Third richest man in China lives on $20 a day, eats same meals as workers
bbc.co.uk
bbc.co.uk
Eventually, I met the owner of the shop that gave the contracts out to businesses like my uncle's and found out that he rakes in millions of $s annually. Now, this elderly gentleman walked around in very worn-out gardener overalls, talked to everyone on site, got to know each one of us personally, offered help, ate with us and drove a beat-up 1980s Benz. He was the first millionaire I met and quite honestly a model for a humble businessman.
My saving habits changed soon after that.
The speech at our graduation was given by our janitor!
She sorted thrift store donations because she liked it.
From him I learned to be extravagant about my passions, and parsimonious with everything else.
I guess I understand that saving and living frugaly is in generally something that is desirable, but what is the point of keep saving, if one is not really planning on using it. It then might as well be a number on a bank statement, or a wad of green paper under the mattrass. One can accumulate all that, then die from over-exhaustion from accumulating it, then it might as well never existed as far as that particular person is concerned, if they never really got to enjoy it (Now perhaps some derive a large enjoyment just from the process of accumulation and knowing they have access to large sums of money, it is just what makes them happy, but that sounds a little to strange to me).
Imagine you have more money that you will ever spend in your entire life. You've bought everything you want, go anywhere you want, etc. and still have billions left over.
Is this really any different from having a $1M in the bank, being perfectly happy, and not spending any of it? In both cases you have more than you need and you're happy.
For many people saving and living frugally isn't a means to an end, it is the end. It's how they like to live their life, and being able to do so while keeping the bills paid makes them blissfully happy. That there may be millions of unused $$$ in the bank is irrelevant to them.
What I gathered and what I heard from others that have been associated with this company, is that workers were happy and quality of work was above average for this type of industry. As a young lad, it showed me that the employee/employer dependance is a two way street, which is not always the case in many companies.
Thing that tied it all together seemed to be a good work ethic and not necessarily working harder to exhaustion.
Having more things leads to more potential points of failure and less means to repair things in the case of multiple failure. It's a balance for everyone but I suspect that possessions were less important to him than security/simplicity.
Frinstance I'm guessing that the majority of the watches made by certain well-marketed and expensive watch manufacturers (I shan't name any names lest someone glance at their own wrist and feel the need to make an impassioned defence) are bought by people who really can't afford to spend that much on a watch. On the other hand, there are watches in the same price range which are probably only getting bought by people who can afford them, and most of 'em are probably brands that most people have never even heard of.
That book really made me evaluate what I am spending money on.
But the whole thing is seriously flawed, because all his statistics are based only on the small fraction of millionaires whom he actually interviewed, who are surely not a random sampling of all millionaires.
Not that I would ever buy a Rolex. Suunto's [1] are more my speed and are like having a mini-weather computer on your wrist (altimeter, barometer, compass). They are not $15 casio cheap, but way cheaper than anything like a Tag or Rolex and actually useful for my mountain climbing :)
[1] www.suunto.com http://www.amazon.com/Suunto-Observer-Wrist-Top-Altimeter-Ba...
Most popular watch brands among HH inc >$100k are Timex, Fossil and Casio but the brands most disproportionately bought by these people, of the 17 brands in the survey, are Tag Heuer (51% of Tags are bought by $100k+), Movado and Swatch. Rolex comes in at #4
I'm wondering if this is cultural traditionalism or personal dedication. On the other end of the spectrum, a lot of the Chinese have been trying to copy western capitalism in spending.
The tea comment is silly. Great Chinese teas are difficult to steep. My favorite kind of Oolong (category) tea for example, will taste disgusting if the steeping temperature of the water is off by even 10 degrees, or the steeping time is extended for even 3 seconds. Maybe he hasn't treated himself to good teas!
You did catch my curiosity with this, though:
Great Chinese teas are difficult to steep. My favorite kind of Oolong (category) tea for example, will taste disgusting if the steeping temperature of the water is off by even 10 degrees, or the steeping time is extended for even 3 seconds.
Really!
I've had that experience with Japanese greens. My favorite (Kagoshima Sencha Yutaka Midori from o-cha.com) goes from sweet to bitter with about those tolerences -- three seconds and ten degrees.
The Chinese teas in general, and even oolongs in particular, though, I've found to be awfully forgiving. They seem pretty happy with approximately boiling water and 30 - 60 seconds on a first steep. I've actually found that to be sort of the charm of them; you can fly by the seat of your pants on the brewing, and wind up with a fair bit of variety in the product.
My favorites (with these characteristics) are Bai Hao ("Oriental Beauty") and teaspring.com's Wu Yi Yan Cha Bing. What are you drinking that's so touchy?
Side note: I've managed to duplicate the flavor of regular lipton by brewing Bai Hao for about an hour and then reheating it in a microwave. (I didn't brew it that long on purpose.)
The white tea? Wow.
Anyway, yes. A more fragile tea is probably a 5+ year aged raw puh-er, as a good example! I still can't brew mine properly. =(
The white: http://www.teaspring.com/Bai-Hao-Yin-Zhen.asp The oolong: http://www.teaspring.com/Bai-Hao-Oolong.asp
I believe, though I don't speak chinese, that Bai Hao refers to the varietal, while the tea class has to do with when it's harvested and how it's processed.
Those teas are both really strong examples of the respective classes, but are otherwise totally different.
Hahaha! That sounds about right.
I've had your standard western tea product only a handful of times in the last few years. Each time I've come away surprised by how impotent and un-tea-like it was. It took me a couple of years to develop a taste for the flavors in good tea; I go back to the regular stuff, and find it surprising that all the subtlety is missing.
When you look at how it's made, the tea you get in the grocery store is analogous to hot dogs: broken pieces, leftover dust, dried out old bits with all of the potent oils and interest gone. If you're just lookin' for a meal, hot dogs will do ya, but don't let me hear you go comparing them to steak.
Though they do make some high quality tea bags these days. I've never seen them in a grocery store, though. Good tea bags have whole tea leaves in them, not dust. And a serious giveaway is that they're HUGE -- tea doesn't give you the right flavor if it doesn't have at least a coffee mug worth of space to unfurl in.
Unfortunately, I can't remember the name of the tea I'm drinking. It's at my desk at work, but I bought it from a tea shop, so it's not pre-packaged. I have the name written somewhere at home, though. When you steep some Oolongs incorrectly, the taste you get isn't as much bitter, as a (chinese word) sow taste. I don't know if that's a very good explanation, but I'm more accustom to drinking than explaining! This particular Oolong steeps for 24 seconds on a first steep (after wen ren shuan), and 22-23 on the second at calmed boiling.
I'm excited about this tea discussion.
I wouldn't say it compared well to some of the more interesting teas I've had in Tokyo (I love Oolong tea as well), but she was probably correct from the price - taste ratio.
I've lived in China for nearly a year and completely agree with your budget, but I'm really curious about the 20,000RMB meals you've had. I'd say I've had quite a few meals with governmental officials and company board members, but nothing even close to that type of budget. Mind if I ask which city and/or what circumstances led to such an outing?
This is a key observation from a man who clearly practices what he preaches.
It's kind of a cool myth, but social mobility doesn't quite work that way.
In other words, I'd argue that it's unnatural to feign disinterest in accumulating infinite power and wealth.
People who make it their life's work to study human beings generally believe that humans are motivated by the drives to acquire, to bond, to defend, and to learn.
The drive to acquire is fundamental to all animals. Getting stuff is therefore one of the prime meanings of life.
What do you spend your money on?
Of course, money is not real and it does not disappear when it is spent. What is real is the resources and labor extracted at the expense of others to provide and procure these services. Most likely, my examples could be improved and aren't worth discussing in particular.
I'm taking exception to lavish spending and resource allotment which does not even make the person spending the money happy, yet is done at the expense of others who have real needs that are going unmet. I do think an act like spending $200,000 on a bottle of wine at a restaurant just for the heck of it, while the purchaser might have hundreds of employees for whom 200k would be a life changing relief, can be seen as sociopathic.
You are getting into an argument about how people should use the resources that they have been rewarded with. This is difficult, because reducing the rewards punish the responsible, and conditional rewards are difficult to implement if the sources of that reward are heterogeneous or disorganized, such as the consumers of mass-produced goods.
Not to say it can't be done, but it's not as simple as sprinkling magic social responsibility dust onto capitalism.
It's more about personal responsibility and ethics than an economic system.
The meme that capitalism is exploitation should be considered harmful. In market societies, money is (in general) not forcibly extracted and trade certainly doesn't happen (in general) at the expense of others.
Anyway, what good is a yacht without them.
On the other hand, the humble, successful businessman simply becomes a better neighbor to all of us, and probably creates an environment where our loved ones stand to benefit.
You're selfish and want me to be a good neighbor who doesn't steal your women.
I'm selfish and want coke and prostitutes and your women.
Those are, at least in your point of view, mutually exclusive (I can imagine people who would appreciate a neighbor who's into coke and prostitutes).
I just don't see how one person's selfishness is better (in a rational way) than other person's selfishness.
If you're in a system with a bunch of humble rich guys, people will be forced to be thoughtful and conscientious. In a system of cocaine and no-value relationships, your daughter is seduced while you're nursing a hangover, and then you die of heart disease.
It isn't about stealing women, but rather creating a sustainable lifestyle where people grow and have a manageable environment.
That quote always gives me a giggle. If nothing else it serves to remind me that everyone has their own priorities.
You should take note though that the focus here is on factory workers, whereas the average Chinese wage for all Chinese workers would be lower.
Nor do I. Just wondering.
$20/day does not seem too unreasonable for local Hangzhounese.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hangzhou
[edit] 2009 figure, probably higher now.
Well... it seems to have been a valid 'criticism'. Does anyone know if this sort of attack still happens in China? I'd be amused if it did at the very least.
Also, note that China today is NOT this extreme-capitalistic country that people think. The big enterprises (telecom, oil, etc...) are open and competitive, but most of the shares are actually owned by the government. In fact, when they describe "Capitalism with Chinese Characteristics" I believe it is not a buzzword (like many believe) but really a meaningful description. It seems that they actually created something different.
Walmart and Carrefour "pulling out"??! Both are openening new stores at an amazing speed, undless that changed in the past year. Does anybody know more about this or have a link?
Living in China, I don't see much difference between Walmart and Carrefour supermarkets, both in decoration and in products, even compared with Chinese chains like Wu-Mei or Lianhua. They all have fresh meats (life frogs and turtles) and fish (a wall of water tanks with life fish), etc.
>> "Carrefour’s Asian strategy is to stay the course in China and Taiwan, [...]"
Looks like they only pull out of South-East Asia, not China, though.
shrug
Perhaps he doesn't care about how much he consumes, but rather at how much he produces. It's not about what one is taking to the grave; it's about what one is leaving.
What he's done is shift money toward capital investment, which shifts consumption C from the present to (1+x)C consumption sometime in the future. I'm not sure that's a bad thing--it's all about the time discount rate you're using in evaluating the value of economic decisions.
Whose consumption is also relevant here, but a century from now the benefits of his forsaking consumption will be fairly diffused.
Probably he is looking out for his family, or will donate a lot of money to charity.
There are plenty of honorable things about this guy. Why pick out the one negative thing?
In this specific case I can assure you that smoking is seen differently in various countries. For example when I visited the US I was astonished to see that smoking was prohibited near most buildings, etc, which is totally a good thing, it's just not like that everywhere else.