Citizen scoring.

As I'm sure most are aware, China has been working on implementing a citizen scoring system. They're still tinkering with the criteria and exact scoring mechanisms but the general idea is that people who score higher, being better citizens according to the state, are afforded greater social freedoms. In the Chinese system some of the privileges that can either be given or taken away are public transit access, internet speed, school choice, job qualifications, and public shaming/recognition.

This system is getting a lot of criticism from freedom advocates, but I think that has more to do with the results, than the process itself.

The truth is, I think a system like this would be fantastic in the US as a way to encourage competitiveness among the population and force people to be better.

So, I want to propose a system inspired by this, but with a more American incentive. Essentially, what I propose is that we score each person by some criteria, and rank each persons conduct on a scale from being the absolute best person in the country to the absolute worst. The best person pays 0% of their tax burden and it linearly scales to the absolute worst person who pays 200% of their tax burden. Thus, by being a better person one could be rewarded financially through lessened taxes. In the event two people tie, the tiebreaker is the change delta of the persons score between this year and the previous year. If there is another tie, you can go back another year, and so on until the tie is broken.

Now, lets move on to scoring criteria. I'm sure that this is where I'll get the most criticism, but I want to hear it. In my opinion, one component in scores should be political, but it should not be partisan. Here's things that I think people should be ranked on:

Short term finances (access to sufficient liquid assets for emergency spending)
Long term finances (investments, retirement plans, etc)
Debt (at "healthy" levels, growing/shrinking as percent of income each year
Home affordability (not over spending on housing)
Transportation access (able to travel, get to work, etc, without over spending)
Physical fitness (gym membership that gets used, some sort of documented regular physical activity, physicians notes)
Health responsibility (smoking status, drug free, alcohol free, health insurance, etc)
Formal education (high school, college, etc... from accredited universities, not alternative explanations to physics from youtube)
Official online presence (giving up your online anonymity)
Political engagement (voting in each election)
Charitable contributions (as percent of disposable income)
Volunteering (x hours of community service per year)
Responsible reproduction (not having more children than you can afford)
Family units (not a single parent household)
Criminal record (obvious)
Multilingual (knowing more languages)

And I would like to hear more. The general idea is that each criteria would be weighted based on effort to achieve given your current resources. People who are lazy and don't put effort into themselves are punished. People who focus on self improvement are rewarded.

Thoughts?

We have a system now...it is not perfect, but it is called capitalism.

Work hard, be fair with those around you, and you will do fine.

When you expect to take from everyone else, you don't rise up...it is that simple.

idk that is like making a game out of life, could be good could be bad. I wouldn't like it, personally

originally posted by: Aazadan

The truth is, I think a system like this would be fantastic in the US as a way to encourage competitiveness among the population and force people to be better.

Too many online trolls for this to ever be accurate.

And besides. why follow a communist regime in it's totalitarian agenda?

a reply to: Aazadan

How can you think this is a good idea...are you even human ?

a reply to: Aazadan

No...# that #.

a reply to: Aazadan

If I wanted to be scored, I'd have signed up for a game. I get ranking in online games. This points to 'life' being nothing more than an online game. Hence, the simulation CT rears its ugly head, because this points to it as a definite possibility.

originally posted by: theatreboy
We have a system now...it is not perfect, but it is called capitalism.

Work hard, be fair with those around you, and you will do fine.

When you expect to take from everyone else, you don't rise up...it is that simple.

The most successful products (in this case, people) are not the highest quality products, they are the most cost effective products. That can encourage poor long term habits.

For example, look at the housing situation in the Bay Area. Everyone wants to live in the city, this is encouraging people to make extremely poor financial decisions which will eventually be catastrophic to everyone who lives in that area, due to a series of poor individual decisions. The best solution in such a case, is to introduce an outside agent that can discourage those poor choices.

Or, to give another example: People buy into the BS from Alex Jones, but never admit to it publicly. This is subverting our nations rationality. If you associate with Alex Jones, you should be forced to do so in a public setting without anonymity. When people have social pressure to keep them in line, they are more discerning with who they associate with. That in turn creates more credible social circles, and less nonsense getting spewed. By removing the anonymous side of things, individuals will self censor and put to rest the whole fake news epidemic.

a reply to: Aazadan

Pretty sure the western world in general has already enacted the exact "citizen scoring" system your proposing... except, its generally regulated by the various socially acceptable groups within society, rather than any central government entity.

originally posted by: burntheships
Too many online trolls for this to ever be accurate.

And besides. why follow a communist regime in it's totalitarian agenda?

Because it's a good idea. The US pioneered it and half assed it with credit scores (which are what inspired the Chinese system). Given the state of technology today, it would be possible to make a much better scoring system, and keep the benefits purely economic so that freedom doesn't have to be curtailed the way the Chinese are implementing it.

a reply to: Aazadan

..."Thoughts?"

Thanks for asking.

Eugenics in slow-motion, sounds like a NWO, globalist wet-dream.

Add your essay to your CV, and send it off to the Rothchilds.
You'll be set for life.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
How can you think this is a good idea...are you even human ?

Because the only solution for a society in decline is to inspire people to improve themselves. By improving the citizens, you in turn improve the country. Better people run for office. Better businessmen appear. People become better educated.

America is in decline. We will not last another 50 years, we become more and more like idiocracy every day, while the government becomes more and more like big brother.

Neither can be trusted to fix the system. Therefore, we need a national policy that incentivizes people to become better. Capitalism became the dominant force on earth because competition improves products. In this case the product is the people. Therefore, we need to introduce a competitive system that makes each person try to out perform their neighbors.

originally posted by: wylekat
a reply to: Aazadan

If I wanted to be scored, I'd have signed up for a game. I get ranking in online games. This points to 'life' being nothing more than an online game. Hence, the simulation CT rears its ugly head, because this points to it as a definite possibility.

You already have a credit score which is a half assed implementation of this idea.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: Aazadan

Pretty sure the western world in general has already enacted the exact "citizen scoring" system your proposing... except, its generally regulated by the various socially acceptable groups within society, rather than any central government entity.

I would suggest criteria to include, and their weighting be implemented through voting, so that the scoring system reflects societies values.

originally posted by: Nothin
Eugenics in slow-motion, sounds like a NWO, globalist wet-dream.

How does this have anything to do with eugenics? Eugenics uses selective breeding. I am simply suggesting that everyone is encouraged to push themselves to their limits.

a reply to: Aazadan

Respectfully, Couldn't disagree with you more on this one. Although I do think this is slightly already happening with class systems and where you were born and who you are surrounded by (I'm talking UK here) your idea would be a disaster. My main reason is simply because people will become skeptical of all and every one, they will not do good for the sake of doing good but to claim to be better and when one person in a family or house, street or wherever they are gets a better score than the other jealousy will rise and become a problem country wide. You would see people setting other people up on a large scale, you would see people fearful of others because of what those other people might need to do to be seen as being "better" than the others.

If everyone is suddenly good and pay no tax then who pays the tax because you know who'll end up paying for all the needs of everyone right? Those who can't rig the system, those who can't be seen as doing good. Here is my example: If a rich man donates say 100 pounds (dollars) to a charity and his poor neighbour donates 10 pounds does that mean the rich man is the better or scores higher (lets say better for the sake of ease) than the poor man or is the poor man better than the rich man because he gave 10 pounds of a much smaller budget now imagine that on a grander scale and you can't score them both the same because then the rich man who gave most would donate a much smaller amount and the poor man wouldn't donate at all. That is the issue with you system.

An easier system is this: Everyone do their part. Wake up. Go to work. Pay your taxes. Look after your families and communities. Better yourself and others around you. Try to live happy and healthy as you can and follow the rules and laws of the land.

(Personally I have a belief that there needs to be some form of protection from certain wants and needs, maybe a national wage where everyone is paid enough for housing and basic needs because with no fear of being homeless and going without food means we can concentrate on other things and doing jobs that pay very little because we don't worry about basic things but that's a pipe dream which I don't think could work in the real world).

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: theatreboy
We have a system now...it is not perfect, but it is called capitalism.

Work hard, be fair with those around you, and you will do fine.

When you expect to take from everyone else, you don't rise up...it is that simple.

The most successful products (in this case, people) are not the highest quality products, they are the most cost effective products. That can encourage poor long term habits.

For example, look at the housing situation in the Bay Area. Everyone wants to live in the city, this is encouraging people to make extremely poor financial decisions which will eventually be catastrophic to everyone who lives in that area, due to a series of poor individual decisions. The best solution in such a case, is to introduce an outside agent that can discourage those poor choices.

Or, to give another example: People buy into the BS from Alex Jones, but never admit to it publicly. This is subverting our nations rationality. If you associate with Alex Jones, you should be forced to do so in a public setting without anonymity. When people have social pressure to keep them in line, they are more discerning with who they associate with. That in turn creates more credible social circles, and less nonsense getting spewed. By removing the anonymous side of things, individuals will self censor and put to rest the whole fake news epidemic.

Alright, you start. Make a new account with your real info, post a link to your facebook account, posting history on any other sites you visit, a list of accounts you have on sites and services, copies of your bank accounts and credit card statements, pay stubs, receipts and bills for the last several years, address, value of your house, value of all your assets, tax returns, medical records, references from every employer you've ever had, personal references from friends, enemies and family etc. Then ATS can give you your score as to appraise your value as a human or I guess as a cog in society.....

There's a pretty good Black Mirror episode about this. It was fairly horrifying.

My opinion is...who gives the slightest # about those things you list off as being a worthwhile way to judge a person? I judge people by the things they do and not much else. If I see someone try their best at things and treat people around them decently and with respect then they're probably alright people whatever their situation. Anything else really doesn't seem worth judging. Everyone's got their own path in life and # people that try and control other people and force them to live in a way that they see fit.

a reply to: Aazadan


I find this system in China and your proposal repulsive.


So you want to grants different levels of freedom based on criteria that will be determined by who?



China does this now.

Stalin had similar programs, so did Hitler.


To say I am disgusted would be an understatement.

originally posted by: Dwoodward85

My main reason is simply because people will become skeptical of all and every one, they will not do good for the sake of doing good but to claim to be better and when one person in a family or house, street or wherever they are gets a better score than the other jealousy will rise and become a problem country wide. You would see people setting other people up on a large scale, you would see people fearful of others because of what those other people might need to do to be seen as being "better" than the others.

Include a criteria for propsensity to get into court battles, and you solve that. People who associate with very litigous people for whatever reason, likely aren't great people themselves. Those who can work out their disagreements without using the cops or the courts are the ones you'll want to associate with.

If everyone is suddenly good and pay no tax then who pays the tax because you know who'll end up paying for all the needs of everyone right? Those who can't rig the system, those who can't be seen as doing good.

That's why I said to rate based on disposable income. In your example I would say the poor person is acting better.

An easier system is this: Everyone do their part. Wake up. Go to work. Pay your taxes. Look after your families and communities. Better yourself and others around you. Try to live happy and healthy as you can and follow the rules and laws of the land.

That would be nice, but the US is plagued with a horrible anti education backlash right now. The most consumed media is propaganda. Faith in government is at an all time low, government approval ratings are even lower than that. Knowledge of civics is basically gone. Making good financial decisions has disappeared. We have four major financial catastrophies on the horizon (student loan, subprime auto, credit card debt, and derivatives), we're suffering from brain deterioration (rather than brain drain where the smart people move away, the smart people just aren't educating themselves anymore), the concept of families has been destroyed, people only cohabitate now for financial reasons. And I could go on... it is time for some more drastic measures, because our entire society has failed.

(Personally I have a belief that there needs to be some form of protection from certain wants and needs, maybe a national wage where everyone is paid enough for housing and basic needs because with no fear of being homeless and going without food means we can concentrate on other things and doing jobs that pay very little because we don't worry about basic things but that's a pipe dream which I don't think could work in the real world).

I'm all for a UBI, but a UBI doesn't really have to do with this. Our society needs smarter, healthier, more creative people. That won't happen until people are encouraged to get proper educations, form proper relationships, contribute to their community, and achieve a work/life balance.

originally posted by: Aazadan
The truth is, I think a system like this would be fantastic in the US as a way to encourage competitiveness among the population and force people to be better.

Or, you could simply move to China and takes yer chances.