It's almost strange and unexpected that the economic rise of China actually benefits the poorest most. The "rising tide" of wealth has lots of problems, and it is hard to compare agricultural China with the industrial, much more populous one, but in General, most Chinese are better off.
And despite that, the richest want to emigrate, because they can't get any "richer" in China. They need western infrastructure to grow their own utility and/or wealth.
They want their kids to be educated in English and attend universities in English speaking countries, which increases their career prospects not only in those countries, but also within China.
Also, a number of these wealthy Chinese seeking to emigrate are highly corrupt. Some of them have committed all kinds of bribery, fraud, and extortion to enrich themselves. Although corruption is rampant in China, it is also punishable by death, so these people are looking for a quick getaway route should they get caught.
>>They want their kids to be educated in English and attend universities in English speaking countries
Yeah, but why the West specifically? There are places like Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia, etc. with very good universities. While they can't compare with certain brand-name schools like Harvard and Yale, the quality of education they offer is near the top.
> There are places like Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia, etc
Hong Kong has been part of the PRC since 1997.
Australia is part of "the West" and along with New Zealand has had a high immigration from Asia for 30 years. When I grew up in Auckland in the 1970's only 1 or 2% were Asian. Now 23% are Asian.
International students coming to Australia for their education is a very big business. In total its about 22% of the student population, up to 40% at some institutions.
Domestic university students in Australia have no upfront tuition fees. We have a student loan type system called HECS (Higher Education Contribution Scheme) which is sort of like a student loan but effectively interest free (it rises with inflation via the CPI). Payments are made automatically from your salary but only when you reach a thresholded salary (~$50k). Its been a very good system in that it achieves a specific objective - accessibility of higher education to most Australians.* If your parents arent rich you can still go to a good university.
International students are not eligible for this system and pay full tuition fees. Fees vary considerably but you are looking at $50k-$250k depending on whether you are going for an arts degree or full medical school. It is a massive source of funding for universities in Australia.
There are occassionally some minor scandals, for instance every now and then an academic passes an overseas student that should have failed because of administrative pressure. There is also a real concern that research is second place and the institutions are becoming undergrad sausage factories churning out graduates. Universities here are certainly more like businesses than they were 20 years ago (see comment below about our current government). But overall I think its been very positive for Australia. It aids multicultural thinking and integration with Asia. It also subsidises the cost of education for domestic students.
* the current government are trying to change this so we have a system more like the USA. They have a fight on their hands.
Well, it's really all of the above, they go for the most prestigious English-speaking universities they can get into. The ones who can get into American Ivy Leagues (and Stanford) do, but the ones who can't, have other fallback options.
Parts of the western infrastructure that spring to mind are stronger environmental laws, stronger property and ownership rights, less corruption. I'm sure there's more.
And despite that, the richest want to emigrate, because they can't get any "richer" in China. They need western infrastructure to grow their own utility and/or wealth.