Years of Poems and Spirits

Rumor had it that Beijing taxi drivers would stage a one-day strike on the Party’s Birthday 7/1. Today I asked a taxi driver again about this, he said the whole affair is onhold right now: the city government agreed to continue the fuel subsidy till further notice.

The immediate cause was the rising fuel price and whether the city government should subsidize the drivers. The real tension has been brewing for a long time. Earlier in the 90s, the city government (an extended arm of the central government) allowed individuals to apply for taxi licenses in order to encourage alternative transportation. It was a boom time for the drivers and thousands of taxi companies emerged as a result.

Later, the city government forced consolidation and stopped issuing new licenses. The surviving taxi companies, now officially sanctioned, had a freehand in running things. Other than 1000 or so remaining “sole properiators”, almost all taxi drivers now are employees of the 200 taxi companies. Unless they have their own vehicles (not common), they have to pay 4000-5000 RMBY per month to their employers, which, depending on who you ask, may count for 2/3 or 5/6 of their income. And they have to pay their own health insurances too. A typical rentier operation anyway.

Some daring taxi drivers sued the city agency responsible for taxi administration for, in essence, unfair practice. They wanted a free-market system where the drivers could again become “sole properiators”. The courts rejected their claims.

After fuel prices rose recently, the drivers were subsidized by the city government. But now the city decided to cut off the subsidy but to increase the taxi fare instead. The drivers were outraged since they believed the increased fair would hurt their business while they still had to pay the same rent. There was a semi-organized compaign to stage a strike on July 1st. I asked a driver how the campaign was carried out. He said some of the them would slap posters on light poles at street corners frequented by taxi drivers. The compaign had to remain underground, or, as he put it, you might as well sat in home waiting for the police to come and get you.

Now the city agency decided to postpone the cutoff to an unspecified “future date”. The taxi drivers are waiting for the next round of confrontation. The city agency is also conducting a survey of drivers’ income and working hours. If you believe what the drivers tell you, both are horrendous.

Some news articles:
此次增加150元的燃油补贴只是短期的行为，目前北京市有关部门正在制订出租车调价方案，运价将随着汽油价格的上涨而变动，调价方案出台以后，燃油补贴将停止发放，将燃油上涨的负担由企业、司机和乘客三方共同承担…

… 吴师傅向记者简单叙述了前一天的工作经历：上午10点开始出车，拉活时间共13个小时，… 车辆行驶累计300多公里。吴师傅算了一下，13个小时总收入305元；主要支出266元，其中一天的车份钱186元，行驶300公里耗油近80元，因此他13个小时工作的实际收入为39元。午夜12点20分，吴师傅才结束工作回家休息。… 北京的出租车司机平均每天工作14个小时，每月工作时间427小时，比法定的252小时多出168小时，也基本没有节假日。… 目前的北京出租车市场已经饱和：越来越多的高收入人群购买了私家车，坐出租车的人较前几年少了很多；而除了在册的6．7万辆出租车，市场上还有三四万辆黑车，形势不容乐观。因此在与出租车公司签订合同时，出租车司机总是被动的，没有协商余地.

北京某品牌出租公司的一位高级管理人员向记者透露，他们这家资产数亿元的出租车公司，资产原来全是国有的，但经过老总与几个法律顾问的几次运作，现在资产全部成了公司几个老总个人的，还美其名曰为“股份制改造”。

记者了解到，政府本来也有相关规定制约出租车公司的改制，本着谁投资谁受益的原则，这类出租车公司属于集体企业，集体企业的领导人、管理者应该由职工代表大会选举产生，企业的重大经营财务活动，包括收多少份钱、劳动时间、福利、待遇等均由职工代表大会决定。但“我们从来没有开过什么职工代表大会，所有规定都是公司领导说了算，然后要我们执行”，一些司机这样对记者说。

有许多出租车公司为了节省开支、达到更多敛财的目的，根本不给司机上保险，无视出租司机的生命安全保障。按照交通局关于收取“车份钱”的规定，司机按月把自己的保险费融在“车份钱”里交给了公司。而一些公司根本就没有给司机上保险，或是出事理赔时偷梁换柱，用上保险的车号来顶未上保险的车。(I have heard that the taxi companies are hiring drivers from rural areas. The new drivers now have to pay for the basic insurance in exchange for lowered rent)

… 而对于广大的出租车司机们来说，建立一个行业性自治组织非常必要。出租车司机的行会组织，可以在有关行政主管部门的监督引导下实行自治管理，

About the “black cars” :
Cars without taxi license. Most drivers are former employees. They have a territorial agreement with the legit drivers (you don’t find them waiting together). Beijing has had a couple of campains to eradicate “the black cars” but the result is mixed. I have met someone who switched back and forth a couple of times. The number of black cars seems to reflect the equilibrium b/w legit and illegit+access to cops.

“我不能代表北京市所有的黑车司机，但说实话，最多的时候我统治过100多辆黑车，我来统一收钱，这些钱不干别的，就是专门用来跟管理部门打交道的。”刘说，他是收钱给这些黑车司机维权去的。“虽然老有人查我们，但我们也得活下去，有的时候查得严了，或者哪个司机被告了，我就得拿这些钱去疏通关系。其实我们自己也不想这么做，如果干个体行得通，谁也不愿意开黑车。”

北京出租车业从1992年开始放开准入限制，允许民间资本进入。从当时的1.62万辆出租车迅速发展到1994年的4.9万辆。此后北京市政府出台了一系列整顿政策，先是在1994年开始重新实施严格的准入限制，1996年又先后出台文件禁止企业“变相卖车”、强行换车(淘汰面的)、缩短出租车使用年限(8年变6年)、企业兼并等。

周海峰称，北京市的出租车公司，原来有1000多家，现在大大小小加起来才200多家。“这200多家实际上也是把许多小企业凑到一块儿，好像是形成了一个大企业，其实还是各自为政，各收各的账。”

记者前往北京市运输管理局，其出租车管理处的一名工作人员不接受采访，并对记者说，“我要是接受采访，就要下岗了。”

出租车司机周海峰告诉记者，一些出租车公司刚成立的时候是一边收司机的钱来买车，一边向银行贷款。“1994年到1996年，一辆夏利车值7万多元，公司卖给你13万到14万，等于在车原有价钱的基础上加了一倍。公司吞了你上交的一半的钱，再把车给你，让你每个月交1000多元的管理费。到了1998年，有关部门要求收车，公司又把车全收回来了。不光不退押金，还来一个倒算法，把这3年算作车份儿，这3年一算完，你投的钱就一点儿不剩全给公司了。”(If this is true, it got be the most outrageous aspect of them all).

Read an summary article on China Youth Daily: 网络年代的“新闻”

5月9日，《重庆晚报》报道了一则名为《渝大女生成南大形象大使》的新闻，内容是一位名叫兰花的女博士生，“身高1．68米，是学校公认的美女；她学习成绩优异，现在是南开大学的形象代言人”。

经过更多网站以讹传讹，标题也变得越来越“醒目”、越来越“抢眼”：《靓丽女博士当选南开大学形象大使》、《女博士成南开大学形象大使已婚令男性皆叹息》、《美女博士成为南开大学形象大使竟遭众人嫉妒》……一位南开学生在博客中写道：（这些报道）简直把兰花描述成了妲己，一个人见人爱，浑身散发性感气息的天生尤物。而事实上，除了《重庆晚报》的电话采访，兰花并没有接受过任何媒体的采访

5月9日，南开大学通过人民网、国际在线、北方网等媒体发表声明，但没能阻止假新闻通过网络迅速传播、繁衍和蔓延

5月12日，北京一家媒体刊登时评《大学不该以“美女博士”媚俗》。这篇时评此前曾出现在人民网上。就连中央精神文明建设指导委员会办公室主办的“中国精神文明网”也转载了该篇时评。

一个不争的事实是，网络已经成为假新闻的“放大器”。据统计，仅北京市的网站，每天就登载4万条左右的新闻信息，论坛帖文和新闻跟帖更新量多达70万条，页面总浏览量超过10亿页次，浏览者逾亿人次。

彭兰教授分析，带来这样一种内容与形式上的边缘化现象的一个主要原因，是网民需求的刺激。

–Another related article about 张海迪建议外国人娶中国妇女应交保证书 or her alleged proposal to 最终取消全国各地的营业性网吧

–Don’t know what to make of this. Without a mature journalism industry, Net is breeding a monster. Is it a temporary thing?

Heard an interesting interview on Diane Rehm show of the author Barry Werth. He wrote a book that builds an very interesting narrative that retraces today’s conservative movement back to the Watergate days. Fascinating and very engaging. Reminded me of another book, Before the Storm.

The book is “31 Days : The Crisis That Gave Us the Government We Have Today”

Some interesting things:
1. Rummy ordered a review of WMD gap b/w the U.S. and the Soviets. The review claimed that the USSR spent almost all GDP on weapons and were on track to dominate in space, and so on. The project was headed by Wolfowitz and Feith.
2. Migdal mentioned that Cheney and Rummy weren’t like what they used to be (see also NYKr’s piece on Scowcroft, on not recognizing the old Cheney). This may not be the case.
3. Cheney’s provocative stance on the power of the president may be heavily influenced by his experience during the 31 days.
4. How subtle the promise of pardon was communicated to Alexander Haig (”do what you have to do”). Even politician at critical juncture with so much at stake chose to use ambiguity. Is ambiguity the norm or the exception in public communication?
5. Extension: censorship, ambiguity, Lisa Wadeen