Topic: China cracking down innovation - page 2. (Read 421 times)

Their social media is highly censored and even searches are strictly monitored. This is why you can see a popular actress wiped out in their history. Good example is Zhao Wei, a popular actress that has been wiped out from their country's internet search. Now, it is no surprise if they will hold off some new innovations and not permit it to enter their regime. So do you really want to live in a country with topnotch economic power but your life is quite different from other normal people outside your region?

There is a huge gap between a dictatorial way of economics and the liberal way (or in other words turbo-capitalism). So there are indeed many ways between to create a economical policy that fits both, the companies as well as the employers. Europe had such a balanced system until the introduction of the Euro. But with the introduction of the Euro, it is moving more and more toward a centrally controlled economic policy that will sooner or later lead to ruin. So that's not a good model either. At most the time before the euro.

I would say that Chinese government allows basically dictatorial ways to handle their economics. Normally I am not the one for suggesting liberal policies but the reality is that instead of a dictatorial way I would say that it would be a lot better to let people be however they are. Is European way of socialism better?

It is way better, add in justice and democracy in there and we got ourselves a great nation. Not really that difficult to imagine since we have 10+ of them in just Europe. However reality is that China grew on the backs of their huge population and did cheap knock-off horrible brands for very cheap nearly starving (and sometimes directly starving) wages for its people and they got richer that way.

I personally can't say anything about what is happening in Chinese society because I never know and there is rarely news about its citizens because it is possible that something is being covered up by the country because I rarely hear news about complaints or anything else. communicate with the public about the country.
but if you look more seriously what you say will be very true because there is no way they are not pressured by all forms of regulations that exist in china and recently there have been quite a few funny things that citizens have done to show workers' protest by doing tang ping which is a form of anxiety for their citizens

The Chinese government has always chosen its own individual path of economic development and it cannot be said that they did not succeed in this. As for the introduction of innovations, I believe that on the contrary, the Chinese government takes them quite seriously. This can even be shown in relation to blockchain technology. Evaluating its novelty and prospects, even the leadership of the Communist Party called on to more intensively introduce it into practice. So far, China is among the leading in terms of the number of patents granted for inventions using blockchain technology.
Decentralized cryptocurrency is simply not in the purview of the Chinese government. Moreover, they see it as a threat to their financial security.

Sooner or later this is going to come back to bite them, that is just the way things are and I think the main reason why the growth of China will begin to slowdown are the horrible demographics caused by their one child policy.

The truth is that a government that tries to crush the liberties of their people will show signs of failure, China looks strong now but as innovation get punished then where are they going to get those technological advancements? After all even corporation spying has its limits and they cannot rely on just getting those advancements in that way as businesses will eventually find a way to protect their commercial secrets.

But in reality, an authoritarian government is only seen as a government that prohibits the freedom of each individual to stand on what he chooses. including the economy itself. China with a system that makes the interests of the state as its main strength needs to prioritize whatever the Chinese government wants to achieve and override the rights of the people who want to live in individual freedom. Even legitimate beliefs make them accept consequences that are unacceptable to all countries. We admit that China's economy is growing very fast, but covering up freedom is not a good policy. The more you press, the bigger the trigger.

The Chinese system of government has always been the communist type for years. They set up a government that likes to control their people and then countries like this user not really giving 100% freedom to do however they like. Compare this to USA you’ll see that they see a lot of difference, it’s not like in the US where people are free to express themselves to the fullest and cell whatever they want to say.

Take for example the Alibaba owner that you have pointed out, you can read the story and everything that happened to him and how it all ended. So their government has been against cryptocurrency for a long time because it was giving their citizens that freedom which they did not like.

It seems to me that they feel threaten if outside technology is starting to become popular among its citizens. They can't have the full control in case they will accept it. Just like facebook and other social media platforms, they are banned in China. But they have their own wechat. So they don't want outside tech to proliferate in their own country. They will create their own as much as possible, and I believe they can, with about 1.4B population, they can always create what they want and let its citizens use it.

It is not the point that big corporations should not exist, capitalism is a working product that we have which gives results. However the fact that some people (investors and owners) make trillions combined while people are poor, and that is the part we should be fixing. Nobody says that we should move to communism, communism is when the government owns things and that is not correct and that should never happen. What should happen is a regulated economy, why do we have zero kids working at age 12, working 12 hours a day in factories anymore? Because, workers took their rights and gave children their freedom.

If you asked a liberal, they would say that if a kid is poor, and their family is poor, then that kid start working early would be beneficial to him. Or why don't we work 10 hours a day for 7 days? Because workers took their rights. I just want the same thing, instead of apple making 10+ billion in profit, they should make 5 and rest should go to workers. Is that too much to ask?

As far as I know they are a community which has good solidarity I think the government want the wealth spread more evenly among Chinese people although sometimes I think they do many excessive move. They control and push ( in positive way ) their citizens to run their business. But that moves make me confused, is the government afraid if there is someone that has very big power outside government institutions?. Well the government know the best about their country.

Not the first time they interfere companies that accumulates power. Chinese government will make sure the owner will not end up being powerful like Bezos that can lobby and sue the government using his wealth while not paying tax.

They believe its fair, I don't think these companies will ever have success too if it werent for their people. The culture play a role for giving back whats earned but the government will also make sure they are not going to kill the company.  The government will also make sure there will be no Union within these companies.

Alibaba is part of a big group of companies by Jack Ma. This is a very big company responsible for distributing lots of products world wide. So is the tech company Tencent

One can understand individual measures of the government. For example, to allow young people playing video games for only 3 hours a week. China has a massive problem with gaming addiction among young people. The same applies to the ban on particular private learning providers. Many parents can not offer their children to attend such expensive courses and therefore there is an imbalance in terms of educational opportunities. You can see in the US what happens if you do not stop such developments early.

Other measures, however, are complete nonsense and rather ideological.

Pick 10 random directors from multinational companies, one from each country and you will see they come up with a different picture of what personal success is. Do the same with 10 from the same country around the same age and again you will see something different.

Very important at this point is not to look at the picture from your own perspective, for a European or American this might be hard to understand but at the same time is ignoring history, all major developments until the middle of the industrial revolution were done with people getting paid a fixed amount for their work, the whole Age of Discovery was sponsored by rich houses and merchants without the actual leader of the expeditions receiving anything else from the enterprises that were built on their discoveries, same for the all the Renaissance.
Would this move prevent the creation of another giant company? Maybe! Will it prevent poor people to try and succeed in life and at least reach the middle to high-income class, absolutely not!


This is going to be an endless dilemma for every government.
Large corporations are efficient, you can't compare the results of a billion factory with the results of a garage shop, so at one point the population gets cheaper products for a period, increasing the purchasing power but at the same time when things go bad a lot of those savings are used to save the company itself.  Tricky and as I said neverending story.


I think you're overestimating the desire for more freedom when it comes to personal actions with the desire to overthrow a government.
Anyone who believes in a few restrictions on what you're allowed to wear and promote in tv shows or online and stricter social rules would lead to any sort of revolt is deeply mistaken. A lot of Chinese are calculated people probably more than us Europeans, they know a sudden change would prove devastating to the economy, and they will most likely choose to play one hour less of games rather than face the instant consequences of a regime change.

China is an authoritarian state, and as such it's focused on staying in control. For this purpose, any innovation is potentially negative because any change is a risk that their power and control will be undermined. It's also worth noting that when it comes to economic innovations, China has no incentive for it because it's already the world's second-largest economy, it already performed an economic miracle, and it's predicted to become world's #1 economy in 10 years. As for being communist, they're ideologically communist but economically rather capitalist.

In China, everything must comply with government laws and regulations. This is the basic principle. There is no right or wrong. If you are not a public figure, you are still very free to speak. Freedom does not mean spreading rumors.

It looks like the Chinese leadership is getting scared. They want to reassert full control over people's lives before any potential negative economic future that is coming. Instead of accepting boom and bust, they cannot be seen to "lose face" by having a bad year, even though that is natural. We see they are also cracking down on celebrity culture of all kind and gaming is receiving a lot of attention too - all things that can create social connections which might go against the government. It actually shows how shallow and weak they are, but these sort of steps tend to backfire as we have seen incompetent officials trying to deny reality before.

I think this will only have an impact on the economies that are connected to Ali Baba, including some countries with quite large connections and more significantly on foreign investors who have assets in them. But on the other hand, I think China is too excessive and always makes the large-income sector an easy target to improve the capitalist economy which has been its ambition so far.

I think this is the problem with communism because it raises few individuals that will benefit from the political system and they grow by feeding fat from the system. But on another wing when the few individual try to go against or independent of the system, they get cracked down.

I think the crackdown taken by the Chinese government with Alibaba is a form of the existence of a regulator on an object that should comply with policy but because it has become a very large multinational company and dominates the Chinese economy, it makes the owner a little arrogant.  Jack Ma's arrogance by offending financial regulators in China made the government even more annoyed.  Their particular case is in a communist country where they have to comply with all existing policies even if they are not in accordance with the company, this is the weakness of the communist socialist economic system.