Worth doing a bit more analysis to inform this crystal ball.
If we think more concretely about the specific situation political leaders and regulators in Beijing find themselves in, I think we can pretty well guess at their mindset and the future (with a grain of salt) 1/
If we think more concretely about the specific situation political leaders and regulators in Beijing find themselves in, I think we can pretty well guess at their mindset and the future (with a grain of salt) 1/
https://twitter.com/freefader/status/1481928032898400267
First, "green lights" to capital. The fact is, there are loads of signals to capital about what to invest in (like the subsides I mentioned in the original thread)... and they work! Investors are attracted. I don't think much more prodding needed 2/
https://twitter.com/briefnorris/status/1481936675651481601
And there are, of course, message about what *not* to invest in - including clear sectoral investment prohibitions.
So why is an additional system of "red lights" (or w/e it ends up called) needed? Putting myself in gov't shoes: it's needed b/c you can't predict the future 3/
So why is an additional system of "red lights" (or w/e it ends up called) needed? Putting myself in gov't shoes: it's needed b/c you can't predict the future 3/
The concrete example: the unexpected bikeshare war money bonfire, which everyone thought was crazy, not only the gov't.
The gov't now put in rules against cash burning, but the issue is that its *after the fact*. It doesn't unburn that money (regulation always works this way) 4/
The gov't now put in rules against cash burning, but the issue is that its *after the fact*. It doesn't unburn that money (regulation always works this way) 4/
Channeling my inner cadre: The obvious question is, "why couldn't we intervene more quickly when things are going off the rails? Why do we have to wait for the system to form rules?"
And more importantly: "how can intervene more nimbly w/o being arbitrarily disruptive?" 5/
And more importantly: "how can intervene more nimbly w/o being arbitrarily disruptive?" 5/
Keep in mind: the government also *loves bikeshare!* It's a genius innovation, it solves a very real transportation problem... there's implications for health and carbon blah blah
If only Mobike & Ofo didn't try to murder each other money! If only we could have *GUIDED THEM* 6/
If only Mobike & Ofo didn't try to murder each other money! If only we could have *GUIDED THEM* 6/
The obvious answer to this dilemma, it seems to me, is not to create new rules, or bestow more powers... but to create *new norms*. Norms *guide* behavior, but they don't dictate it. 7/
https://twitter.com/freefader/status/1481935577356247040
The norms the "traffic light" concept is working at (imho):
- Normal for the party/government to regularly give subjective feedback to capital on the "goodness" of its behavior
- It's expected that capital will listen (and it will, b/c the alt is being blown up, a la edu!) 8/
- Normal for the party/government to regularly give subjective feedback to capital on the "goodness" of its behavior
- It's expected that capital will listen (and it will, b/c the alt is being blown up, a la edu!) 8/
This is why I'm anticipating the party/gov't to behave more like a "backseat driver" going forward. That's what such a system of "advice you have to take to heart" looks like 9/
https://twitter.com/freefader/status/1481928032898400267
And a bit of editorializing: maybe it won't be such a bad system, or difficult to deal with. After all, that bikeshare cash bonfire maybe could have been doused a bit earlier... 10/
The problem, of course, is it escalating to the point of consistent disruption... I mean, we all know what having a backseat driver is like. It makes you want to get out of the car, or drive over a cliff
And I'll end this here... enough speculation for a Saturday morning...
And I'll end this here... enough speculation for a Saturday morning...
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
