply to many people. Regardless of how you feel, its still a benefit. If it wasn't, then you'd get nothing and something is better than nothing. I am not patronizing. I am just adding up all the benefits. I didn't say 10k room and board. I said 1k room and board. What you get for 1k a month, you should be clear. You seem to think that the middle class you exist in is China. It ain't. No I do not. I posted about people from all walks of life and it is important to note that I devoted a large portion to true middle class. Stipends given by entire companies across the board should be considered middle class. Benefits given across the board is middle class. You choose to note my benefits such as company dormitories which are legitimate as demeaning whereas I am not offering any epithets of that sort. I don't understand your generalization however about miserable and damp dormitories. While some might be pretty bad, I have seen my share of good dormitories which are at university level to be honest. Granted Chinese university dorms are not at Western standards, its not bad. I don't think the average dorm is considered horrible conditions. Obviously there are exceptions but at universities 4-6 a room isn't unheard of and the dormitories at these companies are comparable and sometimes even better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liuzhou Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:34 PM Report Share Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:34 PM Yawn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liuzhou Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:41 PM Report Share Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:41 PM 4-6? 8 is standard. But university dorms are a totally different topic. They are not a reward. Or part of an income. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liuzhou Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:50 PM Report Share Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:50 PM Oh and you did take 2 paragraphs and tried to combine it. The one with regular jobs like myself and expense accounts of the rich and trying to tie it together which is doable, but you were extremely misleading. That wasn't me. Do pay attention. Or are you suggesting I took these two paragraphs and combined it (sic) before you actually posted them? I know I'm brilliant, but even that is beyond me. What are you talking about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yialanliu Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:50 PM Report Share Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:50 PM But university dorms are a totally different topic. They are not a reward! Or part of an income. That's true. If living in company dorms which are better than university dorms are miserable and damp, then wow university student accommodation must be torture.... Everything should be in the context of the country which is what I am trying to do. Yes there are problems, however I don't think you are miserable just because it's not the same standard as the West. A lot of times, as long as you are not worse off than your peers, you are okay with it. So as long as someone is living in similar situations (college student versus company dorm) its not miserable. Comparison is very important to the human psyche. Do the millions of transient workers have expense accounts? The shop girls? The wait staff in China's millions of restaurants? Sounds like tying together expense accounts with transient workers to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liuzhou Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:58 PM Report Share Posted March 17, 2012 at 02:58 PM Sounds like tying together expense accounts with transient workers to me Beam me up, Scottie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feng Posted March 18, 2012 at 03:05 PM Report Share Posted March 18, 2012 at 03:05 PM How does any country set the age limit for various things? The US seems even stranger to me! If I understand correctly, you can get married at 14 but you cant buy alcohol? (And you think china is weird!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
civic94 Posted March 18, 2012 at 03:19 PM Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2012 at 03:19 PM yup.. in America you can fight a war for your country at 18, but you cant drink till your 21. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edelweis Posted March 18, 2012 at 03:33 PM Report Share Posted March 18, 2012 at 03:33 PM I think at a time alcohol was prohibited whatever your age in at least some of the states (of the USA) ? Regarding under-age marrying, teenage pregnancy unfortunately does happen whatever the country and time. In places and times where abortion is/was illegal and unsafe, and having a "bastard child" is/was socially unacceptable, it makes/made sense to make a provision for the "redeeming" of stupid or uninformed kids who conceived a child while under-age and unmarried. In modern China this kind of unfortunate accident results in a mandatory abortion I think. Two different ways of restoring social order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thechamp Posted March 18, 2012 at 04:08 PM Report Share Posted March 18, 2012 at 04:08 PM In response to jbradfor, saying there's no law banning spanking in the USA I think R v Brown (an English case) might be considered to have set a precedent here - in relation to sexual spanking. I suspect it would be considered informative in common law jurisdictions. Essentially, unless you're doing some pretty gnarly stuff, if you're consenting adults, anything goes! Can anyone else think of a relevant case here? I think we really need to figure out at what point spanking becomes illegal. Also, OP, I actually love the idea that people living 100 yards away in the next village communicating via hand signals. Perhaps they were deaf and communicating in sign? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edelweis Posted March 18, 2012 at 04:23 PM Report Share Posted March 18, 2012 at 04:23 PM @thechamp: happens all the time in Europe. Since China is basically a whole continent in itself, I do not find it surprising. For instance take modern Belgium (French coexisting with Dutch). And not so long ago, the official French language was taught in schools the same was that putonghua is now taught in China - at home the students spoke a variety of languages and dialects: Breton (celtic), Basque (an isolated language not related to other French languages), Corsican (romance), Provençal dialects (romance), Langue d'Oc dialects (romance), Langue d'Oïl dialects (romance), Germanic dialects and so on. My mother's side of the family is from a small hamlet at the frontier between three different dialects of Provençal, Langue d'Oc and Langue d'Oïl. The mayor recently commented that his own aunt married into a village distant of only a few kilometers, which dialect was unintelligible to her at first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thechamp Posted March 18, 2012 at 05:06 PM Report Share Posted March 18, 2012 at 05:06 PM Hi Edelweiss, Yeah I'm aware of different dialects in Europe. I'm English! (Cornish). Also, I remember doing an exchange to Paris in school and not being able to understand Banlieu French! I was just having fun with the idea that people could grow up 100 yards apart and not understand each other to the point that communication wasn't possible without hand signals and writing. Perhaps it's because you're used to the metric system? ; ) 100 yards is just over 90 metres! Even in modern Beijing there are people who live 90 metres apart and use the same public toilets! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edelweis Posted March 18, 2012 at 05:21 PM Report Share Posted March 18, 2012 at 05:21 PM You're right I didn't realize 100 yards is so little But actually I imagine people from a French and Dutch neighbourhood in Belgium might be separated by just a street... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazy-meiguoren Posted April 23, 2012 at 04:58 AM Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 at 04:58 AM To answer skylee's earlier question: this link could tell you what the minimum age of marriage laws are in the United States. In most states, one can get married at 18 without parental consent (19 in Nebraska). (In a few weeks, my state will also become the newest state to allow same sex marriage. Personally, I think that having the same sex gets boring after awhile...) We're kind of complex here. Once upon a time, some states had lower drinking age laws, but today all states is 21. I remember the day when 21 was also the voting age, but today it's 18. (Brings back to mind an old Barry McGuire song, Eve of Destruction, where the lyrics - circa 1965 - were "You're old enough to kill but not for votin'.) We can easily get around it where I live - if you're 19, you just take a little visit into Canada. Some Indian reservations ban all alcohol consumption for everyone. The insane patchwork of state laws come from our Constitution giving powers to the states not explicity given to the Federal government. We jealously guard that right, and get very upset when the Feds try to usurp it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylee Posted April 23, 2012 at 08:27 AM Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 at 08:27 AM Thanks for the link. So with parental consent females can marry at the age of thirteen in New Hampshire and Texas. The minimum age for males is 14, which seems to tally with that legal presumption I mentioned here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and select your username and password later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.