(Ecns.cn)--The spread of income levels among Chinese urban residents shows a great deal of disparity and will only get worse, according to a report issued on December 1 by the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security.
The study shows the per capita income of the urban dweller is 36,539 yuan (US$ 5,748) in 2010. Those who work in the financial sector top the scale at 70,146 yuan (US$ 11,034), while the agricultural sector bottoms out at 16,717 yuan (US$ 2630). The ratio between the highest and lowest groups is more than 4 to 1.
Banking sector, generous employer
At some Shanghai banks, the per capita income with bonus in 2010 came to 296,600 yuan (US$ 46,655), and per capita earnings in perks were another 60,800 yuan (US $ 9,564), reports the People's Daily. That brought the average per capita income to 357,500 in 2010, ten fold the urban average.
Hong Qifa, the president of China Minsheng Banking admitted at a summit conference on December 1, "Private enterprises make lower profits than banks, and sometimes our profits are too high, and we feel embarrassed to announce it."
The Matthew Effect
What hides behind income disparity are actually different speeds of growth for different sectors. Comparing 2009 to 1985 urban per capita incomes, it is clear the speed of growth varies: by 2009, the highest income group was making 37 times its 1985 income, the middle group 21 times, and the lowest group 12 times.
Monopolies enjoy over-heated growth, contends Tian Qing, a professor from Dongbei University of Finance and Economics who has analyzed the triggers of the phenomenon. Real estate, minerals, and finance top the list of industries raking in huge profits. He also admits unequal opportunities for employment widen the spread of income gaps.
Life satisfaction varies
Growth has been the thrust of China's development over the last three decades since the reform and opening up policy was launched in 1978, and it will continue to be so. Everyone's lives have improved, but some are progressing much faster than others. What does the public have to say about wealth discrepancy?
The Beijing News reports a survey on life satisfaction was conducted with 2,001 residents of Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou, and results were issued by the Guangzhou Public Opinion center on December 7. In the three Chinese metropolises, people at different income levels feel quite differently about their lot. The results are polarized along income lines, indicating the more one earns, the more positive the answers.
As for the means to realize ones personal goals, 81 percent of the high-income group are satisfied with their status or chances, but only 18 percent from of low income-earners are content with their opportunities.
Golden career vs. self-sufficiency
In the job dimension, the interviewees who connected to the government are more content than others, declaring satisfaction with their housing, medical treatment, training and career. In China, once one gets on the yellow brick road, one seldom quits halfway.
By contrast, those who don't work for state-owned organizations, categorized as the self-sufficient group, worry about the future. Especially with respect to social welfare, only 26 percent of individual proprietors, lawyers and accountants express satisfaction, and only 23 percent of employees in foreign companies are content with their lot.
Crossing the divide
Survey sponsor Wang Wenjun interprets the results as follows: the high-income or elite group have an easy time of it and take a superior stance to others. Those who tough it out on lower incomes hold contrastingly negative attitudes towards many aspects of life. And the middle class tends to side with the disadvantaged group rather than the elite, despite the fact they are relatively well-off.
The widening gap between rich and poor is being registered on several different measures. China's Gini coefficient, an income distribution gauge used by economists, has crossed the warning line, moving from 0.28 in 1978 to near 0.5 today, according to Xinhua News Agency.
The Gini ranges from zero to one, and researchers agree that anything in excess of 0.4 means the country's wealth is heavily concentrated in the hands of a small group, a situation that may lead to social instability. To achieve overall well-being, China still has a way to go.
