167
Chinese Characteristics (thelemmy.club)
submitted 3 days ago by Ourst@lemmy.sdf.org to c/mop@quokk.au
28 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 13 points 3 days ago

96% of people own their home in China. I dont think many are paying rents.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/home-ownership-by-country

[-] guillem@aussie.zone 17 points 3 days ago

That site is strange or I need more coffee. It says 96 on top of the page but 90 further down. Also they calculated it by occupied home apparently, not by population? The homelessness rate is almost the same as the US's according to the same site.

[-] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 3 points 3 days ago

No idea, all the sources I can find either say 90 or 96 which is kind of a big difference. Either way thats much higher thsn the US at 65.6%

[-] PugJesus@piefed.social 7 points 2 days ago

96% of people own their home in China. I dont think many are paying rents.

That's curious, considering how widespread renting is in urban areas of China. Almost like the formal system of assigning people houses in their rural hometown but refusing to acknowledge their internal immigration makes for good numbers, but shit analysis.

[-] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 7 points 3 days ago

A large portion of rent is also usually directly covered by your employer

[-] CubitOom@infosec.pub 4 points 3 days ago

You can't actually own land in the CCP's China, but you can lease the rights to the land for which a civilian residence is on for 70 years.

Personally I think this makes real estate investment a bad idea in China but a lot of people do it.

[-] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 15 points 3 days ago

Making housing a non-accumulable resource is good actually. Houses are for living in not speculation

[-] ElectricAirship@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 3 days ago

I think treating housing like infrastructure rather than an investment is a good start to alleviating the issue

[-] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 6 points 3 days ago

The Chinese Constitution has also played a role in shaping the country's land management laws. The Constitution recognizes the right of citizens to own and use land, and it prohibits the unauthorized seizure of land. The Constitution also recognizes the right of the state to regulate land use and to protect the public interest.

Thats wild because their constitution says otherwise.

[-] CubitOom@infosec.pub 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

You should read article 12 onward in Law of the People's Republic of China on the Administration of the Urban Real Estate

Article 20 and 22 is of specific interest here.

[-] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 3 points 2 days ago

Article 20 Before the term for the use of land specified in the contract for granting the land-use right expires, the State is not to recover the land-use right obtained by the land user in accordance with the law. Under special circumstances as required by public interests, the State may, in accordance with legal procedures, recover the land-use right before the expiration of the term and shall make appropriate compensation based on the number of years of utilization and the actual development of the land by the land user.

Article 21 The land-use right shall be terminated with loss of the land.

Article 22 Where the term for the use of land specified in the contract for granting the land-use right expires, and the land user needs to continue the use of the land, the land user shall apply for an extension of the term no later than one year ahead of the expiration. Such an application shall be approved except for the land to be reclaimed as required by public interests. Upon approval of the extension, the land user shall enter into a new contract for the granting of the land-use right and pay fees for the granting in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Does this refute the 90% figure?

[-] CubitOom@infosec.pub 1 points 2 days ago

It depends I guess on how one defines the word "own".

In most of the world, a temporary land use grant (even if it is for 70 years) would not be ownership.

[-] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 3 points 2 days ago

This is because you define home ownership as owning the land beneath it and ths defined it differently. Either way, thats a lot of housed people which is the point.

this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2026
167 points (97.7% liked)

Memes of Production

1030 readers
1135 users here now

Seize the Memes of Production

An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the “ML” influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.

Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.

Other Great Communities:

founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
Deceptichum@quokk.au