Recently, the news that a neighborhood office in Qingdao required residents with substantial savings in their bank accounts but not buying houses to be interviewed has sparked discussions among netizens.
Some articles questioned whether the neighborhood office officials have turned into real estate brokers, and expressed concerns that the government’s encouragement of having a third child could lead to the neighborhood office scrutinizing those who intentionally do not have three children.
On June 10th, the WeChat public account “Three Youths” published an article titled “From Intentionally Not Buying Houses to Intentionally Not Having Three Children.”
The article pointed out that a neighborhood office in Qingdao issued a task notification to promote residents’ housing purchase policies. If residents are found to have significant savings in their bank accounts but do not buy houses, they are deemed to lack awareness and are required to be reminded through interviews. The neighborhood office has also included this task in the employee appraisal standards.
Neighborhood office staff members admitted that they received a notification to include the sales contracts of newly-built commercial apartments in their appraisals. They further mentioned that failure to complete the task may result in the community losing points, and the community secretary might face fines.
After the incident was exposed, it quickly gained a significant amount of attention and discussion online.
The article questioned whether the neighborhood office has transformed into a sales department. Are the neighborhood office officials now acting as real estate agents?
In fact, whether the neighborhood office should venture into real estate sales is not the main issue. Some sharp-eyed netizens identified the core of this farce: anyone found with substantial savings in the bank but not buying a house must be interviewed.
This phenomenon inevitably reminds people of the time when the government implemented the three-child policy. People found it somewhat ironic as in the past, due to the pressure of housing loans and high education costs, many were reluctant to have children, leading to a declining birth rate. “Those who want to have children have already done so, and letting those who don’t want children have ten won’t make a difference.”
Some netizens suggested that the three-child policy should begin with public servants. They proposed that individuals must have one child to be eligible to apply for civil service positions. Once employed, they should be further encouraged to have children and be granted extended parental leave, such as a two-year break after the second child and a three-year break after the third.
Chinese media previously reported that Zhao Yanjing, a professor at Xiamen University, proposed linking childbirth with social security, penalizing those who do not have children, and rewarding those who do, to stimulate the birth rate.
This statement sparked heated discussions online. Subsequently, Zhao Yanjing clarified that the modern pension system relies on contributions from the current generation to support the elderly generation.
The article by “Three Youths” cited Zhao Yanjing’s statement and expressed concerns that one day, just like the strict scrutiny of “intentional non-buyers of houses” by the neighborhood office, the encouragement of the three-child policy might lead to scrutiny of those who have savings in their bank accounts but choose not to have children, which would be deemed as improper.
Last week, Jiaozhou City in Qingdao, Shandong Province, introduced a new policy further reducing the threshold for purchasing houses – lowering the down payment ratio to 7.5%.
Experts and the public believe that this could increase transaction risks, indicating that local governments in third and fourth-tier cities are panicking amidst the real estate market crisis. Netizens mocked, saying they have extended the rope for those who want to hang themselves.
In 2022, Chinese media reported that the Xuejiadao neighborhood office in Qingdao recently ordered community investigations into residents’ willingness to buy houses and required interviews for those who are “intentionally not buying houses” despite having substantial savings in their bank accounts.
Subsequently, the Securities Times commented that stabilizing the property market should be done based on specific circumstances and should not overcorrect disproportionately.