 |
|
 |
Large Medium Small |
State gets into land sales
Local governments are caught in a dilemma over whether to curb housing prices. Their action in most cases has been restricted to words as they continue to make more and more profits from transfers of land-use rights, says an article in Youth Times. Excerpts:
A record price was offered for land at an auction in Beijing on March 15 in contrast to what was suggested at the just concluded NPC and CPPCC sessions. What the public found puzzling is the presence of many large State-owned enterprises (SOEs) as bidders at the auction. If the authorities are really serious about curbing property prices why were so many SOE representatives hiking the land price by bidding for it?
Local governments face a peculiar problem. They stand to lose precious revenue if they help bring down land prices, because a big percentage of their income comes from transfer of land-use rights. And their revenue may increase but the property sector bubble may grow bigger if they continue with their “liberal” policies.
In fact, it is difficult for the governments at the lower levels to replace transfer of land-use rights with another, constant source of income. What complicates matters is that the many officials who run realty business on the side do not want the housing prices to climb down. Besides, officials are reluctant to build subsidized houses for the low-income families because they won’t serve their personal needs. Why? Because many government department and SOE officials have access to inexpensive houses.
The Hurt Locker really hurts
The Hurt Locker, a movie about the US IraqWar, beat Avatar at the Oscars. But the awards cannot hide its lackluster performance at the box office and lack of authenticity, says an article in Xinhua net. Excerpts:
What does the Hurt Locker offer the audience? It shows the brutality of the US-led war in Iraq and the torture of Iraqi civilians. But it is also depicts the heroism and kindness of the US troops, who incidentally are arrogant even in their role as saviors.
The film tries to justify that “decisive shooting” is necessary on the battlefield even if it means killing innocent civilians. But no logic can justify cold-blooded murder, especially in a country where the very existence of US troops has to be justified. More than 100,000 civilians have been killed in the seven years since the US-led invasion of Iraq. And more than 10 percent of children have been born with deformities in Fallujah alone because of the contamination caused by the white phosphorus and depleted uranium bombs dropped by the US.
But what does the Hurt Locker show: Iraqi militants are responsible for all the civilian deaths in that country. Instead of depicting the hatred Iraqis have for US troops, and vice-versa, the film shows a happy soccer match between US GIs and Iraqi children. Even the language used in the film makes us suspect that its makers are trying to exculpate the US of its war crimes. Is that why the movie got so many Oscars?
