Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
China Businesses The Almighty Buck Technology

People Changing Jobs Too Often Could Be Punished by China's Social Credit System (abacusnews.com) 201

Lots of things can hurt your social credit in China. Failing to repay your debts, plagiarizing academic articles and building a debt-laden tech empire and then fleeing to another country, to name a few random examples. One province now wants to add another "discredited behavior" that seems much more harmless: Switching jobs too often. From a report: Zhejiang is pushing to build a local social credit system that will, among other things, deem residents a "discredited" person if they move from job to job too frequently, according to a local TV report. "If someone keeps quitting and landing new jobs, his social credit will definitely be a problem," Zhejiang official Ge Pingan said at a local forum, addressing a complaint from one company's human resources department about being unable to do anything when employees want to leave. Ge didn't specify how "frequently" is too frequent, but he said the upcoming system will put restrictions on both companies and individual workers.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

People Changing Jobs Too Often Could Be Punished by China's Social Credit System

Comments Filter:
  • Really sick argument (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ranton ( 36917 ) on Thursday April 04, 2019 @10:49AM (#58383622)

    "If someone keeps quitting and landing new jobs, his social credit will definitely be a problem," Zhejiang official Ge Pingan said at a local forum, addressing a complaint from one company's human resources department about being unable to do anything when employees want to leave.

    This is a really sick viewpoint, although in this case there isn't much cultural difference between the east and west. Plenty of business owners in the US would love to have ways to keep employees other than providing a good work experience and fair pay.

    • by XXongo ( 3986865 ) on Thursday April 04, 2019 @10:52AM (#58383660) Homepage

      "If someone keeps quitting and landing new jobs, his social credit will definitely be a problem," Zhejiang official Ge Pingan said at a local forum, addressing a complaint from one company's human resources department about being unable to do anything when employees want to leave.

      This is a really sick viewpoint, although in this case there isn't much cultural difference between the east and west. Plenty of business owners in the US would love to have ways to keep employees other than providing a good work experience and fair pay.

      Yes, but the U.S. does not have a government-operated "social credit system" that allows business owners to prevent people from traveling, or even from using public transportation, if they switch jobs.

      • Not Yet... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by nickmalthus ( 972450 ) on Thursday April 04, 2019 @11:01AM (#58383720)
        If the US is fully committed to capitalism and the methods of the authoritarian Chinese government proves to be the most profitable for corporate/government stakeholders then it is only a matter of time before the US adopts similar policies.
        • Re:Not Yet... (Score:4, Insightful)

          by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Thursday April 04, 2019 @11:36AM (#58383930)

          it is only a matter of time before the US adopts similar policies.

          America already has a similar system [thestreet.com]. We are ahead of China on this. The big difference is that in America your credit score is controlled by corporations rather than the government. But similar criteria are used, and excessive job-hopping can hurt your score.

          • by Anonymous Coward

            your fico score doesn't prevent you from using public transportation

            • by Anonymous Coward

              One of the reasons lots of us don't want to be dependent on public transportation. We are not necessarily interested in being compliant citizen-units.

              • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

                One of the reasons lots of us don't want to be dependent on public transportation. We are not necessarily interested in being compliant citizen-units.

                So what do you do, stay at home and go on tediously long road trips?

                Because "public transportation" includes travel by plane and ferry as well. In China, you can be blocked from getting plane tickets and such. And you can be blocked from getting a passport as well (good luck going anywhere outside the country without a passport).

                Hell, I'd expect China to soon

                • "It's also a form of caste system - born to parents of poor social credit will generally make you have poor social credit as well. And the ways to "get out" are extremely limited. When you're scraping the bottom of the barrel for today's meal, the options to increase your score are limited and you'll likely do things that reduce your score just to eat."

                  So pretty much just like the American "credit score" system. A little bit more invasive; but also a little bit more honest and open.

          • it is only a matter of time before the US adopts similar policies.

            America already has a similar system [thestreet.com]. We are ahead of China on this. The big difference is that in America your credit score is controlled by corporations rather than the government. But similar criteria are used, and excessive job-hopping can hurt your score.

            The scary thing about the Chinese system is that it's unclear what the eventual effects of the social credit score will be. There only seem to be suggestions of effects that could occur. In contrast, the US credit report system has been in effect for a much longer time. Employment history is not a factor in credit scores but does appear in credit reports, and the reader of the report can decide how to use that information or whether to ignore it completely. It's entirely understandable that a lender wou

          • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            I thought everyone knew this. When you apply for a loan they want to know how long you have been in your current job, because in the first six months probation period it's easier to fire you... Oh wait, it's America, you have no employment rights.

            This is actually something we should fix in the UK. Ban considering how long you have been in your job for when applying for a loan, because it discourages people from changing jobs. Make sure credit reference agencies can't report it.

            • Re:Not Yet... (Score:4, Interesting)

              by alvinrod ( 889928 ) on Thursday April 04, 2019 @01:57PM (#58384796)
              What does banning a useful predictor actually fix though? In one case, the lenders just find some new proxy that's strongly correlated with the fact you've banned them from using and you're nowhere. In another, they're now rejecting people who could have otherwise gotten a loan (or charging them higher rates to cover increased uncertainty) and now they're unable to buy a house because lenders don't want to deal with the risk. In the worst case they give out more loans that people can't manage because they can't hold down a job and now they've got even more problems in their life.

              Would you tell doctors that they can't use how long a person has been smoking in any diagnoses that they make for patients? Of course not, because relevant data is relevant data. If it's not useful, then it isn't used. You don't need to ban lenders from considering shoe size when giving out loans, because it's not useful so they don't use it. If they think that it matters, it probably does.
              • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                Is a trade off between better info for making decisions and the negative effect of discouraging people not to switch jobs.

          • by Anonymous Coward

            Thanks for that, Xibot.

            The credit scoring system is essentially for one purpose only, are you credit worthy. The credit scoring companies do not care if you are a 'bad citizen' in any way apart from paying your debts.

            We have credit scoring in the UK. I have never needed to know my credit score and it does not affect my life in any way.
            "Social credit" is about 10 levels of sinister above normal financial credit scoring.

            You should be thouroughly ashamed to be an apologist for such a brutal and increasingly si

          • My credit score doesn't affect my ability to ride public transit, travel get healthcare or do other things the Chinese social credit system does.

            The only thing the US credit score affects is your ability to borrow money in all it's many forms.

            • My credit score doesn't affect my ability to ride public transit, travel

              Yet

              get healthcare

              You're kidding, right?

              If you need some expensive medical treatment, but are not about to die in the next day or so without it, you will need approval from the hospital's billing department before your treatment. That approval is contingent on you either 1) paying for everything in cash, 2) paying all deductibles and co-pays in cash if your insurance approves, or 3) approval for financing. The last one is dependent on your FICO score. And arguably, #1 and #2 are also dependent on your FICO score becaus

            • The only thing the US credit score affects is your ability to borrow money in all it's many forms.

              Credit scores are checked for things like rental applications, security clearances, and job applications.>/p>

            • "The only thing the US credit score affects is your ability to borrow money in all it's many forms."

              It also directly affects one's ability to secure housing and employment.

              China's social credit system may be worse, however let's not pretend our "credit score" system is anything but a form of neo-feudal totalitarianism.

        • Good thing that China is such a shining example of how to do socialism the right way.

        • Except that wouldn't be capitalism. Even under Marxian theory, people can capitalize on their own labor (Marx had a certain fondness of the US by the way, even when labor conditions were at their worst ever.) If changing jobs was made impossible, then that doesn't allow you to capitalize on your own labor by selling it to the highest bidder.

          Actually, what China has is more akin to fascism. Fascism doesn't necessarily depend on race (depends who you ask, but it didn't start that way.) Rather, fascism is all

        • If the US is fully committed to capitalism and the methods of the authoritarian Chinese government proves to be the most profitable for corporate/government stakeholders then it is only a matter of time before the US adopts similar policies.

          Not long ago I read a book on Vonnegut's writing career (it was mainly a compilation of his short stories) and it turns out he slaved like a bastard to establish himself as a young author. A few elite publications paid big money if you managed to get one of your works pr

          • The correct book title is: Rule Makes, Rule Breakers: How Tight and Loose Cultures Wire Our World

            Either I cut and paste from a bad source, or had some cut and paste mishap with the last word, and patched it over in the heat of the moment with the wrong tire.

      • "If someone keeps quitting and landing new jobs, his social credit will definitely be a problem," Zhejiang official Ge Pingan said at a local forum, addressing a complaint from one company's human resources department about being unable to do anything when employees want to leave.

        This is a really sick viewpoint, although in this case there isn't much cultural difference between the east and west. Plenty of business owners in the US would love to have ways to keep employees other than providing a good work experience and fair pay.

        Yes, but the U.S. does not have a government-operated "social credit system" that allows business owners to prevent people from traveling, or even from using public transportation, if they switch jobs.

        No, we just get them fired if they supported eeeevil ballot initiatives and such.

      • > Yes, but the U.S. does not have a government-operated "social credit system" that allows business
        > owners to prevent people from traveling, or even from using public transportation, if they switch jobs.

        The US system is operated by far-left oligarchs who go after conservatives. Case in point, a conservative who had Uber, Chase Bank, etc, "unperson" her... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com] Basically, if you don't support socialists like the Dems, you're blacklisted all over the place. Gotta keep your

    • by Dutch Gun ( 899105 ) on Thursday April 04, 2019 @11:17AM (#58383834)

      It seems rather redundant. I mean, excessive job-hopping would seem to make one less employable already. As a prospective employer, when you look at a resume and see that someone hasn't been at a job longer than a year for the past seven or eight years, you'd naturally wonder why, and might tend to assume that this person may not last long at your company either. Why codify such a "social rule" when such a tendency tends to occur naturally?

      Also, the most problematic "sick viewpoint", IMO, is the government believing it has the right and perhaps even an obligation to stick its nose in every aspect of a person's life. As you said, while employers can complain about such things, only the government can really enforce the necessity for workers to live like slaves with no hope of escaping to a better job.

      • It seems rather redundant. I mean, excessive job-hopping would seem to make one less employable already.

        1. People lie on their resumes all the time.

        2. Credit scores, in both China and America, are used for far more than employment.

      • Unless you are an I.T. contractor for short-term projects. My shortest jobs are 4 hours and longest jobs are one year. Whenever a hiring manager asks me why I don't want a "regular" job, I ask why they are hiring a contractor instead of a "regular" employee. It is a free market economy after all.
    • Plenty of business owners in the US would love to have ways to keep employees other than providing a good work experience and fair pay.

      And they do have those ways! Remember non-competes from Jimmy Johns, a sandwich place. Oh, you're in California where they don't honor non-competes. Working in tech field, then you probably have NDAs/claims that you are taking their intellectual property. Failing that, remember when Apple, Adobe, Google, etc. agreed not to hire each other's employees?

      And that's before y

      • by XXongo ( 3986865 ) on Thursday April 04, 2019 @11:58AM (#58384054) Homepage

        ...Working in tech field, then you probably have NDAs/claims that you are taking their intellectual property. Failing that, remember when Apple, Adobe, Google, etc. agreed not to hire each other's employees?

        Yes, but that was challenged and ruled illegal by the U.S. government. That makes a difference: in the US, the government challenges the anticompetitive "gentleman's agreement". In China, the government enforces it.

        https://www.cnet.com/news/appl... [cnet.com]
        https://www.mintz.com/insights... [mintz.com]
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

        • by bigpat ( 158134 )

          ...Working in tech field, then you probably have NDAs/claims that you are taking their intellectual property. Failing that, remember when Apple, Adobe, Google, etc. agreed not to hire each other's employees?

          Yes, but that was challenged and ruled illegal by the U.S. government. That makes a difference: in the US, the government challenges the anticompetitive "gentleman's agreement". In China, the government enforces it.

          https://www.cnet.com/news/appl... [cnet.com]

          https://www.mintz.com/insights... [mintz.com]

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

          Still... where are my back wages? Where were the big fines on these companies who were involved in a criminal conspiracy that affected millions of workers.

          • The four big companies—Apple, Adobe, Google, and Intel—settled for $415 million. The smaller ones—Intuit, Pixar, and Lucasfilm—settled years earlier for $20 million. If you were an employee at one of those seven companies during the time period in question (2005-2010), you would have already been contacted by the lawyers representing the class. The fact that you were neither contacted nor aware of this makes it fairly evident that your claim to being owed back wages has no basis in r

            • These were the leading companies in the industry. They set the upper standard wages for millions of technology workers. I was absolutely impacted in a very negative way over a long period of time.

                I would say they owe me 30 thousand dollars probably.

              I would be happy to be part of a class action lawsuit, but it is probably too late

        • Sure, after a decade the government said "No, bad company." But there weren't fines issued. Just an agreement not to enter into those agreements again. For a time. Fun fact, that time expired and those companies can start all over again without risking contempt of court fines/punishments! (Which are kinda scary because there isn't a presumption of innocence.... yada yada yada.)

          But wait, you say. They did have to pay a settlement in a separate civil suit. Which worked out to less than than $1,000/ye

          • by XXongo ( 3986865 )

            Sure, after a decade the government said "No, bad company." But there weren't fines issued.

            They settled... for $415 million.

            Even for google and apple, nearly half a billion dollars is not pocket change. https://www.cnet.com/news/appl... [cnet.com]

            • Yes, they (between them) settled for $415 million between them. After underpaying at least 66,000 workers for at least five years. That was my point. That's not a deterrent, it's a bargain. Or do you think that their scheme didn't depress the wages of highly skilled programmers/tech people in SF by more than $0.62/hr (assuming they only were working 40 hrs a week)

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Maybe this myth that China is Communist will finally die now.

    • by bigpat ( 158134 )

      "If someone keeps quitting and landing new jobs, his social credit will definitely be a problem," Zhejiang official Ge Pingan said at a local forum, addressing a complaint from one company's human resources department about being unable to do anything when employees want to leave.

      This is a really sick viewpoint, although in this case there isn't much cultural difference between the east and west. Plenty of business owners in the US would love to have ways to keep employees other than providing a good work experience and fair pay.

      Not too long ago, the big tech companies conspired to not hire tech talent away from each other in order to depress wages in restraint of trade... oh and thanks US Government for doing jack shit about punishing that behavior. Pretty sure the wages of millions of Americans are still depressed years later from that illegal conspiracy.

    • Sicker than that... your good-hearted nerds with less than ideal social skills are going to get screwed by this system. Whoever helped China design this stuff should feel very bad about what they have done to a huge population of the world. This is a huge step backwards. Hell, didn't anybody watch a few Black Mirror episodes?!

  • by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Thursday April 04, 2019 @10:50AM (#58383636)

    An interesting aspect of this social credit thing is that each step mirrors things that already exist today... it's well understood that changing jobs too often looks bad on a resume. Or at least, it did before lots of people started doing that, don't even know if it's that bad these days...

    That's the bad thing about a system like social credit codifying rules, is that the rules that affect your score probably change a lot more slowly than socially accepted behavior. I wonder what happens when you try to trap the unwritten morals of a society in amber at one point in time, never to change again (or to change so slowly it's essentially the case). Will that bottle up repression in the people? Or create a kind of mindless utopia that lasts forever? So far, nothing has lasted forever... or even close.

    • it's well understood that changing jobs too often looks bad on a resume. Or at least, it did before lots of people started doing that, don't even know if it's that bad these days...

      Depends on what your definition of "too often" is. I mean, pretty much for the past 25-30 years at least, the only real way to increase your salary and position was the change jobs. Sure, you don't want to be doing it every year, but every 2-3 years, sure.

      At least if you are a W2 employee.

      ...the bad thing about a system like

      • Sure, you don't want to be doing it every year, but every 2-3 years, sure.

        Yes, about every 3 years is the sweet spot. This not only maximizes your income, but is good for companies as well. Job hoppers help ideas flow between companies, and enables rapidly growing companies to attract top talent and expand faster.

        Productivity is higher in places like Silicon Valley where job hopping is common, urged on by California's ban on non-compete agreements. Jurisdictions with rigid labor markets tend to have stagnant economies, and less innovation.

        Churn is good.

        • ... urged on by California's ban on non-compete agreements.

          Quite possibly the only thing CA got right that it hasn't destroyed.

      • Depends on what your definition of "too often" is

        I was thinking about this as well. As you say for a technical profession, changing every 2-3 years seems fine as both sides get benefit.

        There are other professions where maybe the reasonable period is longer, or seasonal workers who naturally would change every year. You'd hope they would account for that in this system, but who knows...

        One end effect of this would you'd want to be lots more careful changing jobs, because once you started something you'd re

      • Well we finally paid the war off. We're still paying off WW1 and 2, Korea is for our grandkids.

      • and the "telephone fee" was a tax-the-rich thing. Remember that whenever any leftist says "we're only going to tax the rich"....
    • An interesting aspect of this social credit thing is that each step mirrors things that already exist today... it's well understood that changing jobs too often looks bad on a resume. Or at least, it did before lots of people started doing that, don't even know if it's that bad these days...

      That's the bad thing about a system like social credit codifying rules, is that the rules that affect your score probably change a lot more slowly than socially accepted behavior. I wonder what happens when you try to trap the unwritten morals of a society in amber at one point in time, never to change again (or to change so slowly it's essentially the case). Will that bottle up repression in the people? Or create a kind of mindless utopia that lasts forever? So far, nothing has lasted forever... or even close.

      It is interesting that it kind of writes down what in other societies is unwritten.

      There's something to be said for making the rules explicit, anyway. On the flip side, no society functions solely through specified rules.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      As you point out, there already was a "social-credit rule" for this: How people viewed your resume.

      Of course, that's a decentralized codification; each individual can make his own decision about how to understand a resume. The problem here is, as always, centralization; the problem is a monopoly.

      All you folks rant and rave about the dangers of a monopoly, but you can't seem to perceive that a government is itself a monopoly—the worst kind of monopoly, in fact: One grown through violent imposition rath

    • by leonbev ( 111395 )

      Ya know, it's almost like they watched the "Nosedive" episode of Black Mirror, didn't realize that it was satire, and made an entire national policy out of it.

    • Actually, the scariest thing about a social credit system isn't codifying the rules, it's that they are not public. So everyone worries about any given act and self-polices. It's actually too easy to change the rules - well-placed rumors can have people refusing to wear red shirts (the color of Pooh's shirt), or otherwise behaving in cargo-cult ways. Which is great for an authoritarian system bent on control (let the rebels wear their red undershirts as opposed to take on the system!), but horrible for l

      • the scariest thing about a social credit system isn't codifying the rules, it's that they are not public.

        That is a great point, and if the rules becomes complex enough even the supposed rulers may not understand what the choices being made!!

        It's actually too easy to change the rules

        This is also a great point - either the rules can be easily shifted without the public reality knowing, or (very probably) selectively applied to some specific individuals (for worse or better, like bribing someone to alter your

    • by Qbertino ( 265505 ) <moiraNO@SPAMmodparlor.com> on Thursday April 04, 2019 @12:11PM (#58384138)

      I wonder what happens when you try to trap the unwritten morals of a society in amber at one point in time, never to change again (or to change so slowly it's essentially the case). Will that bottle up repression in the people?

      That already exists. It's called "Religion". And yes, it does pretty much exactly that.

      • Before you throw stones, remember, atheism is a religion, too. The only belief system that is not is agnosticism--"I just don't know".
        • by Wulf2k ( 4703573 )

          I don't enjoy having sex with rocks.

          This does not mean my fetish is "not having sex with rocks".

      • I wonder what happens when you try to trap the unwritten morals of a society in amber at one point in time, never to change again (or to change so slowly it's essentially the case). Will that bottle up repression in the people?

        That already exists. It's called "Religion". And yes, it does pretty much exactly that.

        I get that it's popular to take cheap shots at religion but it actually has changed quite a bit over the years. Some factions have gone so far as to completely drop well established historical teachings and norms in favor of what's trendy this year.

        • Businesses adapt to new market pressures. So they change the tune so that the lie keeps reeling in new customers.

          Basic supply and demand.

    • ... it's well understood that changing jobs too often looks bad on a resume.

      "Looks bad on a résumé" is a far cry from "prevents you from having a bank account or traveling to other countries and taints not just you but your family, friends, and associates as well".

      The problem is not some nebulous concept of "social credit" as a way to quantify someone's reputation within a specific context, like a credit score in the context of loans, but rather the fact that this particular form of "social credit" is backed by legal force in a regime which casts various natural human

    • by bigpat ( 158134 )

      An interesting aspect of this social credit thing is that each step mirrors things that already exist today... it's well understood that changing jobs too often looks bad on a resume. Or at least, it did before lots of people started doing that, don't even know if it's that bad these days...

      That's the bad thing about a system like social credit codifying rules, is that the rules that affect your score probably change a lot more slowly than socially accepted behavior. I wonder what happens when you try to trap the unwritten morals of a society in amber at one point in time, never to change again (or to change so slowly it's essentially the case). Will that bottle up repression in the people? Or create a kind of mindless utopia that lasts forever? So far, nothing has lasted forever... or even close.

      There is otherwise nothing wrong with someone wanting to discourage most of the kinds of behaviors that China wants to discourage... What is wrong is using force against people who are simply exercising their human rights.

      Most of the behaviors that have been cited are things that in the US and many other countries are simply
      discouraged because of social pressures. But ultimately leaving a job, or finding a new place to live or finding new friends is a way to move on and move forward. Having such a regimen

  • Red Scare Reporting (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Every article that I read on this is propagandized to hell and back. Here's a thread from a journalist who has actually read through the stuff. People who owe tons of back taxes might be forced to buy regular plane/train tickets instead of first class. The horror... The horror...

    https://twitter.com/isgoodrum/status/975536363364696064?lang=en

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Punish people for doing things we don't agree with!

    How much more "progressive" can you get?

  • From statistics I've read, people in the US are actually staying at jobs longer than they were 25 or more years ago.
    However, in the IT/Development world it is different situation.

    From what I've heard anecdotally and in job interviews it appears that employers expect people to bounce around.
    Some employers almost expect hires to last 1-3 years and then move on.
  • Tacoma is one of those walking simulator games, but I liked the story. It takes place in the future, and one of the things you can figure out is a bit of context about how jobs work. In the future, companies have introduced their own currency they call "Loyalty" to pay workers. However each company has its own "Loyalty" and it's a lot of trouble to switch companies as you have to exchange your "Loyalty" and you can't always do it all (it sounds like it works like college credit when you switch colleges). Th
  • by UnknownSoldier ( 67820 ) on Thursday April 04, 2019 @12:36PM (#58384302)

    Switching jobs about every two years allows you to maximize your earning potential.

    Companies whine about employees not being loyal but they partially created this problem:

    * Asymmetrical respect. They can fire you at any time but when YOU want to end the business relationship they expect two weeks.
    * no or meaningless rewards for being a loyal, long term employee
    * don't offer pay increases comparable to switching to a new job
    * idiotic "Human Resources" dept. as if people are resources to be strip-mined instead of treating them as an asset

    Getting this back on topic:

    China wants to reward bad companies and penalize good people??? Color me surprised. /s

    --
    Redditard / Slashtard, noun, someone who downvoted a person for asking a question

  • But their labor practices seem to be in the worst "capitalist" tradition.

    • The 'collective' combined with unfettered capitalism, under the control of an unaccountable, unelected elite who rake in most of the gains from productivity. Seems to fit the definition of Globalism.

  • We shouldn't be so worried about China using genetic engineering to produce 'super soldiers', we should be more worried that they'll use it to produce Good Little Robot People who do exactly what they're programmed to do, unerringly, unquestioningly, and never complaining -- even if what they're told to do is fling themselves into an operating woodchipper. That's about what I think of the Chinese government and their complete and total lack of regard for human beings and basic Human Rights. Shit like this a
    • Oh you hate what China has become?

      Seems to me to be the logical outcome of when leftists push identity politics and other conduct divide and conquer actions, while the right-wing embraces globalism with open arms. One side striving to squash dissent, conduct violence to shut down political speech, to disarm lawful citizens, to deplatform and unperson problematic individuals, while the other side makes being a wage slave a badge of honor, and being exploited by corporations one's civic duty. All while mass s

  • lenjoy that total control over the life of their citizens.
    Welcome to a totalitarian Communist gov.
    Contrast that with the freedom of the real China, Taiwan.
  • Socialism cannot function if people can just up and change jobs whenever they want, or move wherever they want. The government must control the means of production, and labor is a means of production.

    To all you kids who think Socialism is some great thing, this is why the three generations before you fought so hard against it.

  • they are transparent, unlike some fake democracies that are dominated by advertisements and money.

A computer scientist is someone who fixes things that aren't broken.

Working...