It’s not just some vague slogan. I personally know someone who’s been banned to fly, take the high-speed train and stay in star-rated hotels simply because they’re directors of a company that lost a law suit for damages amounted to a couple of million RMB. They’ve appealed the case and won, but had to jump through hoops to remove the credit label, to no avail for months.
Indeed, as mentioned in this article and the previous one, these travel restrictions exist. And, according to the official in the video, they are allegedly part of a larger planned and/or discussed framework which he calls the “social credit system”. But such restrictions are imposed as a result of court judgments, not because of some ‘social credit score’ as Western social media loudly proclaims. Sure, you can say this is not vague, but that doesn’t make this slogan any clearer. Chinese use different terms to refer to the travel restrictions, namely ‘限制高消费’ or ‘失信人’ (to refer to those affected).
Well, it’s understandable that you draw a distinction between court judgement and official proclamations as though there is an independent judiciary in the Middle Kingdom. I don’t.
Name a country with an “independent” judiciary! I can’t think of one. That should not be surprising since judges are invariably paid by the state.
That said, these days in China if your case is strong and you have a good lawyer (critical!) you can almost always win your case without having to bribe the judge. This is a significant improvement over the situation 15 years ago.
On the other hand, getting paid can be a bit more complicated, it’s true. The travel restrictions alone are not always motivating enough.
Independent judiciary means judges paid out of the ether? Significant improvement over 15 years ago and having a good lawyer you can almost win your case without having to bribe the judge? Please give me a break!
You are actually confirming what the article says. The restrictions are there to compel people to pay off their debts. The idea to expand these good/bad behavior points to more aspects of one's life, so far is a slogan, and the "West" is not completely behind. Just as an exaple, in Italy we have had some behavior scores for the driving license (search "punti patente" if you want).
The EU has just confirmed the project for the digital ID is going on, and it will be linked to the environment CO2 hoax. The thing to notice here, in my opinion, is that there is no real East vs West: that is also a hoax.
To my knowledge we have nothing comparable in China. Nor is there any evidence of a plan to expand the consumption restriction scheme to cover other situations. Of course that doesn’t mean that no such plans exist but thus far the concrete evidence points to a Western origin.
A “Social Credit System” remains a favorite wet dream of the governing bureaucracy in the West.
It’s not just some vague slogan. I personally know someone who’s been banned to fly, take the high-speed train and stay in star-rated hotels simply because they’re directors of a company that lost a law suit for damages amounted to a couple of million RMB. They’ve appealed the case and won, but had to jump through hoops to remove the credit label, to no avail for months.
Indeed, as mentioned in this article and the previous one, these travel restrictions exist. And, according to the official in the video, they are allegedly part of a larger planned and/or discussed framework which he calls the “social credit system”. But such restrictions are imposed as a result of court judgments, not because of some ‘social credit score’ as Western social media loudly proclaims. Sure, you can say this is not vague, but that doesn’t make this slogan any clearer. Chinese use different terms to refer to the travel restrictions, namely ‘限制高消费’ or ‘失信人’ (to refer to those affected).
Well, it’s understandable that you draw a distinction between court judgement and official proclamations as though there is an independent judiciary in the Middle Kingdom. I don’t.
Name a country with an “independent” judiciary! I can’t think of one. That should not be surprising since judges are invariably paid by the state.
That said, these days in China if your case is strong and you have a good lawyer (critical!) you can almost always win your case without having to bribe the judge. This is a significant improvement over the situation 15 years ago.
On the other hand, getting paid can be a bit more complicated, it’s true. The travel restrictions alone are not always motivating enough.
Independent judiciary means judges paid out of the ether? Significant improvement over 15 years ago and having a good lawyer you can almost win your case without having to bribe the judge? Please give me a break!
You are actually confirming what the article says. The restrictions are there to compel people to pay off their debts. The idea to expand these good/bad behavior points to more aspects of one's life, so far is a slogan, and the "West" is not completely behind. Just as an exaple, in Italy we have had some behavior scores for the driving license (search "punti patente" if you want).
The EU has just confirmed the project for the digital ID is going on, and it will be linked to the environment CO2 hoax. The thing to notice here, in my opinion, is that there is no real East vs West: that is also a hoax.
To my knowledge we have nothing comparable in China. Nor is there any evidence of a plan to expand the consumption restriction scheme to cover other situations. Of course that doesn’t mean that no such plans exist but thus far the concrete evidence points to a Western origin.