From: li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tom Li)
Subject: Re: China(was More than 50% support TI)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 02:21:29 GMT


In article <liqiang.726187604@kramden>, liqiang@kramden.nyu.edu (Li) writes...
> 
>A good reference would be "The Statistical Yearbook of China". It is published
>yearly by China's National Statistical Bureau and should be retained in the
>reference section of every business school's library. This book contains
>official data of all facets of the mainland's economy and is oft-quoted
>by economists. I assume one can find other countries' yearbooks for comparisons.
> 
>As far as my memory can serve me, the total yearly grain output of the mainland
>is a little over 810 billion jin (1 lb = .918 jin) - check the most recent
>yearbook for more digits. This figure has been claimed by the mainland
>gvmnt for yrs to be No. 1 in the world and I have not heard of any disputes 
>on that - what the hell, we have a population 5 times as big as that of the
>US.
> 
>The greatest achievement of the mainland's economy has been feeding
>22% of world's population with only 7% of world's cultivable lands. Thus
>it is not a surprise that China's grain output per unit land is way higher
>than most countries (esp the US and Canada where mechanization is
>prevalent and does not ensure high yield per unit land - since they
>have a surplus amount of land). This is achieved by intensive farming
>and double(or even triple)-harvesting but I disagree with Chunde Shi that
>double-harvesting demonstrates the fertility of China's land. Many people 
>have argued that double-harvesting does harm to land's fertility and I think
>while American and Canadian farmers can practise double-harvesting, they have
>never thought about it.
> 
>Isn't it true that the most notorious famines occurred during periods of 
>turmoil? Even if the Chinese lands may not be as fertile (let's take into
>account the climate factor here) as the Ukrainian Plains,
>this factor alone cannot cause a ubiguitous famine. The truth is
>ancient Chinese wars were exceedingly destructive (maybe Western European
>wars were no less destructive, but that's irrelavent here).
> 
>For example, right before the An-Shi Turmoil in Tang Dynasty, Chang'an and
>Luo'yang (and just anywhere else in China proper) were very rich but after the 
>8-year turmoil, the total population dropped from 55 million to 8 million
>and residents (including many officials) of the two capitals were wearing 
>paper instead of clothes!
> 
>A counter-example is the early Tang era. Li Shimin took the throne in
>626. In 627, there was a terrible disaster in Central China caused by swarms of
>locusts(?) and in the following year, there was the flooding. During these yrs,
>Li Shimin was able to execute excellent political management (Tang was
>small then but practically at peace) and avoid a nationwide famine. In 629, the
>harvest was tremendous (eventually) and the country went on to survive
>and became a regional power.
> 
>My point is most ancient Chinese famines were caused by warfare. Advance
>farming tech (mentioned by Nelson Lu) and good political management in
>peaceful times can well offset the possible non-productivity of the Chinese
>soil - that is, if you can argue about it at all. Usu the gvmnt stores
>surplus food during peaceful times to provide against military actions
>and unfavorable harvests. At war times, however, with no gvnmt support,
>a single natural disaster can hit the country real bad. 
> 
>Remember the Great Leap Forward in 1958 and the then prevalent movements
>nationwide of free food, drinks, etc? This was not a communist invention.
>Exactly the same thing happened in Sui Dynasty. When Sui was at her climax,
>Yang Guang, the 2nd emperor, used to set up restaurants from Luo'yang all
>the way to Chang'an to offer free(!) foods and drinks to passers-by. It is
>ironic that only a few years later, starving rebels were hunting him down
>all around the country.
> 
>Agreed. Natural disasters should be accounted for.
> 
>I suspect the Yellow River was a well-behaved river in ancient times. The
>current flood peril has been due to unrelenting destruction of the trees that
>used to forest the now Huangtu Plateau, isn't that so? Thus the fact
>that the US and Europe have seen fewer and less severe floods is due
>to their extensive forestry which China traditionally (not now unfortunately)
>also enjoyed.
> 
>With the continued practice of intensive farming, the fertility of
>not just the Northern China Plains but plains of the whole China could
>become more doubtful. 
> 
>- Li, Qiang

Good article. I am glad to read this one from Li Qiang, another Mainland 
Chinese particularly after reading so many Chunde's. 

Who say Mainland Chinese are all bad? :-)

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan