Does anyone think that James Barton is doing anything but fantasizing in his post at RealClearWorld:
For those who say that the Middle Kingdom’s economy will buckle under environmental restrictions, there is also the simple fact there is significant economic gain – not to mention well-being – to be had from lower pollution levels. In fact, Beijing largely started its anti-smog campaign due to economic considerations. According to China’s Ministry of Environmental Protection, pollution in 2010 cost the economy a whopping 3.5 percent of GDP. This is not surprising when one considers the health costs, lost productivity, and detrimental effects of pollution on sectors ranging from tourism to agriculture.
As it turns out, then, there is some good news both for Beijing and the world. Though some economic sectors may feel some initial and relatively muted impact from the environmental restrictions, over the long term, China may well be able to both have its cake and eat it too.
For China’s leaders the highest priority is their retaining their hold on the reins of power. They have shown that they believe that depends on continuing Chinese economic growth and keeping unemployment low. Coal miners are workers, too. When China’s economy was growing in double digits every year it was one thing. Last year it probably grew at half that.
It can’t be lost on China’s leaders that the decline in economic growth coincided with the very modest crackdowns on pollution.
How many people from China do you know and talk with on a regular basis? I don’t know tons, but do know a fair number. So starting with he fact that I am dealing with what is probably a biased group since they left, most of them tell me that one of the goals is many Chinese people is to work themselves up to an “indoors” job. They worry about working outdoors in the very polluted air. My sense is that there is real concern about the issue. What I don’t know, is what group(s) the govt had decided need to be mad happy. Obviously, the billionaires and party leaders, but who do they worry about rioting or trying to change things? Are they really only worried about the middle and upper classes? Are they worried about the poor who are not yet participating more in the growth?
Steve