Hypothetical Situation: Should Governments implement a Citizen Rating system that awards points for contributions to society, furthering education, signing up as an organ donor (upon death) and being compliant with the law, etc. and on the other end of the spectrum, deduct points for crimes committed, failing to clock x hours of social work per year, unwillingness to sign up as an organ donor (upon death), etc.
One with a low citizen rating isn’t punished, though those with a high citizen ranking enjoy certain benefits. They are prioritised when it comes to buying affordable homes, and given priority access to medical services.
Other potential benefits: - Pays a preferential tax rate - Enjoys subsidised medical and educational benefits - State-Paid Funeral (upon death) - Given Priority Vaccination (s) in the event of a pandemic. - Children of citizens with a high citizen rating enjoy free primary and secondary school education. - Citizen Rating taken into account (when sentencing) if they are charged with a minor offence.
Updates
+1 y
In this hypothetical situation, no one but you and the government know your rating. I believe it’s slightly different from what I gather from the responses I received.
1) Citizens with a low rating are not punished in any way nor deprived of medical services, education etc.
They just fall below citizens with high ratings in terms of priority.
2) Citizens with a high rating is just given priority when it comes to important matters.
Updates
+1 y
Note that I am not advocating For this to be implementing. I’m just putting forth a hypothetical situation for debate.
Should the government implement a ‘Citizen Rating’ System?
Cause that worked out SO WELL in China and the government knows BETTER THAN ANYONE what "morality" is...
Per the update, if citizens weren't punished for it in some way, there'd be no reason to have it. This is also exactly what China does as well, and they claim that the "punishment" are the default setting, so technically, you aren't being punished. You just have to work up to avoid punishment, since you start off with a low score.
That's a horrible idea and pretty much every person in the world can be called a saint or sinner, depending on the individual perspective anyway, which is why there's already no such thing as objective morality. All there is, is charity and order ("good") and selfishness and chaos ("evil.") Morality doesn't exist, or else, 95% of humanity would be going to Hell just for not being vegans or something.
Besides, we already have that right now. It's called your basic reputation. If you're an asshole, word gets around. If you're a good person, it might take MUCH MORE WORK and a much LONGER timeframe, but word gets around on that too.
(Sorry for putting so much emphasis on words here.)
12.1K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
They do.
What did you think medals, honours lists, public events of recognition etc etc were?
Ordinary people are just people. But people who have done great services or deeds get special privileges, honours, titles, sponsorships and other such recognised awards which place them above the ordinary citizen.
Have you been living under a rock or were you home schooled or something?
It wouldn't take long until opposition and people who dare to think different than ruling party were suppressed, opressed and socially destroyed by such system. I can't imagine there is a different goal than to install totalitarian society with 'social score' systems.
No way. That’s what China is doing with the social credit score thing. When ordinary people start policing each other over extremely minor things, freedom is stripped away. I suggest that you watch the episode of “Black Mirror” that deals with this exact scenario.
Thank you, I will give that episode a go. Yes I do not advocate for it even though some people might construe it that way. I meant for it to be a fun topic to debate. Thanks anyway!
No, I wished to ensure readers would know how this hypothetical situation would be run. It was my intention for it to be a fun debate question. Obviously it didn’t turn out as such, but it wasn’t my intention to turn it into such a heated debate.
Sure, as if a country’s economy and classification is based solely on its size. There are so many impoverished countries that have large tracts of land.
Again. Your country is smaller. You expect higher gdp per capita. The fact that Americans have the luxury of more living space , back yards etc. skews your statistic. The fact more people are hard at work in your country doesn't make you any less 3rd world. It's your ideology, moral and education standards, and world political influence. You making computer chips and random electronic machinery changes absolutely nothing. 0
Sure, I’m not going to further engage with you. It matters not the country size, if you compare GDP per capita of Country A to GDP of country B, it would be an accurate depiction of wealth. If you compare gross GDP of two countries with different land size and population, it would then be different. How you hate to be wrong about Singapore being a 3rd world country. Find me an article that says so and I might give in.
Sure, it matters not what the world thinks. It matters not if the official ranking lists Singapore ahead of the US and UK. As long as PatriceONeal thinks it’s not, then it’s not 👍🏻
The working class in Singapore are extremely poor, the culture is behind the times, which is why they are still 3rd world. Could have to do woth their shake history, new leadership or simple nihilism. First hand accounts from Singapore are tales of a polished turd. The people are rude to eachother, spitting on concrete paths and stairs etc. Pushing and shoving onto public transit. Granted it isn't as bad as current day India where public defecation is practiced by a majority. India is also a 3rd world country for similar reasons.
Saudi Arabia wouldn't be considers a 1st world country would they? Regardless of how much oil they export, or how many infedels they kill to increaae per capita gdp.
Singapore is 3rd world and until they swallow their undeserved pride, they will remain that way.
People spitting everywhere? I think you mean a certain other country (which I don’t have to mention). Spitting is a $1000 offence in Singapore. Not flushing the toilet in public is also a chargeable offence. Same goes for not wearing a mask in public transport, littering, plucking leaves and flowers from trees and shrubs etc.
It’s just authoritarian in some sense. I am forced to conscript in the army. I fully agree with you that we are ‘behind’ in terms of mindset but certainly not education and economics.
Freedom of speech and movement will be terminated. It’s called a life score and if you have an opinion against government then low score. China does this. Where you shop for groceries…food stand or Krogers is determined by this score. Your quality of life is determined by this social score. It is communist move. Bill of Rights is over if implemented in USA.
Its a nice idea, its been explored in 2 tv shows i know of Nose Dive - Black Mirror and Majority Rule - Orville Both explain the pro's and cons of such a system quite well and more specifically the dangers of such a thing
My dude, such rating system would and is beneficial only and I mean like Only to a people who created it, control it and obviously would and are above it. Such system eventually will morph into a full genocide system and if you think I'm wrong, that is because you haven't fully thought it through how such system would and is operates in reality.
Sure thing, another piece of food for thought. 1. If such system would be controlled by humans (humans are corrupt and evil in nature), all people who are threatening system that they have build, don't want to be part of or would be questioning their system, eventually would be killed. 2. If such system would be controlled by A. I. it will be even worse, because A. I. is a system of Perfection and Order. Meaning most humans on this planet would have to be eliminated, because most humans would not be able to meeting A. I. level of human Perfection (physical/genetic) and Order, humans basically acting like robots.
Thank you. I appreciate you putting across your opinions respectfully unlike the others who do not understand what a hypothetical situation is. Your opinion is much appreciated.
That’s why I apologised for being out of character and offending both of you in return. At least I know I have done my part by apologising. I have also made myself clear that I do not advocate for it. If you still construe it as such, that’s beyond me.
You don't actually come out and state whether you are for or against such a system yourself, but there are hints in how your question is written as to where you stand.
I can only hope that you know the type of world such a system would bring about.
I never take publicly voice my opinion on the political questions I ask on here. Most of my questions are either hypothetical or taken from online forums etc for the purpose of debate.
He just explained to you how your word choices and phrasing has positioned you. You're asking for instagram or tiktok to become mandated and governed. We're talking about totalitarianism. Total control.
I did not say that the government should implement that.
It’s like asking ‘should military service be mandatory?’
Would you then think I support conscription? Because I am currently in a conscript army against my will and I have asked a question regarding mandatory military service on here.
It would be deadly for ALL both young and old, rich and poor. There will be no happiness whatsoever at all. All people would be forced to pretend to be happy. Realistically speaking, how long can a person pretend that he/she is happy before they make a mistake or crack from all the pressure that has been accumulating while living in a world ruled by fear of death, because forced smiles and fake joys were not detected by cameras or sensors.
Well, I see from your profile that you asked a question relating to the mass banning of social media. I’m sure it’s a hypothetical situation too and You’re not advocating for it. Anyway, I have no intention to argue with you. I did not take a stand nor at I advocating for anything. You are entitled to your own opinion and I respect that fully. No hate.
I'm definitely advocating for the mass banning of social media. It's obvious if you read the opinion. Just like you tipped your hand and have proven yourself a real life fascist.
The government should stay out of most things. There already exists a societal credit system. People who obey the rules are rewarded with wealth and power. Those who do not are marginalized in a variety of ways. The only exceptions are people who are born into wealth and power that they didn’t have to earn. They get to break all the rules and suffer no meaningful consequences.
Absolutely not, it would be used for racist, sexist, ablest and heterosexist (that's the REAL term, it's not a phobia when you discriminate) reason to give non-WASPs a lower rating. But then, that's what the Trump loving goat fuckers want. See, I can ad hom, too.
the "I can ad hom too" is to all the blue (and one pink who is really a blue in disguise) anons who are too chicken shit to post their ad homs and threats with their actual account names. They are probably wanted for January 6, anyway. Yes, the investigation is still going and the wanted list only gets bigger.
The government is comprised of people just like you and me. Those scores won't simply remain anonymous. That's expecting the same altruistic power to remain in power. It's highly irresponsible and short sighted.
26.4K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
Who gets to decide what makes a good citizen? Is it letting the government put something in your body that you don;t want? Is it ignoring crimes committed by government officials and their family members? What makes a bad citizen? Wanting to see laws enforced? It is a slippery slope.
No they shouldn’t. But we should implement a rate ur government system and below average score means reelection. So those fuckers better start delivering what they promised
No, citizens should implement a 'Government Rating' system. Er, if they didn't already. It's the government's job to serve the citizens, not vice versa.
Well clearly you thought a legitimate English word was a misspelling. So, obvious you must be the problem if the Singapore Singaporean education system isn't the problem. It's interest that you think just getting through high school somehow makes you educated. Some of us actually went on to get graduate degrees in fields of science and engineering, but you keep working on your spellchecker career.
Sure, I have no need to defend myself nor aggrandise my education credentials. I’m pursuing a Masters Degree, though not impressive, I’m sure I’m not that dumb.
Sure. I did not offend you with my question. I asked my question just as a friendly debate. I’m not running for the presidency, so chill. I’m not advocating for anything. I don’t go around insulting people.
Well I know you started it off by insulting me but I should have been more gracious and not insult you in return. So for that I apologise. Please make my excuses. I respect both your opinions but I also hope you understand that my question does not represent my political afflictions and it’s solely meant for debate. However if you wish to construe it as such, it’s beyond me. Have a great day guys.
Clearly you didn't study psychology. People pleasers often deal with low self-esteem and draw their self-worth from the approval of others. That's way you are concerned with forum statistics. I don't pay attention to mine at all, but I'll check real quick for you. My profile says MHO 31% SO 997. There you go, get your jollies off on that. In contrast confident people are assertive, honest, and forthright. Many times confident people are dominate and blunt, which can come off as insensitive and hurt the feelings of people with fragile egos.
Yes I did not study psychology. I’m a business student. Anyway, I apologise for my earlier comments and retract them. It wasn’t nice of me to respond to your comment that way. Cheers.
I don't care. You can still go sit on a pineapple. We're not doing social credit scores here. If you don't understand your first warning, we can progress to pineapple grenades.
I have since mentioned to you that my phrasing might have led you to believe that I am advocating for this, though I am most definitely not. I’m not sure why your initial response was so hostile, but I do respect and thank you for your opinion anyway.
Well you have totally shown yourself to be the bigger man. I have apologised for responding to your insult with another insult. If you don’t accept it, that’s beyond me. I have done my part.
Even in a fascist system a lot of people would be able to survive, where in a technocratic social system, no one will be safe and everyone would be at risk of execution.
No I don’t. Meant solely for discussion. I already live in a Country that gives you very little freedom in some ways. Of course I wouldn’t want my freedom stripped more than it already has been.
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
