2006-05-04

Magores out how China and the US are different: Parks

I thought I'd take a break from the huge posts that take hours to write, and almost as long to read.

Here's a short one for you...

As you probably know, and have gathered, if you have been reading along: China is different than the US.

One difference is Public Parks.

Take for example, Golden Gate Park, Wapato Lake, Crissy Field, or any other park in the US that you can think of. (National Parks like Yosemite are different. I'm talking about the local stuff.)

In the US, the way it works is that you cross the street, and you are now in the park. It's as simple as that. You aren't in the park, and then you are.

Beijing is different. It costs money to get into public parks. This seems odd to me. Granted it's as little as 1 RMB, but it still feels weird. It IS a public park isn't it?

(In case you forgot, 1 RMB is 1 Chinese dollar. The offical way to say it is "Yi Yuan". Most people say "Yi kuai". 1 Chinese dollar is 1/8 of a US dollar.)

I was explaining to James (the big boss's husband) how it's different in the US. So, how does the US pay for the parks? Generally, income tax and/or sales tax and/or bond measures.

Aha.... China doesn't have this. We didn't get into the details of taxes in China, but I gathered this much... No income tax. Any sales tax is added before the consumer sees the price. Bond measures are a different beast all together. We didn't go there.

So... The parks pay for themselves by the entrance fees they collect from the people that visit the park. (I'm sure they are subsidized somewhat, but we didn't dive into that much detail about the topic.)

--

The Chinese system seems to encourage a "Self Sustaining" outlook. Go to X park, so you pay to make it better/keep it up. You don't go to Y Park, so why should you pay for it?

The arguement from the US would be that... Parks are a public resource, so the entire public should pay for the entire Park system.

--

It's kinda funny...

Which description sounds more like capitalism, and which sounds like socialism?

No comments: