Wen Tiejun: I'd rather have a room in the city than a courtyard in the village, and young people don't be stupid

Listening to a content from Wen Tiejun today, I am talking about a psychological phenomenon of rural youth today, that is, I would rather have a room in the city than a courtyard in the village. Professor Wen Tiejun explained a phenomenon that caused this psychology from the perspective of real estate. For example, including fourth-tier cities and the following central towns, a lot of real estate needs to be digested. How to digest it? It is the way to force the peasants to go to the city to buy and digest these surplus houses. Of course, this persecution is a big detour.

For example, through the concentration of education, the basic public service of schools is concentrated from the countryside to the towns, which makes rural youth want to let their children go to school, they have to go to the towns to choose to live, then they have to buy houses in the towns. On the other hand, the public service of medical treatment is also concentrated from the village to the town, for example, if you see a doctor at a medical station in the village, it is not within the scope of reimbursement, and you can only be reimbursed if you see a doctor in a hospital at the county level. In this way, many elderly people have to go to the city to see a doctor, and young people have to choose to live in the city in order to make it convenient for the elderly to see a doctor, to buy and digest those surplus houses.

In short, to think that this peasant going to the city is not entirely based on the choice of voluntary initiative, but in terms of system, forming a kind of artificial wall, like chasing ducks, blocking the direction you can run, and you can only go in that direction. Of course, young people choose to go to the city, including but not limited to these two aspects. For example, some young people just feel that life in the city is lively, there are many people with more information, and there are many opportunities. To be honest, even if you are looking for a girlfriend to fall in love, you must first go to a place where there are many young girls, and girls are not the same. That is to say, young people choose to go to the city, and the ideas and reasons are also manifold.

But behind these early radical actions, there is a very large peasant crisis. So I said, I'd rather have a room in the city than a courtyard in the countryside, don't be stupid.

Why?

What I said above actually began in the mid-to-late 1980s. In the past few decades between urban and rural areas, such a peasant has been interpreted into the process of entering the city. In the process, we see the withering of the countryside everywhere, the absence of medical stations, the decay of schools, the enlargement of hollow villages, the disappearance of young people, and even the beginning of desolation of the fields.

But what Lao Hu wants to say is that these phenomena have lasted for decades and have clearly reached the end of a trend. That is, if you look at it 40 years ago, this is a trend, and from today's point of view, this trend has come to an end. Further back, this trend no longer has the stamina to move forward. This point, as today's rural young people, must be clearly seen. Otherwise, there's a good chance you won't be able to keep up with the trends of the previous decades, and you'll be thrown far behind again in the decades to come.

Some of the more rigid rural phenomena that we can see today are supporting Lao Hu's views. For example, the general hardening of rural roads, the gradual improvement of rural infrastructure, the three networks into the village, the subsidy for the transformation of dangerous houses in rural areas, plus the recent express delivery into the village, e-commerce into the village. There are also phenomena such as the introduction of policies on agricultural industrialization, the introduction of policies to encourage young people to return to their hometowns, and so on, which seem to be in sharp contrast with the forcing peasants to go to the cities mentioned above: while encouraging them to go to the cities and encouraging their returns, while vigorously engaging in urbanization and at the same time vigorously engaging in rural revitalization, what is the meaning of this?

This is also the point that Lao Hu said in the previous video program, that is, the grand strategic intention of China's development, including rural revitalization, is to carry out a comprehensive national rejuvenation through two-way, screening, and qiankun large-scale transfer. Specifically, it is to let young people who have the ability to enter the city and hope to enter the city be able to go to the city, which is also a kind of humane construction. Not like in the past, if you want to go into the city, you also have the ability to enter the city, but you just can't do it if your hukou is restricted. And let the young people who cannot go to the city continue to stay in the countryside and become rising stars. Even the next policy of citizens going to the countryside, which is highly likely to be realized, is breaking the one-way flow of the past and advancing in the direction of more humane construction. In a word, all kinds of artificial restrictions are being broken, and the future Chinese society will be more enlightened and more open. Household registration restrictions, birth restrictions, education restrictions, medical restrictions, and pension restrictions are all broken, the first to break is the difference between urban and rural areas, and the second is between identities, between industries, and between posts. In short, the trend is to break down restrictions, not to set more restrictions. We have to see this trend clearly.

However, at the end of the previous trend, at the beginning of the latter trend, in this alternating stage, we tend to express our own views according to what we have seen in the past, and rarely express our views on the judgment of future trends. This is why we only see the withering of the countryside, but not the prosperity of the countryside.

Then, under this future trend, rural young people would rather have a room in the city than a courtyard in the countryside. If it is after the radical behavior of entering the city in the early stage, the later stage is faced with employment pressure, income pressure, and survival pressure. Just like this epidemic, when the epidemic came, prices rose, not to mention, incomes fell sharply. As an ordinary family living in the city, I think I can feel the pressure of survival the most. For an amphibian who has both rural life experience and urban life, it is really possible to realize the survival of the countryside and the survival of the city, which is easier.

The revenue model of various economies has begun to change from the past centralized centralization to decentralized decentralization. To put it simply, the idea that you want to do something in the city and want to struggle for a few years to earn an upstart is unrealistic. That is, we are saying that money is earned by everyone, and the result of decentralized decentralization is that money is earned by everyone, which means that everyone earns a limited amount. It is flattened and pulled evenly, unlike in the past, as long as you catch any opportunity, you earn a lot of money alone, others want to earn and can't earn, hold on to death, starve to death, that phenomenon is unlikely to happen. Because in the past, the so-called opportunity was actually caused by information asymmetry, you know what others don't know, this is your opportunity. Now and later, information asymmetry has been greatly weakened, information has been shared, and opportunities are no longer favored over the other. Everyone has a chance, and everyone has to rely on their own labor and hard work to grasp it.

I'd rather have a room in the city than a courtyard in the countryside. In this word, there are more meanings. One of them is that the house in the city is valuable, the rural yard is not valuable, and there is also a meaning that for the rural single stick, a room in the city can be used as a marriage room, no matter how small it is, it is also a person with a house, but the room in a courtyard in the countryside is not a room, the woman does not agree, and there is also a meaning, no matter how small the house in the city is, we are also urban people, the rural house is big, we are still farmers, there is an inferiority complex.

Let the old nonsense say, the house is used to live, as long as you do not speculate on the house, the house is worth not worth anything, it has nothing to do with living. The livable environment in the future of the countryside must be better than the city, which is some stupid women who can't see the stupid and stupid crowd into the city, and the hard days are behind it. The overall image of the countryside has been improved, so that the peasant identity in this world in the future can be inlaid with more gold edges. Therefore, young people in the countryside, before we were stupid, we could not keep up, in the future, don't be stupid again.