【揽瓜阁4.0】+ winonabreath-yy打卡贴

winonabreath-yy

打卡贴

winonabreath-yy

【社会科学-企业】
Pinduoduo faces growing PR crisis over employee death.
(Financial Times - 496字 短阅读)-用时4分钟

China’s fastest-growing ecommerce group Pinduoduo is facing a growing public relations crisis and an investigation into its working conditions after one of its employees died after collapsing on her way home from work.（中心句）

The employee’s death, which occurred in the early hours of December 29, has revived concerns over the brutal（残忍的、残酷的）ese tech companies. The long hours often expected of employees are known as “996” — meaning they start work at 9am, leave at 9pm and work six days a week.
The sector’s exhausting working weeks have come under fire in the past, with an “anti-996” campaign gaining steam in 2019 among tech workers and activists. But the effort largely failed to change workplace norms.

Pinduoduo in particular is known for its gruelling schedules and a secretive culture, with several current and former employees telling the Financial Times that a working week at the company could stretch even longer than the “996” norm.

In return, employees often take home higher pay than their peers at Alibaba or Tencent.（对事件加以描述，解释996概念）

Last year, the company’s workforce succeeded in powering rocketing revenues, while Pinduoduo’s New York-listed shares rose almost 400 per cent to bring the company’s year-end market value to $218bn. Its shares fell 2 per cent in early trading on Monday.

Pinduoduo identified the employee by part of her first name, Fei, while state media reported that she was on her way home from work with colleagues at 1:30am when she suddenly collapsed. She was in her early twenties and later died in hospital, the company said.股价上升

While the cause of the employee’s death remains unknown, some Chinese netizens blamed the company and condemned its handling of events, with some even calling for a boycott of its platform.舆论发酵，导致员工的抵制

Early on Monday morning, a post from one of Pinduoduo’s social media accounts downplayed the worker’s death saying: “Look at the people at the bottom — who is not trading life for money. . . this is an era where we fight with our lives.”、

The post went viral, despite being quickly deleted, leading Pinduoduo to claim that it was a fake. However later on Monday, Zhihu, the social media platform on which the post was made, said it had come from Pinduoduo’s account, forcing the company to backtrack.

Pinduoduo went on to blame the errant post on an external agency employee, surnamed Li, who was mistakenly logged into its official Zhihu account. It “does not represent Pinduoduo’s official attitude”, the company said.

The employee’s death and Pinduoduo’s response were among the top five trending topics on Weibo on Monday. “Work one worker to death, find another worker to take the fall,” commented a user on the Twitter-like platform.拼多多在知乎的言论导致的影响

Chinese state media also reported that the social security bureau of the Shanghai district holding Pinduoduo’s headquarters was investigating labour conditions at the company.

Pinduoduo said: “We are heartbroken by Fei’s death and feel deeply for her family.” The company did not immediately respond to further questions for comment.拼多多的态度

Source: Financial Times



【社会科学-经济】
Economic Scene;Good news for the down and out, or are the data misleading?
(WSY - 775字 长阅读)--用时8分钟

WHAT'S all this fuss about income inequality? Sure, the richer are richer and the poor are eating Doritos. But not to worry,9says W. Michael Cox and Richard Alm, researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas: Most Americans struggling to make ends meet are on the fast track to affluence. 转折词，中心句就是对造成收入不平等的分析

They found that just 5 percent of a sample of Americans in the bottom fifth of the income distribution in 1975 were still there 16 years later. Meanwhile, 29 percent of them had managed to grab the brass ring, ending up in the top fifth. And "between opportunity and equality," they remind, "it's opportunity that matters most." Cox的观点

The Cox-Alm study, published in the Dallas Federal Reserve's 1995 annual report, is making big waves among the movers and shakers of the political right. Indeed, after a ringing endorsement from the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal, it has become required reading for conservatives impatient with the current hand-wringing（绝望的） over the alleged plight of the young and immobile.

But a close look at the new research is not confidence-building. Indeed, even a casual look suggests that something -- actually, many things -- are amiss. "Cox and Alm ask the wrong question and give a misleading answer to the question they ask," argues Peter Gottschalk, an economist at Boston College and co-author of "America Unequal" (Russell Sage Foundation).对第一段Cox的观点提出了质疑

Standard measures of income distribution amount to snapshots at a moment in time. The large and growing variations between those at the top and bottom that have been reported by the Census are, of course, cause for disquiet. But liberals and conservatives generally agree that mobility matters, too. And without exception, studies that track the fortunes of individuals or families for many years suggest that lifetime income is distributed far more equally than income in any single year.

The Cox-Alm study is in this tradition. It follows 3,725 individuals ages 16 and over who remained part of the University of Michigan's Panel Survey on Income Dynamics for a 16-year period. And their conclusions are nothing short of remarkable. Of those in the bottom fifth in 1975, 95 percent were earning enough money in 1991 to have jumped in the rankings. Poverty in the 1975 snapshot was apparently no impediment to future economic success. The average income of individuals in the bottom fifth rose by $25,322, even after adjustment for inflation.

Mr. Gottschalk, however, notes that the Dallas researchers use unconventional means to reach these astonishing ends. For one thing, they measure incomes actually earned by individuals, rather than assigning individuals some prorated share of family income. As a result, the average earnings of the bottom fifth in 1975 was just $1,153 -- far less than anyone could actually live on.两种研究方法和结果的对比

Who, then, were these people? Probably not the poorest individuals, but the ones who worked only briefly in 1975. Mr. Gottschalk guesses most of them were part-time workers with marginal links to the formal labor force: students with after-school jobs, housewives who worked at the post office in the Christmas rush, and so forth.

Sixteen years later their average incomes had risen a fantastic 23-fold, to $26,475. To Mr. Gottschalk, this suggests that virtually all the former high school and college students in the sample had full-time jobs in 1991, as did most of the mothers whose children had grown up. "I'd be surprised if my teen-ager, who now earns pocket money delivering newspapers, doesn't do equally well," he allowed.

Mr. Gottschalk says, too, that by tracking individuals over time the Cox-Alm study mingles（混合) real economic mobility with income gains linked to accumulating work experience. It should hardly be surprising that 35-year-old carpenters make more than they did when they were 19-year-old carpenters.
What does all this add up to? "We have long known that mobility partially offsets the impact of inequality," says Van Doorn Ooms, director of research at the Committee for Economic Development. "It's still unclear by how much."

One answer that probably better represents the mainstream in economic research comes from Moshe Buchinsky and Jennifer Hunt of Yale University. In a paper published this year by the National Bureau of Economic Research, they estimated that averaging family incomes over a four-year period reduced measured inequality by about one-fourth. But they also found that the rate of economic mobility -- the probability of moving from one-fifth of the income distribution to another in any given year -- had actually fallen since 1980.

"Maybe it would make sense to spend less time splitting hairs over what's happened -- and more trying to figure out what can be done for the losers," Mr. Ooms concludes.

Source: WSY

winonabreath-yy

1.19打卡

winonabreath-yy

1.20打卡

winonabreath-yy

打卡

winonabreath-yy

Day 5 打卡 1.22

winonabreath-yy

1.23 Day6+加餐 打卡

winonabreath-yy

Day7 1.24打卡

winonabreath-yy

Day 8 1.25打卡

winonabreath-yy

Day 9 打卡