The move is aimed at steering the food delivery industry away from mere expansion toward high-quality development
I think this is the key sentence here. This is exactly the strategy that China is now adopting toward the economy as a whole, away from the raw growth driven model of unfettered but chaotic development of productive forces to a more regulated but high-quality development. This also includes a greater focus on worker protections.
Another thing to note is the keyword "involution", which comes up a lot these days when you see discussions about the change in China's macro economic strategy. It features here too. But i'm not quite sure yet what to make of it. On the one hand it signals a desire to move away from the present hyper-competitiveness toward what in China they would call a balance of competition with social harmony. I think a lot of people in China will welcome the change.
In this sense it's an anti-capitalist move. It goes against pure market competition logic and ensures that China does not get caught in the trap of diminishing rate of profits that characterizes capitalist market economies. It's ironic that it took a socialist state to be able to actually realize the idealized ruthless competition that capitalism in theory was supposed to have but which actual capitalist countries could never achieve due to the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie leading to corporate takeover of the state regulatory mechanisms and the formation of monopolies.
On the other hand, it's in part thanks to this ruthless competition that China has been able to innovate at a rapid rate and simultaneously steadily reduce consumer prices. This is often framed as a bad thing under the label of "deflation" but it's actually what capitalist economic theories always promised would happen and sold as the benefit of market competition (which never happens in actual capitalist countries because they form monopolies instead which then make the service worse while driving the price up).
Will we see an end to the trend of falling prices as a result of this new "high quality development", thanks to the new regulations and worker protections? Will this lead to a similar monopolistic consolidation in China as we see in the West, as smaller emerging businesses cannot meet the barrier for entry? And is this being allowed on purpose with the intention, as Lenin once explained about the transition from "state-capitalism" under the dictatorship of the proletariat to socialism, of eventually nationalizing the emerging "champions"?
21
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ - 3mon
It's definitely going to be fascinating to watch because we are entering a new era now. For the first time in history, we have a socialist state that is thriving and outcompeting capitalist ones. Now that the goal of moderate prosperity has been achieved, CPC is starting to put the brakes on capitalist relations within society.
The interesting part for me is what approach China will end up following here. It's worth noting that Chinese approach up to now has been to try different things at local scale, and then see what works well. So, my expectation is that instead of doing any large scale sweeping changes from top down, what we'll actually see happen is that different provinces and cities will start experimenting with different types of regulations, and incentives designed to create a healthier social environment. The ones that prove to be a good balance will then start being promoted to national level.
The whole let a hundred flowers bloom philosophy has been the key to China's current success in my opinion. USSR system was organized in a top down fashion, and whenever reforms were introduced they got pushed down wholesale. This was a much riskier approach, and mistakes ended up being very costly. Chinese approach of trying many different solutions and then scaling them up is far more robust.
16
cfgaussian - 3mon
The whole let a hundred flowers bloom philosophy has been the key to China's current success in my opinion. [...] Chinese approach of trying many different solutions and then scaling them up is far more robust.
I agree. This is something that a lot of people don't understand about China, is just how decentralized it actually is. It's just too big to be otherwise.
12
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ - 3mon
Incidentally, I finally got around to Thinking in Systems and this bit jumped out at me:
It's such an important insight that complexity has to grow bottom up, and that larger systems need to be composed of smaller subsystems that are themselves self-contained for the system as a whole to have resiliency.
11
NotMushroomForDebate - 3mon
When I read the title I thought it was talking about drafting people for food delivery platforms like military conscription, lol.
It does seem like a positive development. Ever since Uber initially took off, this style of subsidising to choke off the competition and either monopolise or collapse has been devastating.
4
La Dame d'Azur - 3mon
I'd much rather be drafted into DoorDash than the U.S. Military tbh.
yogthos in china
China solicits public opinions on draft requirements for food delivery platform services
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202509/1344392.shtmlI think this is the key sentence here. This is exactly the strategy that China is now adopting toward the economy as a whole, away from the raw growth driven model of unfettered but chaotic development of productive forces to a more regulated but high-quality development. This also includes a greater focus on worker protections.
Another thing to note is the keyword "involution", which comes up a lot these days when you see discussions about the change in China's macro economic strategy. It features here too. But i'm not quite sure yet what to make of it. On the one hand it signals a desire to move away from the present hyper-competitiveness toward what in China they would call a balance of competition with social harmony. I think a lot of people in China will welcome the change.
In this sense it's an anti-capitalist move. It goes against pure market competition logic and ensures that China does not get caught in the trap of diminishing rate of profits that characterizes capitalist market economies. It's ironic that it took a socialist state to be able to actually realize the idealized ruthless competition that capitalism in theory was supposed to have but which actual capitalist countries could never achieve due to the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie leading to corporate takeover of the state regulatory mechanisms and the formation of monopolies.
On the other hand, it's in part thanks to this ruthless competition that China has been able to innovate at a rapid rate and simultaneously steadily reduce consumer prices. This is often framed as a bad thing under the label of "deflation" but it's actually what capitalist economic theories always promised would happen and sold as the benefit of market competition (which never happens in actual capitalist countries because they form monopolies instead which then make the service worse while driving the price up).
Will we see an end to the trend of falling prices as a result of this new "high quality development", thanks to the new regulations and worker protections? Will this lead to a similar monopolistic consolidation in China as we see in the West, as smaller emerging businesses cannot meet the barrier for entry? And is this being allowed on purpose with the intention, as Lenin once explained about the transition from "state-capitalism" under the dictatorship of the proletariat to socialism, of eventually nationalizing the emerging "champions"?
It's definitely going to be fascinating to watch because we are entering a new era now. For the first time in history, we have a socialist state that is thriving and outcompeting capitalist ones. Now that the goal of moderate prosperity has been achieved, CPC is starting to put the brakes on capitalist relations within society.
The interesting part for me is what approach China will end up following here. It's worth noting that Chinese approach up to now has been to try different things at local scale, and then see what works well. So, my expectation is that instead of doing any large scale sweeping changes from top down, what we'll actually see happen is that different provinces and cities will start experimenting with different types of regulations, and incentives designed to create a healthier social environment. The ones that prove to be a good balance will then start being promoted to national level.
The whole let a hundred flowers bloom philosophy has been the key to China's current success in my opinion. USSR system was organized in a top down fashion, and whenever reforms were introduced they got pushed down wholesale. This was a much riskier approach, and mistakes ended up being very costly. Chinese approach of trying many different solutions and then scaling them up is far more robust.
I agree. This is something that a lot of people don't understand about China, is just how decentralized it actually is. It's just too big to be otherwise.
Incidentally, I finally got around to Thinking in Systems and this bit jumped out at me:
It's such an important insight that complexity has to grow bottom up, and that larger systems need to be composed of smaller subsystems that are themselves self-contained for the system as a whole to have resiliency.
When I read the title I thought it was talking about drafting people for food delivery platforms like military conscription, lol.
It does seem like a positive development. Ever since Uber initially took off, this style of subsidising to choke off the competition and either monopolise or collapse has been devastating.
I'd much rather be drafted into DoorDash than the U.S. Military tbh.