The Chinese Communist Party’s announcement during the Two Sessions claiming an increase of 20 yuan in farmers’ pension has exposed the living conditions of the vast majority of Chinese farmers. Analysts believe that the extreme exploitation by the CCP has led to the poverty of farmers, and the so-called rural revitalization strategy that the CCP has been advocating for years is unlikely to be effective.
Recently, Chinese Premier Li Keqiang announced in the Two Sessions government work report that the “basic pension for urban and rural residents will be raised by 20 yuan, appropriately increasing the basic pension for retirees.”
This statement once again brought attention to the issue of farmers’ pensions.
Chinese science popularization blogger Xiang Dongliang wrote an article stating that although it is called the basic pension for urban and rural residents, it is actually targeted at the rural population, hence it is more appropriate to call it the farmers’ pension.
The article mentioned that in Hubei Province, for example, the standard farmers’ pension in 2024 was 172 yuan per month, and the 20 yuan increase translates to an 11.6% rise. In the future, farmers in Hubei Province reaching a certain age can receive 192 yuan per month, enough for a hotpot meal.
The basic pension for retirees should also be “appropriately increased.” In 2024, the basic pension for retirees was raised by 3%. Taking Beijing as a reference, the average retirement pension in 2023 was 5,951 yuan, and an appropriate 3% increase would mean an average monthly increase of 178.5 yuan. Just this increase alone is more than 6 yuan higher than the total monthly pension of a farmer in Hubei. The urban-rural gap and regional disparities are evident.
Veteran media personality Peng Yuanwen recently wrote that farmers were the earliest group in society to contribute to social security, paying public grain and including the “three provisions and five supply” measures. Farmers should receive pensions of no less than 800 yuan per month.
The article stated that before 1998, most enterprise employees did not pay social security, but their working years were directly considered as payment years. Before 2014, staff in government and public institutions also did not contribute to social security, with their working years similarly considered as payment years. So, why can’t farmers be treated equally? Even rural youth have their working years counted, so why not farmers?
However, the reporter found that Peng Yuanwen’s public account “Memories and Thoughts” where the article was published was unable to be followed due to “violations.”
Wang Mingyi from a rural area in Hubei told the reporter that in today’s Chinese society, ordinary grassroots people, regardless of where they live, are all suffering: staying in rural areas may lower living costs, but incomes will also decrease relatively; living in cities may offer more job opportunities and convenience, but various fee items continuously exploit the common people.
“The people in impoverished areas do not receive any guarantees for their livelihoods, and nobody cares about their lives. The people living at the bottom of mainland China, their monthly subsidies do not even cover the cost of raising livestock, living worse than livestock, and the CCP government turns a blind eye to them…”
Historian Liu Yinquan stated in an interview with the Epoch Times that farmers’ status in China is the lowest. Strictly speaking, they are not even considered farmers because they do not own land. An increase of 20 yuan in the farmers’ pension cannot keep up with the inflation rate, nor can it solve any problems. The essence of CCP rule is to serve the very few beneficiaries who control power.
Liu Yinquan mentioned that the CCP’s origins stem from Marxism combined with the peasant movement. The CCP’s earliest army was called the Workers’ and Peasants’ Red Army, where in reality, the vast majority, 99.9%, were farmers, including CCP leaders. The CCP relied on farmers to seize power, treating them as cannon fodder, feeding farmers a communist pie.
However, once in power, the top CCP officials live in cities and need to ensure urban prosperity and stability, deliberately expanding the urban-rural divide. Setting a planned economy from the start, they depressed the prices of agricultural products, forcing farmers to buy expensive industrial products, leading farmers to become poorer.
“This scissor gap has caused rural poverty. The Communist Party has never solved this scissor gap issue. So, their constant mentioning of the ‘Three Rural Issues’ is useless. The disparity between rural and urban areas has grown. Farmers’ houses remain the same their whole lives, not appreciating, just due to the CCP’s policies, perpetuating the perpetual poverty of Chinese farmers, making them serfs.” he said.
Chinese problem scholar Dai Wei stated in an interview with the Epoch Times that originally, the land belonged to the farmers, and besides labor, they had profits to earn. However, after 1949, the CCP nationalized farmers and even their houses (ancestral homes), eliminating farmers, they were just industrial workers. During the People’s Commune era, they still had to work and receive work points. And industrial workers were required to have pensions.
Regarding the CCP’s boast of abolishing agricultural taxes that had been in place for thousands of years, Dai Wei pointed out that in the past, agricultural products were the world’s largest commodities. However, with the development of industrial civilization, resources like minerals, rare earths, mobile phones, and chips could generate greater economic value. Agriculture had enormous natural risks, with limited profits, so agricultural taxes became a small portion.
“The abolition of agricultural taxes was not a favor from the Communist Party, but after joining the WTO, seeing that agricultural products worldwide not only did not pay taxes but also received subsidies from the public finances. Those countries seem to be subsidizing agriculture, essentially indirectly subsidizing every citizen who consumes agricultural products.”
In recent years, the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs has proposed a rural revitalization strategy that plans to invest at least 7 trillion yuan. The plan includes subsidies for households to establish family farms, state-owned enterprises in infrastructure entering agriculture, and allowing the buying and selling of rural residential land.
Regarding this, Dai Wei expressed that domestic scholars had long suggested the establishment of family farms and the construction of science and technology parks but doing it through the current leasing system made it impossible for family farms to start, as they lacked rights. Agricultural land must return to privatization, farmers need to own their land for autonomous farming and operations.
Liu Yinquan also believes that the CCP spending money on the “revitalization” of rural areas will not be effective, and rural areas will only worsen. The key issues are:
First, there is a significant discrepancy between urban and rural areas. In comparison to cities, rural areas lack in various aspects. Young people in villages are actively seeking ways to move to cities. Rural areas no longer have the allure to retain talent and youth.
“I also have relatives in rural areas, and when I call to check their situation, there are hardly any young people left in the villages. Only the elderly and the infirm reside there. In such a situation, no matter what is done, it cannot be resolved. This is the first aspect – from a manpower perspective, it’s not sustainable.” he said.
Secondly, there is a systemic issue. Land is not privately owned; it falls under collective ownership, which effectively is controlled by the Communist Party. Farmers cannot make long-term plans, improve soil quality—it costs a lot of effort and money, and the land may be taken back by the state or land leases would expire anytime. Thus, in such circumstances, how can things possibly improve?
Thirdly, land is divided into small plots, making it impossible to use large machinery for production, maintaining a subsistence farming economy. Land cannot be bought or sold, similar to renting a house. Without the right to ownership, how can one possibly invest in improving their land?
Qin Shuzhong from Xinzhuang Market in Shijiazhuang, Hebei, said that in recent years, changes have occurred in rural areas, with muddy streets being replaced by cement roads, cement-structured houses being built, including school buildings and hospitals. However, despite these changes in housing, medical care, and education over the years, people have not experienced much improvement mentally or financially, let alone any increase in their happiness index.
“For the past seventy to eighty years of Communist Party rule, in such a vast territory with a huge population base, how many generations have farmers been used as raw materials to be squeezed by the Chinese government? For so many years, just hearing the routine talk of the Two Sessions is nausea-inducing and repulsive, having had enough of the lies.”
He gave an example of the cold winters in North China, where burning coal for warmth was banned. Traditional coal heating was very effective, yet the common people had no choice; in the freezing winter, burning coal could result in a fine of 5,000 yuan. Electric heating received subsidies, provided you used equipment designated by the town government.
“I built my house in 2009 and used electric heating, and for many years, I have not received a penny in subsidies because I chose electric heating of my own free will in the free market. In one winter, my electricity bill amounts to thousands of yuan, without any subsidies.”
Wang Mingyi also told the reporter that in recent years, the most significant change felt was the increase in various charges for public facilities. For instance, installing air conditioning in schools began incurring an air conditioning fee, as well as charges for a shower, a washing machine, and a variety of other miscellaneous items.
“Most families typically have the breadwinners working in the city. Over the years, the family rarely gathers, portraying the current situation of the ordinary Chinese farmers. Due to the extreme exploitation of the CCP government towards the grassroots people, the people’s lives are increasingly difficult, compelling them to constantly travel back and forth for survival.” he said.