Please help me write an article about your views on the Ludian earthquake, please.

Opinions on the Ludian Earthquake

I read something today about the self-built houses in rural areas during the earthquake. It is nothing more than the unsafety of self-built houses has brought many bloody lessons. . This further extends to China's people's livelihood issues, issues with China's ruling party and government, inaction, etc. This type of discussion will occur every time a major domestic event occurs.

First of all, there is the issue of self-built houses. After the Ludian earthquake, some media said this: The 6.5-magnitude earthquake in Ludian, Yunnan, although not too high in magnitude, caused a large number of casualties. Experts analyzed five major reasons. One of the important reasons is that the epicenter is about 26 kilometers away from the county seat. Most of the local houses are rural houses, mostly adobe houses and brick-concrete houses, which have poor disaster resistance. I think this has also created a starting point for some discussions. Some media have pointed their swords at the supervision of self-built housing in rural areas, including "big names" such as Xinhuanet. This sharpness is enough to make some local governments feel ashamed and timid.

My neighbor’s house happens to be under construction, and my major is more or less related to it. I would like to share my views.

First of all, I want to talk about the cost issue. The cost of a good house and a house with strong earthquake resistance is naturally much higher than that of an ordinary house. We must admit this. For self-built houses, especially in rural areas, the cost may have to be considered. To give a simple example, if you build a two-story small building, you can have slabs between the floors, or you can use steel bars and concrete. Casting on site, in terms of sturdiness, is naturally stronger, but in terms of cost, it may be twice as much, and China's rural people don't seem to be that wealthy. I don’t know about other places. In Jiangsu, taking into account the current prices of building materials and labor, the cost of a two-and-a-half-story building is about 200,000 (without decoration). This is based on not demanding the structure, for example There is no need for steel bars and concrete to be cast on site.

Building a house may consume a good part of a rural family’s savings, and farmers have to consider their children’s education, family expenses, medical treatment for major diseases, etc. It’s impossible. Invest all your savings!

Some media gave suggestions: Design templates and construction standards can be compiled and issued according to regional characteristics and seismic standards. So what I want to say is, who should pay for the increased costs due to structure or design. Is it the government or taxpayers? Does the government have the financial resources? Some suggestions are to learn from Japan, Canada and other countries, and use subsidies and other methods to advocate the use of wooden structures and light steel structures with strong earthquake resistance to build houses.

First, China seems to have much more rural people than these developed countries. With China's current financial resources, it seems that there are not many people who can allocate subsidies equally to individual accounts, and it seems impossible to change the structure of a house with a few thousand yuan.

Second, even if there is a subsidy, will it be issued by the state or led by local governments. If it is a national-level decision-making, then will these funds be used for other purposes when they arrive at the local level, especially in the relatively poor western rural areas? Developed countries can improve these mechanisms very well. I am afraid it is still difficult for China. This is not a criticism of the government. The issue of confidence is sometimes not an issue of embezzlement, because there are many places in need of money in poor areas. If it is dominated by local governments in a certain region, then where does the money come from? Governments in developed eastern regions can generate wealth through economic means such as infrastructure construction and consumption, but what about the west? The focus of this discussion seems to be mainly on self-built houses in earthquake-prone areas.

Thirdly, the design of "wooden structure and light steel structure with strong earthquake resistance" does not seem to be controllable by amateur farmers. Then do you have to hire a few architects when building your own house? College graduate? Who will pay the wages?

Fourth, in rural areas, self-built houses may also have to take into account customs. Everyone builds brick houses. If you are unconventional and build a house with a special structure and high cost, others will No matter how you look at it, people in rural China are relatively frugal and conservative. Older people may say that you are a prodigal, and sometimes spitting on them may make you feel uncomfortable. People in some places still believe in the so-called wealth that should not be exposed. .

Secondly, it is the government's problem. Once something like an earthquake occurs, there will be such a statement on the Internet that the government does nothing or does little, and the government should bear a lot of responsibility for the huge casualties caused by it. Responsibility, does the government have any responsibility? It is undeniable, but some things are uncontrollable. What is a natural disaster that cannot be controlled by manpower? Even in a country like Japan that is prepared for earthquakes, are there no casualties from earthquakes? Won’t the earthquake expose some problems? As far as supervision is concerned, if it is to supervise self-built houses, then the regulatory agency must be the village or township. Going further up does not seem to be very operable, because building a house does not happen overnight, and in China, a humane society, let It seems a bit difficult for the secretary or village chief of the same village to supervise. Also, for those houses that have been built, some may have been built for more than ten years. More than ten years ago, the awareness of earthquake resistance and disaster prevention seemed to be even weaker. Should the current government pay for this? And how many of the collapsed houses were such elderly houses? Should houses like this be demolished in the vast rural areas of China? If it is demolished, who will spend the money to build it? The farmers themselves will definitely be unwilling to demolish it. If it is not demolished, if an earthquake occurs and it collapses, will the local government be scolded again? Therefore, we should not only see what the government does poorly, but should objectively evaluate the government's behavior.

On the other hand, the actions of all levels of Chinese government after the earthquake are still remarkable! China is different from Haiti. China is not a country that relies on international assistance to overcome natural disasters such as earthquakes. The Chinese government's post-disaster reconstruction capabilities are still very strong. This seems to be evident from the Wenchuan earthquake. Japan, which is also a big country, has a very strong ability to rebuild after disasters. The shadow of the island nuclear power plant accident does not seem to dissipate quickly.

The current situation is like this. A group of people sitting in high-rise buildings, a group of people who have no idea about self-built houses. When they see the bloody figures in the earthquake, they think about the current government’s Corruption and other issues, and then look at the foreign media's evaluation of China's ruling party, they can't help but gather together, and some remarks float out. The fact may be that they just read a few relevant articles on the Internet, or they heard it from hearsay. I received some news. What I want to say is that the articles you see are also written by people, and the opinions you hear are also spread by people. Those people may not have a thorough understanding of it like you, but you chose to join. In the camp that follows the trend of discussion, some discussions seem to be irrational.

And some that rise to the point of completely negating the government and the ruling party appear to be irrational.

China currently has many problems, which we must admit, but its achievements cannot be questioned. I sometimes feel dissatisfied with the current government and some of the current social conditions, but the Chinese government and the ruling party have made some achievements in recent years. Now I want to explain what, in my opinion, the achievements of the Chinese government or the ruling party have been over the years.

Economically speaking, generally speaking, before this century, East Asia’s economy seemed to be dominated by Japan. In East Asia, Japan was the first to succeed in economic development, and then through industrial exports, it boosted the economies of East Asian countries, such as South Korea.

However, during the 1998 financial crisis, Japan adopted a beggar-thy-neighbor approach and devalued the yen. Although it protected Japan's economy to a certain extent, it also led to Japan's political and economic problems in East Asia. The weakening of influence.

Secondly, the public opinion war in Western countries is not a simple matter. Maybe in just a few months, the image of a responsible big country that has been finally established will collapse. Then China is really isolated and without help, just like Japan during the 1998 economic crisis. It can be seen that China's slightly aggressive approach to some South China Sea countries has also aroused concerns in some third world countries. Third, whether it is the South China Sea issue, the Taiwan issue, the Xinjiang issue, etc., they are just means by Western countries to restrict us. If it affects the rise of China, it is not worth it, but it seems that these actions have played a certain role in restricting China. effect. The most important point is that China has now seized the leadership of the East Asian economy and then the pulse of the world economy. How can we repeat the mistakes of Japan in 1998? As for the issue of islands in the East China Sea, China is much more intense. Japan's purchase of islands seems to have caused quite a stir in China.

Those who do not understand strategy are at most a pioneer general, and only those who can see the overall situation are handsome.

…………

These are all things China’s ruling party and government have done, and they cannot be regarded as inaction! But China also has many problems, such as bureaucratic corruption, the gap between rich and poor, etc. For example, last year, the top official of a municipality fell down. The official explanation was that it was corruption and abuse of power. Everyone has their own answer to whether this is true or not. But these cannot be used to deny the achievements of the government and the ruling party. Merits are merits, and mistakes are mistakes. Rational judgment is very important, and blindly being negative seems to have little value.

I am just expressing my own opinions based on some comments on the Internet after the Ludian earthquake. I am not a professional and will not explain too much.