It hence is worth asking the question whether or not the hukou system has been sufficiently improved to a more people-centered system. In fact, many large cities are still strict about granting rural migrants with urban hukou and about using the hukou system to determine whether or not one should be granted with welfare entitlements. Even if the “National New-type Urbanization Plan (2014-2020)” and the “Opinions on Further Promoting the Reform of the Hukou System” implemented in the third reform period intend to create a more people-centered system, they claim that larger cities should have different hukou registration systems from the smaller cities and towns; and that the hukou regulation will continue to be stricter in larger cities. However, the very large cities (such as Beijing) are usually the ones that attract rural migrants the most, given their extensive job opportunities. In this case, although the state has actively implemented many reform policies, the hukou rural/urban division still functions and represents a division system of life chances. Some scholars hence have argued that the hukou reforms indeed have not fundamentally changed the hukou system but have only decentralized the powers of hukou to local governments; and it still remains active and continues to contribute to China's rural and urban disparity. Meanwhile, others have also argued that by concentrating on cities, the hukou reforms have failed to target the poorer regions, where social welfares such as education and medical care are often not offered to the residents. Still, others seem excited, remarking that some cities have been offering a condition that encourages more migrant parents to bring their children along. In short, the majority of rural migrants thus are still largely overlooked due to their lack to urban hukou, which is often seen as starting point for gaining access to life well-beings.