this post was submitted on 28 May 2026
245 points (98.8% liked)
Chapotraphouse
14398 readers
444 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
welfare system called the Five Guarantees (五保) if you want to look into it further. as far as I understand it if you qualify for the Three Withouts (三无): without livelihood source, without the ability to work, and without family support then the state guarantees basic food, clothing, housing, medical care, and burial expenses
Damn if they don't live for Number Plural Noun over there
Five Guarantees, Four Cardinal Principles, Three Withouts, Two Whatevers, and a Partridge in a Pear Tree
And I believe there was/is an 'n' number of household appliances, as a sort of economic benchmark, which has been revised a few times. However now I can't find any details about it.
Three Alls.
yikes, not as fun
How often is that able to be utilized? For example, there is a filial piety law, but elderly are still abandoned occasionally, right? I heard from a friend that the pension elderly are able to sue their families for is very low, and nursing homes aren't as popular. In most countries, there's what exists on paper, and then there's what actually happens.
That seems to me like the devil is in the details: what does "without the ability to work" mean? So if you lose your job and can't find a new one, you're just gonna die because you don't qualify?
That is the opposite of what they are saying, "without the ability to work" meaning they provide you food if you can't work, if you lose your job you won't starve unlike what happens in many capitalist countries.
Well, it's understandable how I could not understand it though, isn't it? They could have also said "people without work" instead of "without the ability to work", no? Then it would have been clear that someone that loses their job, but still has the ability to work, is included. The way they phrased it very much sounded like you're fucked if you have the ability to work, but just don't have a job right now for some other reason.
If that was the only "without" then yeah but just before that they say "without livelihood source" which means a job or income of some type.
It literally means subsidies for disabled and unemployed people, you doughnut!
That's why I phrased everything I said as a question, because I wanted to make sure that I didn't misunderstand them, you bagel!