11 ms·

Xi Jinping’s Capitalist Smackdown Sparks a $1T Reckoning

88 points by smaddali 5y ago

pontsprit 5y ago
Interesting counterpoint to say the least: https://www.newstatesman.com/world/asia/2021/07/west-isn-t-dying-its-ideas-live-china https://www.newstatesman.com/world/asia/2021/07/west-isn-t-d...
asdfsfkwqe 5y ago
They failed to realize the root cause of all these after school tutoring. There are just not enough proper schools for them to attend. They have to compete for the spot to get an education. And all these elite colleges/high schools are located in Beijign, Shanghai, etc. They usually take in local students first. So you see the problem. They will always be some form of private tutoring as long as there are immensive competition for basic education.
- DubiousPusher 5y ago
  But why are people so set on getting a fancy "educatiom" at all? I mean, I'm not against it by any means. Education has dome alright by me. But maybe part of the problem is also a divergence in quality of life for the educated or a rampant credentialism whoch tells people their worth is tied to credential attainment? Obviously educating citizens is good for a nation. And if it is really what people want to do, that's good. But it would also be good to ensure people can make a good living and self actualize without a formal education.
  - keutoi 5y ago
    Education as a way up in society has been in China for a long time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination .
    - DubiousPusher 5y ago
      I understand that. And I'm not opposed to creating rewards for educational attainment. But we as humans have to realize that cognitively people come in many shapes and sizes. And we should consider that it's possible that a certain amount of people are going to flunk out of the modern world. The more homogenous and narrow we make the singular way in which we expect people to live, the more some will fail to find their footing. So far, modernity has widened what it accepts from people in many ways. But in one key way it has narrowed. We expect virtually everyone to become employed and pay rent. And we paint a pretty singular path to better employment, formal education.
  - exporectomy 5y ago
    > But it would also be good to ensure people can make a good living and self actualize without a formal education. How? Wanting magic to be true doesn't make it possible. If your economy is already strong enough to provide a good living to anyone who wants to be a noncontributing poorly educated self-actualizer, then OK, let them enjoy that. But what if it's not? Who supports them? Even developed countries with good social welfare usually make it hard to be voluntarily unemployed and receiving welfare just because you'd rather play on your hobbies than work for others' benefit. It's meant for people who want to work but can't, not those who don't want to but can.
    - DubiousPusher 5y ago
      We don't organize into socities solely to eek every drop of value out of people economically that we can. The goal is to create a more stable and less miserable life for people. Some people are never going to be happy spending years in formal education. And creating an incentive so strong that even people without the slightest interest or compunction towards it creates its own inefficiencies. You twisted my comment into a false dichotomy. Societies obviously cannot fully subsidize people to enjoy a life of the most self indulgent or pretentious interests. But a society can acknowledge that not everyone is going to grow skills, discover talents or develop interests in the same way. Perhaps the most efficient thing is to shrink agriculture work to the bare machine assisted minimum with a dichotomy of skilled labor at the top and a balloon of grunt workers at the bottom. On the other hand, growing a wide professional class of ag workers with more stake in the system may lead to happier workers and perhaps a more sustainable and durable ag sector. If a society needs to subsidize that or create a pipeline that carries workers out of primary education into that kind of work it may be preferable for less tangible reasons. It's absurd that we should drive forward with efficiency no matter how much it emiserates people. And to insist upon it with so much of the reward for it accruing at the top is downright feudal. Even still, it's not necessarily true that funneling everyone into the knowledge economy is in fact better. If someone would be happy and productive farming five acres but they go to the city, get half a degree, crash out and end up in a very low value labor market, society has probably lost out. It is my opinion that economists view labor markets aa far too fluid. They don't account for the fact that people are more like bits of rock, sand and clay than they are like water. They clump together, break apart and get stuck.
- NonContro 5y ago
  The gender imbalance is another problem. China needs more young people to be happy to be factory workers forever, instead of seeking out white-collar jobs. But many young men and their parents are convinced that a University degree is essential to find a wife. If the situation reverses to more women than men, by simple microeconomics the dating standards of women will fall and more families and men will be content in lower-status (but economically important) roles. China could incentivize more women being born by allowing 'bride prices', paid to the bride's family instead of just being used for the wedding. Another option could be to encourage excess males to emigrate, as seems to be occurring in India. https://www.thinkchina.sg/no-bride-price-no-marriage-china https://www.thinkchina.sg/no-bride-price-no-marriage-china
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
someperson 5y ago
http://archive.today/2021.08.02-054731/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-08-01/china-tech-crackdown-communist-party-policy-changes-behind-1-trillion-selloff http://archive.today/2021.08.02-054731/https://www.bloomberg...
yellow_lead 5y ago
This article is pretty ridiculous and lazy. > After 40 years of allowing the market to play an expanding role in driving prosperity, China’s leaders have remembered something important — they’re Communists. China isn't a true communist state and hasn't been for a while. Yet the author feels the need to dunk on this straw man and defend capitalism and venture capitalists who lost money in the tutoring crackdown. The muddy Shanghai construction photo is a nice touch too.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- fsckboy 5y ago
  you are quoting the subhead; headlines are not written as part of the article by the author of the article, they are added in at a later stage by a different person
itmayno 5y ago
The native citizens will come to HN and offer some rationalization. The non citizens will offer others. The reason is very simple. The dictator is paranoid about losing control and getting killed. Simple as that
- alex_smart 5y ago
  The dictator is paranoid about losing control and getting killed from the private tutoring industry? :o
  - baybal2 5y ago
    People don't need to reach the high bar of regicide to be considered a challenge to the system: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28032536 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28032536 > "Activity that is harmful to the economy?" I think they get much more glaring issues to care about if it comes to this. > What about their wrong simply being "getting too rich, and successful," and causing somebody a burst of jealousy? > Becoming richer than a partyman in some small village is very much a challenge to the party. What changed now is that the entire China has become that village. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28028463 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28028463 > I keep the claim that the explanation is even more simpler: whomever becomes a big man in a country like China eventually goes down, and that's the whole story. > There can only be one "big man" in such system, and he tolerates no competition. > This consistently held true through the whole 40 years of modern China: whomever attains too much of the social, political, economical, cultural, moral, or even genealogical prominence consistently gets taken down. This is why most mainland Chinese have that fear of publicity, and standing out almost bordering on panic disorder. And this is why people attaining any level of prominence there keep leaving the country for the West.
howtofly 5y ago
In the era of wiki/scihub/libgen, the whole tutoring industry is worthless. They are just making easy money taking advantage of information asymmetry. Generally, easy money will not be allowed in China. Edited: I'm talking specifically about Chinese tutoring industry. One comment below gives a very detailed description, which perfectly explains why I think it's worthless. We are all in the process of a revolution initiated by wiki/scihub/libgen. Whether agree with me or not, you are welcome.
- swarnie_ 5y ago
  If that were true then the entire education industry globally is a scam which i simply can't believe. Have you never had a great lecturer who can deliver information in a way which makes more sense to you then just reading it off a website?
  - ishan1121 5y ago
    Online Education industry is a scam in India - high fees ($500-$1500 range) along with low wage mediocre teachers!
    - alex_smart 5y ago
      That makes it a high margin business, not a scam.
  - jowday 5y ago
    I have, but the chance of getting that when you pay for an education is low enough for it to be an anomaly in my experience.
    - exporectomy 5y ago
      That's not what teachers and tutors are for. The personal human interaction motivates you to do work that you wouldn't bother to otherwise. Some schools even call them "facilitators" or some other word to remind you they're not just a firehose of facts.
coder-3 5y ago
It is so interesting to see the CCP try to navigate the dichotomy between state planning and free markets. Trying to make diametrically opposed systems play together. I would even be rooting for them if it wasn't for the complete disregard for human life, personal liberties and all the fucking genocide...
- cblconfederate 5y ago
  Markets are nowhere free since they are always defined narrowly by state and international laws. What china doesn't allow is capitalism but handling a state-planned market doesnt seem to be that hard.
  - The_Amp_Walrus 5y ago
    At least computationally, central planning is quite hard https://chris-said.io/2016/05/11/optimizing-things-in-the-ussr/ https://chris-said.io/2016/05/11/optimizing-things-in-the-us...
- redis_mlc 5y ago
  > It is so interesting to see the CCP try to navigate the dichotomy between state planning and free markets. No, they're not "navigating" anything. The CCP deliberately used temporary free markets to kick-start their national economy before re-nationalizing everything. This is part of the Communist playbook now, and is discussed widely. Any Chinese billionaire that's not a CCP head will be imprisoned or killed over the next decade.
tmule 5y ago
In America, politicians are controlled by billionaires. This comes at the cost of national interest, given that winner-takes-all systems are gini coefficient maximizers. In China, politicians control billionaires. At least in theory, especially given how much the Chinese political establishment is attuned to the needs of the Chinese commoner, this does protect the national interest.
- refurb 5y ago
  This is an incredibly generous take on the situation. In China the corruption of government officials is several orders of magnitude higher. We’re talking wholesale theft of govt assets in the billions of dollars. Chinese leaders also have a much more tenuous hold on power. They aren’t smacking down Jack Ma because they are looking out for the Chinese commoner (though they might benefit), their top priority is looking out for themselves.
  - haram_masala 5y ago
    This is the first time I have ever heard the claim that the CCP's hold on power is anything but rock solid. Unless you mean that specific leaders within the party have a tenuous hold against their party rivals.
    - refurb 5y ago
      The later.
  - oreally 5y ago
    To put it this way is too much of a simplification. There is good and bad. For now their priorities intersect with the chinese commoner, ie. Protecting themselves via serving the chinese commoner. Another bonus to this is the ability to make harder decisions now for the sake of the future. The fact of the matter is that with this 'aligned interests' dictatorial style you can more done and plan for the future - so long as that future is aligned with your population. I'd say the standoffish bipartisan politics of the US is far harder to get things done, but hey, as I'm sure some of you would say, it's better to have the freedom.
3327 5y ago
I don’t think its about getting killed. Basically 1.5tn is nothing and worth it compared to the future trajectory of education. Lets face it - listed tutor education companies are leaches and Xi made a bold and right move. Im simple terms; education or capital. China has advantages to their system that they can do broad stroke ro change things. The US struggles for decades from similar problems. Only in war time does the Us actually succeed at broad structural change.
JumpCrisscross 5y ago
I can't imagine Xi is thrilled with this. More likely: zealous deputies, looking ahead to next year's National Party Conference, are looking to curry favor and build their resumes. When everyone is simultaneously dialing it to eleven in a zero-sum game, fuckups are almost assured.
- 0dayz 5y ago
  What you mean? Its literally his idea/policy. The previous leader however must be reeling in pain.
- libertine 5y ago
  Honestly I don't think they care, since they are playing the long term game (probably in decades, if not 100+ years). Not only that, but China just has too much momentum for any of this to make a big dent. I think it was Warren Buffet that compared the US economy to a fast moving train, and that a stick or a stone in the rails won't make it derail. We also have to acknowledge that China is also a massive moving train at high speed, and it won't derail. That's why they can make these decisions. Remember that companies are apologizing to China on a monthly basis, I haven't seen a single Chinese company issue apologies for anything related to offences to western countries.
  - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
    > they are playing the long term game This was true ten years ago. It hasn't been since Xi became more...permanent. The headline case is Hong Kong's accession, where a territory that would have--without much controversy--reverted to Beijing within a generation was accelerated to meet a 68-year old man's timeline. This not only cost China internationally, not only cost it in Hong Kong, it also neutered support in Taiwan for peaceful reunification. Bad for China. Good for Xi. > haven't seen a single Chinese company issue apologies for anything related to offences to western countries Corporate apologies to governments have zero value in the West. One could argue its pragmatism. One could argue we're jaded. But a Chinese company doing something wrong and apologizing for it could be seen as possibly more insulting than paying the fine and fixing the problem. Similarly, if our companies can save money or gain advantage by issuing apologies, power to them.
mettamage 5y ago
I feel a bit too far removed from this, so my comments might be a bit too curious without considering other perspectives (aka I am a bit naive on this topic). With that said: Global investors are getting squashed. But there must be global investors who shorted these stocks or bought put options. Why aren’t they covered in this article? I’m missing nuance on the investment side. From a political standpoint, I want to follow this more closely. I can imagine that the west might take some inspiration on how to deal with big tech. Armchair investor and my political pedigree is “I vote” (aka a total commoner).
- mjburgess 5y ago
  If you think about it from a macro perspective, we're talking about Chinese companies generally suffering an investment hit. It is unlikely there are very many people "shorting china". But even so, shorts "dont make the world go round". They are a necessary mechanism against exuberance, but companies selling shares and using those to invest/grow -- that's the heart of the promise of shareholder capitalism.
- rwmj 5y ago
  Intelligent shorts can look at factors like - is this company an outright scam (Wirecard)? is this company in a market which is likely to shrink? are its competitors on the verge of a breakthrough technology? They wouldn't necessarily have inside knowledge that the government of the country is going to force companies to turn into non-profits (like happened recently with Chinese school tutoring companies). That's like having an asteroid hit.
- aliswe 5y ago
  > But there must be global investors who shorted these stocks Why would you short a tutoring stock, especially if whats publicly traded is an investment fund that only does it as a small part of their business?
reader_mode 5y ago
I feel like investing in market pathologies has become too common and modern democratic governments are far too slow at doing there roles and curbing such behaviour. Bitcoin is the obvious example of something that should have been banned years ago (and all proof of work crypto), but there are so many examples coming up daily, if there was ever any faith in institutions it's eroding quickly, and once you remove that you accelerate the pathologies (people start acting like anything goes) and society starts to destabilise.
- chii 5y ago
  > Bitcoin is the obvious example of something that should have been banned years ago (and all proof of work crypto) not that i would invest in bitcoins (or any crypto), but i don't see it as an obvious ban. The only reason i can deduce from your "obviousness" comment is that proof of works "wastes" energy. But then it is hypocritical to argue this when other modern conveniences also "waste" energy, and yet you don't call for a ban.
  - sgt101 5y ago
    Bitcoin uses energy without providing substantial utility unavailable from other vastly less wasteful alternatives. Additionally it provides a place for the rich and ruthless to prey on the weak and gullible with endless washtrades and exchange scams. It should be banned.
    - askmike 5y ago
      The utility is hard to measure, but brushing it off being valueless is subjective. It should be clear to you at this stage that not everyone agrees with you.
      - sgt101 5y ago
        The mafia agrees, but the mafia are wrong.
  - tedk-42 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
drenvuk 5y ago
I can see why hackernews was (is?) banned in china. You guys see nothing but negatives in any policy decision that comes out of there. Sure there are some power struggles, sure there's a powerful cadre of billionaires who own the politics of the country but aside from the pretty disgusting issues with the Uighurs I would consider china up there with Norway in terms of country development. If you just contrast what Xi is orchestrating vs what's happening in the US with open eyes, you'd see that maintaining the status quo is impossible. We're too fat and complacent and there are too many leeches on government spending. This is the holy shit kind of article that made me realize we're going to lose our place on top. I don't even know how to help stop it.
- trainsplanes 5y ago
  Is hacker news banned in China? I've always used it as a way of testing my internet connection there since HN loads quickly and has been ignored by basically every filter everywhere. I haven't been to China since borders were shut down, but HN worked there last January. And to address everything else, I wouldn't say China is Norway-level, but they're definitely on a very clear upward path of development and accelerating. I think a lot of other countries have gotten comfortable with their place somewhere near the top and assume it's an intrinsic trait their country holds, and not something they need to work for. e.g., As an American, loads of people I know say America is the absolute greatest place on earth (maybe it is in some aspects). But mention that it's falling behind in some ways (crumbling infrastructure, etc) and some people refuse to acknowledge it. Say some countries (especially any country in Asia and particularly China) do any single thing better than the US, and a large number of people get absolutely enraged. It's wild. Even people who a couple years ago would've proudly shouted about how much they hate nationalism and especially jingoism seem to be falling into that trap. It's hard to improve your country when people think country development is an immutable trait, and not something you need to constantly work for.
  - baybal2 5y ago
    > Is hacker news banned in China? It been banner around a year ago when links to Github repos with Wuhan exposes started popping here.
ur-whale 5y ago
https://archive.is/Lw3Lm https://archive.is/Lw3Lm
Zardoz84 5y ago
> 22-year-old motorbike courier Mr. Tang complains about the lack of medical insurance. “There’s nothing I can do about it if Meituan doesn’t pay for it,” he added. “The wealth gap between people in this society is too big”. People should stop calling China a communist state, when isn't. If they we are truly communist, not will be medical insurances or a "entrepreneur" driving it. It would have a public medical system that cover everything, and the business would be driven by the workers of it. However, that they hit hard on private education, it's a good step. Private education never should allowed to exists. Only a quality public education system can give access to good education to everybody.
- bumbada 5y ago
  China is a communistic state precisely for that. You would also say that Venezuela or Cuba is not communistic. The only communistic country that had a moderately good public medical system was German Democratic Republic, and it was because the constant influx of help and resources from the West. The more communist a State is, the more miserable it is. You had China with Mao making tens of millions of people die of Hunger. Was Mao not communistic? At the start of the 20th century Russia population was bigger and richer than the US of A. Lenin destroyed the economy and made millions of people die from hunger, way more than on WWI. Was he not communistic? Let's not talk about Stalin or PolPot. >Private education never should allowed to exists. Only a quality public education system can give access to good education to everybody. You are confusing education with forced indoctrination and propaganda. I can educate and think for myself. Just repeating a mantra or dogma ignoring History like you do is not education.
  - wastedhours 5y ago
    I don't think you're arguing the same thing - the "idealised" version of a communistic state is what the OP is referring to. The "actual" version of a communistic state is what you are. They're correct that a state built on communist principles would have free healthcare for all, and would have proper free education for all. However, the reality is markedly different, and all the so-called communist countries are anything but.
- 5y ago
trhway 5y ago
interesting that the lifting of the children number restriction coincides with the attack on the "three mountains" - education, healthcare and housing costs - which are significantly related to the size of the family.
nomoreplease 5y ago
> Call it progressive authoritarianism. That’s a terrible term. Bloomberg already has a bad history of journalism, but appreciating Authoritarianism is a new low
VolTt 5y ago
x-thread://50466801/unblocked

88 points by smaddali 5y ago

Interesting counterpoint to say the least: https://www.newstatesman.com/world/asia/2021/07/west-isn-t-dying-its-ideas-live-china https://www.newstatesman.com/world/asia/2021/07/west-isn-t-d...

asdfsfkwqe 5y ago

They failed to realize the root cause of all these after school tutoring. There are just not enough proper schools for them to attend. They have to compete for the spot to get an education. And all these elite colleges/high schools are located in Beijign, Shanghai, etc. They usually take in local students first. So you see the problem. They will always be some form of private tutoring as long as there are immensive competition for basic education.

DubiousPusher 5y ago
But why are people so set on getting a fancy "educatiom" at all? I mean, I'm not against it by any means. Education has dome alright by me. But maybe part of the problem is also a divergence in quality of life for the educated or a rampant credentialism whoch tells people their worth is tied to credential attainment? Obviously educating citizens is good for a nation. And if it is really what people want to do, that's good. But it would also be good to ensure people can make a good living and self actualize without a formal education.
- keutoi 5y ago
  Education as a way up in society has been in China for a long time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination .
  - DubiousPusher 5y ago
    I understand that. And I'm not opposed to creating rewards for educational attainment. But we as humans have to realize that cognitively people come in many shapes and sizes. And we should consider that it's possible that a certain amount of people are going to flunk out of the modern world. The more homogenous and narrow we make the singular way in which we expect people to live, the more some will fail to find their footing. So far, modernity has widened what it accepts from people in many ways. But in one key way it has narrowed. We expect virtually everyone to become employed and pay rent. And we paint a pretty singular path to better employment, formal education.
- exporectomy 5y ago
  > But it would also be good to ensure people can make a good living and self actualize without a formal education. How? Wanting magic to be true doesn't make it possible. If your economy is already strong enough to provide a good living to anyone who wants to be a noncontributing poorly educated self-actualizer, then OK, let them enjoy that. But what if it's not? Who supports them? Even developed countries with good social welfare usually make it hard to be voluntarily unemployed and receiving welfare just because you'd rather play on your hobbies than work for others' benefit. It's meant for people who want to work but can't, not those who don't want to but can.
  - DubiousPusher 5y ago
    We don't organize into socities solely to eek every drop of value out of people economically that we can. The goal is to create a more stable and less miserable life for people. Some people are never going to be happy spending years in formal education. And creating an incentive so strong that even people without the slightest interest or compunction towards it creates its own inefficiencies. You twisted my comment into a false dichotomy. Societies obviously cannot fully subsidize people to enjoy a life of the most self indulgent or pretentious interests. But a society can acknowledge that not everyone is going to grow skills, discover talents or develop interests in the same way. Perhaps the most efficient thing is to shrink agriculture work to the bare machine assisted minimum with a dichotomy of skilled labor at the top and a balloon of grunt workers at the bottom. On the other hand, growing a wide professional class of ag workers with more stake in the system may lead to happier workers and perhaps a more sustainable and durable ag sector. If a society needs to subsidize that or create a pipeline that carries workers out of primary education into that kind of work it may be preferable for less tangible reasons. It's absurd that we should drive forward with efficiency no matter how much it emiserates people. And to insist upon it with so much of the reward for it accruing at the top is downright feudal. Even still, it's not necessarily true that funneling everyone into the knowledge economy is in fact better. If someone would be happy and productive farming five acres but they go to the city, get half a degree, crash out and end up in a very low value labor market, society has probably lost out. It is my opinion that economists view labor markets aa far too fluid. They don't account for the fact that people are more like bits of rock, sand and clay than they are like water. They clump together, break apart and get stuck.
NonContro 5y ago
The gender imbalance is another problem. China needs more young people to be happy to be factory workers forever, instead of seeking out white-collar jobs. But many young men and their parents are convinced that a University degree is essential to find a wife. If the situation reverses to more women than men, by simple microeconomics the dating standards of women will fall and more families and men will be content in lower-status (but economically important) roles. China could incentivize more women being born by allowing 'bride prices', paid to the bride's family instead of just being used for the wedding. Another option could be to encourage excess males to emigrate, as seems to be occurring in India. https://www.thinkchina.sg/no-bride-price-no-marriage-china https://www.thinkchina.sg/no-bride-price-no-marriage-china

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

someperson 5y ago

http://archive.today/2021.08.02-054731/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-08-01/china-tech-crackdown-communist-party-policy-changes-behind-1-trillion-selloff http://archive.today/2021.08.02-054731/https://www.bloomberg...

yellow_lead 5y ago

This article is pretty ridiculous and lazy. > After 40 years of allowing the market to play an expanding role in driving prosperity, China’s leaders have remembered something important — they’re Communists. China isn't a true communist state and hasn't been for a while. Yet the author feels the need to dunk on this straw man and defend capitalism and venture capitalists who lost money in the tutoring crackdown. The muddy Shanghai construction photo is a nice touch too.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
fsckboy 5y ago
you are quoting the subhead; headlines are not written as part of the article by the author of the article, they are added in at a later stage by a different person

itmayno 5y ago

The native citizens will come to HN and offer some rationalization. The non citizens will offer others. The reason is very simple. The dictator is paranoid about losing control and getting killed. Simple as that

alex_smart 5y ago
The dictator is paranoid about losing control and getting killed from the private tutoring industry? :o
- baybal2 5y ago
  People don't need to reach the high bar of regicide to be considered a challenge to the system: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28032536 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28032536 > "Activity that is harmful to the economy?" I think they get much more glaring issues to care about if it comes to this. > What about their wrong simply being "getting too rich, and successful," and causing somebody a burst of jealousy? > Becoming richer than a partyman in some small village is very much a challenge to the party. What changed now is that the entire China has become that village. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28028463 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28028463 > I keep the claim that the explanation is even more simpler: whomever becomes a big man in a country like China eventually goes down, and that's the whole story. > There can only be one "big man" in such system, and he tolerates no competition. > This consistently held true through the whole 40 years of modern China: whomever attains too much of the social, political, economical, cultural, moral, or even genealogical prominence consistently gets taken down. This is why most mainland Chinese have that fear of publicity, and standing out almost bordering on panic disorder. And this is why people attaining any level of prominence there keep leaving the country for the West.

howtofly 5y ago

In the era of wiki/scihub/libgen, the whole tutoring industry is worthless. They are just making easy money taking advantage of information asymmetry. Generally, easy money will not be allowed in China. Edited: I'm talking specifically about Chinese tutoring industry. One comment below gives a very detailed description, which perfectly explains why I think it's worthless. We are all in the process of a revolution initiated by wiki/scihub/libgen. Whether agree with me or not, you are welcome.

swarnie_ 5y ago
If that were true then the entire education industry globally is a scam which i simply can't believe. Have you never had a great lecturer who can deliver information in a way which makes more sense to you then just reading it off a website?
- ishan1121 5y ago
  Online Education industry is a scam in India - high fees ($500-$1500 range) along with low wage mediocre teachers!
  - alex_smart 5y ago
    That makes it a high margin business, not a scam.
- jowday 5y ago
  I have, but the chance of getting that when you pay for an education is low enough for it to be an anomaly in my experience.
  - exporectomy 5y ago
    That's not what teachers and tutors are for. The personal human interaction motivates you to do work that you wouldn't bother to otherwise. Some schools even call them "facilitators" or some other word to remind you they're not just a firehose of facts.

coder-3 5y ago

It is so interesting to see the CCP try to navigate the dichotomy between state planning and free markets. Trying to make diametrically opposed systems play together. I would even be rooting for them if it wasn't for the complete disregard for human life, personal liberties and all the fucking genocide...

cblconfederate 5y ago
Markets are nowhere free since they are always defined narrowly by state and international laws. What china doesn't allow is capitalism but handling a state-planned market doesnt seem to be that hard.
- The_Amp_Walrus 5y ago
  At least computationally, central planning is quite hard https://chris-said.io/2016/05/11/optimizing-things-in-the-ussr/ https://chris-said.io/2016/05/11/optimizing-things-in-the-us...
redis_mlc 5y ago
> It is so interesting to see the CCP try to navigate the dichotomy between state planning and free markets. No, they're not "navigating" anything. The CCP deliberately used temporary free markets to kick-start their national economy before re-nationalizing everything. This is part of the Communist playbook now, and is discussed widely. Any Chinese billionaire that's not a CCP head will be imprisoned or killed over the next decade.

tmule 5y ago

In America, politicians are controlled by billionaires. This comes at the cost of national interest, given that winner-takes-all systems are gini coefficient maximizers. In China, politicians control billionaires. At least in theory, especially given how much the Chinese political establishment is attuned to the needs of the Chinese commoner, this does protect the national interest.

refurb 5y ago
This is an incredibly generous take on the situation. In China the corruption of government officials is several orders of magnitude higher. We’re talking wholesale theft of govt assets in the billions of dollars. Chinese leaders also have a much more tenuous hold on power. They aren’t smacking down Jack Ma because they are looking out for the Chinese commoner (though they might benefit), their top priority is looking out for themselves.
- haram_masala 5y ago
  This is the first time I have ever heard the claim that the CCP's hold on power is anything but rock solid. Unless you mean that specific leaders within the party have a tenuous hold against their party rivals.
  - refurb 5y ago
    The later.
- oreally 5y ago
  To put it this way is too much of a simplification. There is good and bad. For now their priorities intersect with the chinese commoner, ie. Protecting themselves via serving the chinese commoner. Another bonus to this is the ability to make harder decisions now for the sake of the future. The fact of the matter is that with this 'aligned interests' dictatorial style you can more done and plan for the future - so long as that future is aligned with your population. I'd say the standoffish bipartisan politics of the US is far harder to get things done, but hey, as I'm sure some of you would say, it's better to have the freedom.

3327 5y ago

I don’t think its about getting killed. Basically 1.5tn is nothing and worth it compared to the future trajectory of education. Lets face it - listed tutor education companies are leaches and Xi made a bold and right move. Im simple terms; education or capital. China has advantages to their system that they can do broad stroke ro change things. The US struggles for decades from similar problems. Only in war time does the Us actually succeed at broad structural change.

JumpCrisscross 5y ago

I can't imagine Xi is thrilled with this. More likely: zealous deputies, looking ahead to next year's National Party Conference, are looking to curry favor and build their resumes. When everyone is simultaneously dialing it to eleven in a zero-sum game, fuckups are almost assured.

0dayz 5y ago
What you mean? Its literally his idea/policy. The previous leader however must be reeling in pain.
libertine 5y ago
Honestly I don't think they care, since they are playing the long term game (probably in decades, if not 100+ years). Not only that, but China just has too much momentum for any of this to make a big dent. I think it was Warren Buffet that compared the US economy to a fast moving train, and that a stick or a stone in the rails won't make it derail. We also have to acknowledge that China is also a massive moving train at high speed, and it won't derail. That's why they can make these decisions. Remember that companies are apologizing to China on a monthly basis, I haven't seen a single Chinese company issue apologies for anything related to offences to western countries.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago
  > they are playing the long term game This was true ten years ago. It hasn't been since Xi became more...permanent. The headline case is Hong Kong's accession, where a territory that would have--without much controversy--reverted to Beijing within a generation was accelerated to meet a 68-year old man's timeline. This not only cost China internationally, not only cost it in Hong Kong, it also neutered support in Taiwan for peaceful reunification. Bad for China. Good for Xi. > haven't seen a single Chinese company issue apologies for anything related to offences to western countries Corporate apologies to governments have zero value in the West. One could argue its pragmatism. One could argue we're jaded. But a Chinese company doing something wrong and apologizing for it could be seen as possibly more insulting than paying the fine and fixing the problem. Similarly, if our companies can save money or gain advantage by issuing apologies, power to them.

mettamage 5y ago

I feel a bit too far removed from this, so my comments might be a bit too curious without considering other perspectives (aka I am a bit naive on this topic). With that said: Global investors are getting squashed. But there must be global investors who shorted these stocks or bought put options. Why aren’t they covered in this article? I’m missing nuance on the investment side. From a political standpoint, I want to follow this more closely. I can imagine that the west might take some inspiration on how to deal with big tech. Armchair investor and my political pedigree is “I vote” (aka a total commoner).

mjburgess 5y ago
If you think about it from a macro perspective, we're talking about Chinese companies generally suffering an investment hit. It is unlikely there are very many people "shorting china". But even so, shorts "dont make the world go round". They are a necessary mechanism against exuberance, but companies selling shares and using those to invest/grow -- that's the heart of the promise of shareholder capitalism.
rwmj 5y ago
Intelligent shorts can look at factors like - is this company an outright scam (Wirecard)? is this company in a market which is likely to shrink? are its competitors on the verge of a breakthrough technology? They wouldn't necessarily have inside knowledge that the government of the country is going to force companies to turn into non-profits (like happened recently with Chinese school tutoring companies). That's like having an asteroid hit.
aliswe 5y ago
> But there must be global investors who shorted these stocks Why would you short a tutoring stock, especially if whats publicly traded is an investment fund that only does it as a small part of their business?

reader_mode 5y ago

I feel like investing in market pathologies has become too common and modern democratic governments are far too slow at doing there roles and curbing such behaviour. Bitcoin is the obvious example of something that should have been banned years ago (and all proof of work crypto), but there are so many examples coming up daily, if there was ever any faith in institutions it's eroding quickly, and once you remove that you accelerate the pathologies (people start acting like anything goes) and society starts to destabilise.

chii 5y ago
> Bitcoin is the obvious example of something that should have been banned years ago (and all proof of work crypto) not that i would invest in bitcoins (or any crypto), but i don't see it as an obvious ban. The only reason i can deduce from your "obviousness" comment is that proof of works "wastes" energy. But then it is hypocritical to argue this when other modern conveniences also "waste" energy, and yet you don't call for a ban.
- sgt101 5y ago
  Bitcoin uses energy without providing substantial utility unavailable from other vastly less wasteful alternatives. Additionally it provides a place for the rich and ruthless to prey on the weak and gullible with endless washtrades and exchange scams. It should be banned.
  - askmike 5y ago
    The utility is hard to measure, but brushing it off being valueless is subjective. It should be clear to you at this stage that not everyone agrees with you.
    - sgt101 5y ago
      The mafia agrees, but the mafia are wrong.
- tedk-42 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

drenvuk 5y ago

I can see why hackernews was (is?) banned in china. You guys see nothing but negatives in any policy decision that comes out of there. Sure there are some power struggles, sure there's a powerful cadre of billionaires who own the politics of the country but aside from the pretty disgusting issues with the Uighurs I would consider china up there with Norway in terms of country development. If you just contrast what Xi is orchestrating vs what's happening in the US with open eyes, you'd see that maintaining the status quo is impossible. We're too fat and complacent and there are too many leeches on government spending. This is the holy shit kind of article that made me realize we're going to lose our place on top. I don't even know how to help stop it.

trainsplanes 5y ago
Is hacker news banned in China? I've always used it as a way of testing my internet connection there since HN loads quickly and has been ignored by basically every filter everywhere. I haven't been to China since borders were shut down, but HN worked there last January. And to address everything else, I wouldn't say China is Norway-level, but they're definitely on a very clear upward path of development and accelerating. I think a lot of other countries have gotten comfortable with their place somewhere near the top and assume it's an intrinsic trait their country holds, and not something they need to work for. e.g., As an American, loads of people I know say America is the absolute greatest place on earth (maybe it is in some aspects). But mention that it's falling behind in some ways (crumbling infrastructure, etc) and some people refuse to acknowledge it. Say some countries (especially any country in Asia and particularly China) do any single thing better than the US, and a large number of people get absolutely enraged. It's wild. Even people who a couple years ago would've proudly shouted about how much they hate nationalism and especially jingoism seem to be falling into that trap. It's hard to improve your country when people think country development is an immutable trait, and not something you need to constantly work for.
- baybal2 5y ago
  > Is hacker news banned in China? It been banner around a year ago when links to Github repos with Wuhan exposes started popping here.

ur-whale 5y ago

https://archive.is/Lw3Lm https://archive.is/Lw3Lm

Zardoz84 5y ago

> 22-year-old motorbike courier Mr. Tang complains about the lack of medical insurance. “There’s nothing I can do about it if Meituan doesn’t pay for it,” he added. “The wealth gap between people in this society is too big”. People should stop calling China a communist state, when isn't. If they we are truly communist, not will be medical insurances or a "entrepreneur" driving it. It would have a public medical system that cover everything, and the business would be driven by the workers of it. However, that they hit hard on private education, it's a good step. Private education never should allowed to exists. Only a quality public education system can give access to good education to everybody.

bumbada 5y ago
China is a communistic state precisely for that. You would also say that Venezuela or Cuba is not communistic. The only communistic country that had a moderately good public medical system was German Democratic Republic, and it was because the constant influx of help and resources from the West. The more communist a State is, the more miserable it is. You had China with Mao making tens of millions of people die of Hunger. Was Mao not communistic? At the start of the 20th century Russia population was bigger and richer than the US of A. Lenin destroyed the economy and made millions of people die from hunger, way more than on WWI. Was he not communistic? Let's not talk about Stalin or PolPot. >Private education never should allowed to exists. Only a quality public education system can give access to good education to everybody. You are confusing education with forced indoctrination and propaganda. I can educate and think for myself. Just repeating a mantra or dogma ignoring History like you do is not education.
- wastedhours 5y ago
  I don't think you're arguing the same thing - the "idealised" version of a communistic state is what the OP is referring to. The "actual" version of a communistic state is what you are. They're correct that a state built on communist principles would have free healthcare for all, and would have proper free education for all. However, the reality is markedly different, and all the so-called communist countries are anything but.
5y ago

trhway 5y ago

interesting that the lifting of the children number restriction coincides with the attack on the "three mountains" - education, healthcare and housing costs - which are significantly related to the size of the family.

nomoreplease 5y ago

> Call it progressive authoritarianism. That’s a terrible term. Bloomberg already has a bad history of journalism, but appreciating Authoritarianism is a new low

VolTt 5y ago

x-thread://50466801/unblocked