The problem with these sorts of systems, both those backed by technology and those backed by old-fashioned prejudice, is that it exerts an upward force on those who are already on top while simultaneously pushing downwards on those who are on the bottom. Each of the examples listed here have this effect: having a high credit score means you get cheaper healthcare, have more opportunities to find a well-off partner, don't need to pay deposits on car rentals, get to travel, etc. It seems as though if you're on top, you're going to stay there, meanwhile if you're on the bottom, you're going to stay there also.

What I'd like to know, as an American sitting literally a world away from the people under this system, is to what extent wealth and influence purchase a high social credit score? Some factors are obvious: those with more money are less likely to incur debts, for instance. But what about connections to administrators? I imagine there isn't a politician in all of China who doesn't magically have a sterling social credit score.

I wonder whether the net result is a society in which a high standing resulting from material and social wealth leads to perks that in turn lead to more material and social wealth.