Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Life on the wrong side of China’s social credit system

inkstonenews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 335 posts

Re: Life on the wrong side of China’s social credit system

#311

Post by powerapple »

caprese wrote: post #38

> If he had money to buy an airline ticket, they told the South China Morning Post, he should use it to repay what he owed. This line of thinking spans cultures and completely ignores the velocity or time value of money. It is extremely counterproductive and doesn't factor in what someone is trying to do. This punitive approach to all forms of spending and consumption hampers the productivity of nations. A simplistic…

Apparently then a person found out he couldn't fly in airport, he paid back the money straightaway from his phone. True story.

Re: Life on the wrong side of China’s social credit system

#312

Post by coldtea »

Frondo wrote: post #307
yepguy wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legal rights are things that society decides you're entitled to. Natural rights are basically theological in origin. Violating them transgresses the natural law regardless of what society decides (or even whether society exists, I guess). It seems you're only considering legal rights, possibly because natural rights are difficult to justify from a secular perspective.

I'm not actually trying to distinguish at all -- the OP spoke of rights stemming from nature, and, as you said, any you'd describe as such are basically theological in nature. The thought experiment I'd run is, just like the one of science vs religion: start from scratch, look for the rights that every society has in common. Property? Nope. Freedom of speech, association, whatever? Nope. The one I think might be univ…

>I can't think of ever reading about a society where the right to marry and start a family was not a part of it

There are societies (studied by ethnologists) that don't marry -- the children are raised by the community.

Re: Life on the wrong side of China’s social credit system

#313

Post by Frondo »

coldtea wrote: post #312
Frondo wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not actually trying to distinguish at all -- the OP spoke of rights stemming from nature, and, as you said, any you'd describe as such are basically theological in nature. The thought experiment I'd run is, just like the one of science vs religion: start from scratch, look for the rights that every society has in common. Property? Nope. Freedom of speech, association, whatever? Nope. The one I think might be univ…

> I can't think of ever reading about a society where the right to marry and start a family was not a part of it There are societies (studied by ethnologists) that don't marry -- the children are raised by the community.

Wow! That's pretty interesting. Do you happen to remember the names of any?

And maybe there isn't anything universal to societies that's considered as "right".

Sort of opposite -- things forbidden -- I've heard from some biologist that the only universally forbidden behavior (no society has ever generally permitted it) is incestuous relationships.

Everything else, you'd find some society somewhere that's okay with it.

That makes sense from a biological perspective, too, that we as a species would be hard-wired not to allow it. That might be as close as an "in nature" thing as you might find, something our brains are hard-wired to discourage.

Re: Life on the wrong side of China’s social credit system

#314

Post by headcanon »

nradov wrote: post #208
headcanon wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was once sitting in a courtroom for something unrelated and saw a 19 year old kid go to jail for 3 months for not paying child support. Not sure how he's going to pay it back in there, but if all you have is a hammer...

Was he really sent to jail for not paying child support, or was it actually for contempt of court? People generally can't be jailed for debt. But if the subject of a child support order has money and refuses to may, or refuses to take reasonable steps to earn some income, then sometimes the judge has to administer an object lesson on the importance of fulfilling one's obligations. Judges usually don't take that step…

It was awhile ago so I don't remember correctly, but you might be right. I just remember thinking this was rooted in the debt he had to pay, and removing his ability to pay the debt, while ostensibly serving to teach him a lesson, didn't seem constructive. Perhaps it was the correct thing to do, perhaps not, it just seemed sad.

Re: Life on the wrong side of China’s social credit system

#315

Post by headcanon »

btrettel wrote: post #107
headcanon wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure it works great in some areas, but its completely unrealistic in others. Try running errands in Metro Detroit on a bike and come back and talk to me. With that said I would prefer if the municipalities were more bike friendly in the first place. I like driving, but I was certainly happiest when I lived in a different town and could bike to work.

To reiterate a point I made in another reply, I'm not advocating for cycling here, just pointing out that driving is expensive. Also, I know an engineer who works on diesel engines in Detroit and commutes by bike. He seems to think Detroit is pretty good for cycling, actually, contrary to what I expected. Don't know about metro Detroit, though.

Downtown Detroit is ok for biking, certainly. The metro area though is so spread out I just don't see a realistic alternative. Sorry to jump on you like that, I agree driving is expensive but when everything in our lives is separated by dozens of miles, connected by streets where cars move at deadly speeds next to paper-thin bike lanes, its difficult to see an alternative.

I'd love it if there as a pan-Southeast-Michigan light rail to happen, but doesn't seem realistic with all the other infrastructure issues Michigan is having right now. Best we can hope for right now is that Q line gets extended out from downtown Detroit up to Royal Oak or Birmingham, but even that is a whole can of worms that Dan Gilbert would have to push for for there to be a chance at it.

Re: Life on the wrong side of China’s social credit system

#316

Post by NoblePublius »

not_kurt_godel wrote: post #250
NoblePublius wrote: post #247

I don’t see how this is functionally different than having your wages garnished by a court order. Deadbeat dads are subject to the same financial scrutiny in the US. I get the feeling now that much of the criticism of this system is just Western media clickbait.

[flagged]

If you’re a deadbeat dad and your wages are garnished, you’re blocked from travel because you don’t have any money. And if you spend the money on travel instead of your kids, the Court would know instantly in states where the Court systems plug into your bank accounts. We already do this. The Chinese system just seems more efficient. Obviously this is a horror show in a country without due process, but I have no problem with debtors being denied niceties.

Re: Life on the wrong side of China’s social credit system

#317

Post by btrettel »

saxonww wrote: post #257
btrettel wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain which parts you believe are lecturing drivers? My post was meant to offer my perspective as a cyclist: driving is more expensive than many appreciate. I wasn't arguing that it was unnecessary; quite the opposite. I don't know what you mean by "Please don't ruin people's lives with your ideas" if you were not referring to taking away someone's license because of debt. As I stated, I don't believe someo…

Just some perspective. I know this is not what you wrote, and probably not what you meant, but what I was thinking when reading your comment was "Car owners are extravagant. I spend a lot on my bike and still spend so much less money than them. Maybe if we suspended licenses some would get a clue." I'm probably not alone in reading it that way, and I'd say many of us would be offended.

I appreciate your honesty.

What I meant was this: Driving is expensive, so one might argue that removing one's ability to drive would help them save money, but that doesn't work when a drivers' license is needed to generate income in the first place.

Re: Life on the wrong side of China’s social credit system

#318

Post by asark »

Frondo wrote: post #183
AcerbicZero wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Societies should define what is a privilege and what is a right. That's a hard no. I see where you're going with this, and we likely agree on 90% of this topic anyway, but the issue with society defining rights is that you end up letting the mob decide the "right" of green eyed people to live has just become a privilege. Rights stem from nature, and exist with, or without society. If a society wants to add to the li…

I don't mean this in a trollish way, but can you show me a "rights" molecule? Or explain what it would mean for rights to exist outside of a society?

It's a US thing. Most folks here have very little exposure to political philosophy unless they seek it out or major in something at least adjacent to it in college, and the bit they do is almost all Locke's concept of natural rights, by way of Paine. Neither figure is typically read, only mentioned and briefly summarized. Like, that's it. Beginning and end. Whole thing.

That the concept is... not trivial to defend, in these our modern times, and further that it may not have much practical use beyond its value in propaganda (which is real and shouldn't be dismissed and, I suppose, is furthered by the sort of education above) isn't really covered.

Re: Life on the wrong side of China’s social credit system

#319

Post by _bxg1 »

dis-sys wrote: post #287
alanwong wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is, as demonstrated in the article, high speed train isn’t always a luxury. And the punishment can have the opposite effect of making people to pay their debts.

You are defending those offenders with a passion by completely ignoring the real victims here. When those "laolai" refuse to pay their debts when they have the resources to do so, rather than defending for those "laolai", how about show some decency by thinking about the real life situations of the actual victims who couldn't get their money back from those "laolai" even after court orders? With 1.4 billion people, s…

At least in America, the vast majority of the time, creditors are huge companies and debtors are individuals who happened to fall on hard times or make financial decisions that didn't pan out. Therefore it's much, much worse when a debtor is unjustly punished than when a creditor unjustly goes unpaid. It's the difference between completely ruining an individual's life, and removing a meaninglessly small amount of money from the pockets of rich people who will remain rich regardless. Are creditors in China commonly non-rich individuals? Are micro-loans a significant portion of what's being talked about here? I'm asking this as a serious question.

Re: Life on the wrong side of China’s social credit system

#320

Post by _bxg1 »

dis-sys wrote: post #264
alanwong wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP and Inkstone editor here. I think you raised a really, really interesting point. One thing I think many people overlook in China's social credit system is its stated goal – to create a system that rewards good behavior and punishes bad behavior – and whether this system can really tackle self-destructive behavior you describe, like debt. And what's going to happen to people who're entering a debt spiral, and are a…

> And what's going to happen to people who're entering a debt spiral, and are as a result further punished by the system? please stop spreading false info. people on that "laolai" list are those who intentionally refuse to pay their debt when they have the resources to do so. as also explicitly mentioned in your own article, they are punished to the extent of being inconvenience to do certain things, e.g. in your des…

> those who intentionally refuse to pay their debt when they have the resources to do so

Having resources and having resources to spare for paying creditors are two different things. You can't hope to pay off your debt long-term if you don't buy food in the meantime. That's an extreme example, but the same principle applies to clothes for interviews, transportation to business opportunities, and, yes, possibly high-speed rail travel. An individual can't pour every yuan they get into paying off debt, or they'll end up in poverty (or worse) and their debt will have no chance of ever getting paid. Everybody loses in that scenario.

Post reply on HN