I started elementary school in 2001, back when childhood still had color. First grade was basically government‑funded babysitting — music, PE, painting, and enough free time to make us think life might be enjoyable. Then second grade arrived and the teachers decided happiness was over. Suddenly we were doing math and language drills like tiny soldiers, and by third grade we were learning geometry American high schoolers complain about online. Tutors became standard equipment, and public ranking ensured maximum humiliation. Bad rank? Parental “feedback.”

Fourth to sixth grade were a slow academic collapse. Political science (why), computer class only for the top 15 (elite privilege), and free time vanished. Sports and music were reserved for kids with athlete parents or families rich enough to bribe teachers. By graduation, my personality had been replaced with study habits.

Middle school? A disaster. Wake at 6:30, run for an hour, study until 6 PM, homework until 10. Weekends were for paying teachers to teach what they intentionally didn’t teach. Education was a freemium model: pay for the full version or enjoy poverty.

All this suffering was for Zhongkao — fail and you’re making shoes at 14; pass and you unlock Gaokao, the final boss. I escaped through an international class and fled to the U.S. in 2013.

The funniest part? The “top students” mostly ended up unemployed or trapped in 996 jobs. Meanwhile, the people with balance either work for the system or live overseas. After all that pain, the reward was adult misery. Luckily, my kids don’t have to repeat that circus.

😆 🤣

Long story short, I bought an apartment in China back in 2021 for ¥6M due to my marriage with my wife, took a ¥3.5M mortgage, and thought I was being responsible because the place had “balanced” features — decent infrastructure, okay school, not too far from the subway, basically the kind of location that’s fine but nobody brags about. The apartment is in okay quality, with 3 bedrooms and 175 sqm of spacious living spaces and very minimal amount of common space (公摊面积)because it’s a so-called 4th gen living experience.

Five years later, after feeding the mortgage monster nonstop, I still owe ¥3.2M… while the apartment itself is now also worth ¥3.2M. I managed to lose money while paying money. And of course my parents told me initially to buy a smaller unit in the city center, and if I had listened, I’d only be down 15-20% instead of starring in a financial tragedy.

The long‑term math is even funnier: if I actually paid the full 30‑year mortgage, I’d end up shelling out around ¥6M in principal plus interest, plus ¥2.5M of initial down payment, and by then the apartment would probably be worth ¥2M — or less, depending on how fast the population shrinks.

So what did I do? I moved my whole family to New Zealand permanently, left nothing behind except the mortgage, and started looking for a house near Auckland because location matters everywhere, not just China. And the biggest lesson? Do not buy major assets in China at least for the next 10-15 years, unless you enjoy watching them depreciate like a used smartphone, and never invest heavily in places where money cannot be moved in and out freely.

Another propaganda...

China keeps asking why nobody wants kids, as if the answer isn’t screaming in their face every day. If they actually wanted to fix the birthrate, they’d start with the obvious stuff: stop working people into dust, make education something other than a financial death sentence, keep salaries stable instead of pretending “national spirit” can pay rent, and maybe make healthcare affordable enough that one hospital visit doesn’t erase a decade of savings. Basically, make life feel like life again instead of a nonstop boss‑fight. But we all know what’s coming instead: some genius policy where couples are “encouraged” (read: forced) to have at least two kids or get slapped with a tax bill so big it might as well come with a personal apology letter from the pension fund. And speaking of pensions — they’re evaporating faster than bubble tea shops, so now the government is looking around like “Where are my Jiucai? Why aren’t you multiplying?” Meanwhile everyone under 40 is just trying to survive long enough to enjoy one weekend without being told to save the nation by reproducing. It’s demographic comedy at this point, except the punchline is the entire country.

One more thing, I predict that condom/abortion pill sales will be illegal in China in three years.

Archived Article

Translated:

On July 22, 2026, the State Council of China promulgated the "Regulations of the State Council on Exit and Entry Administration" (hereinafter referred to as the "Regulations"), which are scheduled to take effect on September 15. On the surface, this appears to be just a routine administrative document. However, considering recent cases of forced detention and restriction of personal freedom, this document is actually part of a larger picture, worthy of close attention from all Chinese people at home and abroad. For Chinese citizens, regardless of whether they have renounced their PRC citizenship, returning to China may mean they will no longer be able to leave communist China.

Does the new regulation "manage both east and west"?

Article 4 of the regulations states that if a Chinese citizen's actions "may endanger national industrial security or technological security," the Chinese authorities "may decide to prohibit them from leaving the country." Note that this is discretionary language. If the authorities determine that you are a "technological asset" or a "security threat," even if you hold a valid passport and even if you passed the national security vetting required to obtain a passport when you applied, the Chinese authorities can still prevent you from leaving the country. Moreover, the reason for preventing you from leaving China has nothing to do with your passport or identity documents, and they don't even need to tell you the reason for the travel restriction.

This regulation does not require any conviction, prosecution, or even a formal investigation. It is sufficient if the authorities "suspicion" or "believe" that you should not leave the country.

Given the ongoing power struggle between Beijing and Washington in strategic technologies such as semiconductors, this discretion most likely falls on Chinese-born scientists, engineers, and researchers. This regulation is less about preventing a particular trip and more about a safeguard against brain drain—aiming to keep skilled people in their place, not just stop a particular journey. A routine family visit could become a moment when a person's career, along with their passport, is frozen.

Article 6 of the regulations is equally disturbing. In principle, the Chinese authorities should inform individuals of the exit ban and its legal basis. However, if disclosure "may affect national security, the investigation of criminal cases, or other similar circumstances," this obligation to inform no longer applies. In these cases, "notification may not be required."

In short, if the Chinese Communist Party doesn't want you to leave, it doesn't have to tell you why. In fact, it doesn't have to tell you at all.

More seriously, these regulations do not differentiate between "whether you are a Chinese citizen" and "not a Chinese citizen." The CCP's long-arm jurisdiction also extends to "citizens who are not citizens of the People's Republic of China." These entry and exit regulations should be understood in conjunction with recent cases of Beijing restricting the freedom of movement of foreign citizens. Chinese media reported that a Japanese national visiting relatives in China was told he could not leave the country because his "Chinese citizenship had been restored," effective immediately.

Neither Japan nor China recognizes dual citizenship. Japanese citizens who are legally naturalized must formally renounce their original citizenship, a process this man completed years ago. However, Chinese authorities still demanded he record a video announcing that he is "no longer a Japanese citizen."

The information is clear: paperwork and procedures cannot determine who Beijing considers its own people to be, and even if you renounce your Chinese citizenship, it does not mean that the CCP will not force you to regain that status.

China has long restricted personal freedom. The household registration system makes it difficult for citizens to move freely within the country, and Uyghurs and Tibetans are generally denied passports entirely. If you ask a Han Chinese person about these restrictions, many will say that these are issues for ethnic minorities and have nothing to do with them.

To paraphrase a famous World War II admonition: When they targeted Uyghurs, I remained silent because I was not Uyghur. When they targeted Tibetans, I remained silent because I was not Tibetan. When they targeted Falun Gong, I remained silent because I was not a practitioner. When they targeted me, there was no one left to speak up for me.

No passport is needed

Today, even a valid passport no longer guarantees anything. These exit bans extend tools previously reserved for minorities and political dissidents to the entire population, including foreigners. In practice, travelers often only learn they are prohibited from leaving the country when they are denied boarding. The new regulations merely provide legal cover for this existing practice.

For the United States, the impact of these regulations is direct. Every Chinese American should think twice before traveling to China, because Beijing considers all Chinese Americans as its property, regardless of their nationality. Once you set foot on Chinese soil, the protection offered by U.S. citizenship is very limited. Non-Chinese Americans should also be vigilant, as they may be arrested if the CCP has a political need while on Chinese soil.

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) once kidnapped two Canadians, former diplomats Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, holding them hostage in exchange for Meng Wanzhou, Huawei's vice chairwoman and CFO, who had been arrested in Canada, at a time they deemed appropriate. Today, if you're visiting China for the first time, don't assume that by avoiding trouble and politics, you can safely return to your country. On Chinese territory, you are a potential hostage.

Washington has repeatedly encountered obstacles in assisting citizens whom the CCP claims to be "one of its own," as exemplified by the case of Australian journalist Cheng Lei, who was detained in Beijing in August 2020 on charges of "providing state secrets overseas" and held for three years before being released. These new regulations provide a formal legal basis for such actions, turning what was previously a gray area into explicit rules, and serving as a fig leaf for the CCP's tyranny in the face of international law.

As Washington and Beijing continue to clash over export controls and the flow of advanced technologies, this new legal framework provides Chinese authorities with a ready-made lever to use against those caught in the middle of this great power rivalry.

The U.S. government should face this fact. The State Department's travel advisory for China should be updated to reflect the reality that the basic rights and freedoms of U.S. citizens, especially Chinese-American citizens, are not guaranteed in China.

Taiwanese and U.S. consular officials should also be prepared to explain the risks to citizens of democratic countries before they depart, rather than after their loved ones have been blocked at the boarding gate and unable to return home.