are they counting urban villages as slums? because what else in modern China is even mildly slum-like?
sure, if you go to some very rural corner you can find people living in simple housing, but that’s also not a slum, and you can find similar things in rural southern/eastern europe as well as taiwan and thailand which are all very pale in this map.
if they really count urban villages (or other migrant worker areas such as the less agreeable factory dorm areas) in urban china as “slums”, which i guess is the only way you’d get anywhere near 20%, then surely you’d do the same for migrant worker areas in the US as well? if they count less fancy urban working class areas in China as “slums” then how come egypt, colombia and southeast europe are all bright pale?
what about the gulf states? migrant workers there ( western financebros and other scam artists not counted, i mean asian migrant workers) definitely live in worse conditions than chinese migrant workers and constitute a big percentage of the residents but apparently it doesn’t count.
It’s very likely using similar dubious metrics as statistics that claim China has a 20-30% homelessness rate because it counts all the migrant workers that don’t officially own a home in the cities they migrate to (they count rental properties under this FYI) as “homeless” even though they all technically have homes in their home towns already.
Also yeah, it’s pretty hilarious that Thailand has a ‘pale white’ slum category while all their neighbours are much higher in percentage when Thailand one of the most unequal countries in the world when it comes to wealth and living standards. I mean just go to downtown Bangkok and you will literally find slum-like habitations next to high rise condominiums lol.
Western nations deliberately misunderstand seasonal migrant labour specifically for cases like this where they can claim it as evidence of a “homelessness”, “slums” or “forced labour” problem.
Flashback to western media reporting all local labor in Xinjiang as “forced” and that all the labourers were being sent to other regions of China somehow simultaneously
are they counting urban villages as slums? because what else in modern China is even mildly slum-like?
sure, if you go to some very rural corner you can find people living in simple housing, but that’s also not a slum, and you can find similar things in rural southern/eastern europe as well as taiwan and thailand which are all very pale in this map.
if they really count urban villages (or other migrant worker areas such as the less agreeable factory dorm areas) in urban china as “slums”, which i guess is the only way you’d get anywhere near 20%, then surely you’d do the same for migrant worker areas in the US as well? if they count less fancy urban working class areas in China as “slums” then how come egypt, colombia and southeast europe are all bright pale?
what about the gulf states? migrant workers there (
western financebros and other scam artists not counted, i mean asian migrant workers) definitely live in worse conditions than chinese migrant workers and constitute a big percentage of the residents but apparently it doesn’t count.
It’s very likely using similar dubious metrics as statistics that claim China has a 20-30% homelessness rate because it counts all the migrant workers that don’t officially own a home in the cities they migrate to (they count rental properties under this FYI) as “homeless” even though they all technically have homes in their home towns already.
Also yeah, it’s pretty hilarious that Thailand has a ‘pale white’ slum category while all their neighbours are much higher in percentage when Thailand one of the most unequal countries in the world when it comes to wealth and living standards. I mean just go to downtown Bangkok and you will literally find slum-like habitations next to high rise condominiums lol.
Western nations deliberately misunderstand seasonal migrant labour specifically for cases like this where they can claim it as evidence of a “homelessness”, “slums” or “forced labour” problem.
Flashback to western media reporting all local labor in Xinjiang as “forced” and that all the labourers were being sent to other regions of China somehow simultaneously
I think it’s fair to say that itinerant homelessness is real homelessness, it should just be counted as its own category.see belowthese people are neither, they have a house in one province and rent an apartment in another (or worst case have a staff dorm as a job benefit)
Oh, I misread, my bad