is run by the Communist Party. "It's good to be rich", indeed, but apparently "enjoy the good life in China" is the unspoken addendum.
The people who got rich in China did so in context of a national strategic plan, devised and put in place by the Communist Party. It seems disengenuous to adopt a Randian position after the fact.
This same plan was supported by "partners" in the West. It is equally disengenuous ("tricky") for Western companies to complain about "treats". Those "treats" were, undoubtably, part of the agreement between the Communist Party and Western elites.
That depends on your political views, but in my book, sure. The only measure of economic success for a country should be the improvement of the lives of their citizens.
China's current economic strategy have lifted more than 500 millions of people from poverty. A change of that magnitude have never happened before in history.
Do you know how they talk about poverty in the world improving in the last years?. Normally it's not mentioned but it's basically China.
About the capital controls, from the NYT article: "The government sets a $50,000 limit on the money Chinese citizens can move out of the country in a year, [..]"
It seems to me that the people that feel constrained by this are not the majority of the people in China.
They would be insofar as most people aren't performing the action of "investing" their money at all, but are rather handing it off to money managers (e.g. mutual funds) to invest. Those money-managers are then limited by the the capital controls—not at the $50k level, but still at a level low enough that it prevents prevent globally-efficient investment to best grow private citizens' wealth.
Since when did benefits to "China" surpass benefits to individuals living in China? The state should serve the people, not the other way around.