View Poll Results: HK CE *lection - Who Would You Vote For?

Voters
35. You may not vote on this poll
  • Justice Woo

    9 25.71%
  • Regina IP

    0 0%
  • Carrie Lam

    8 22.86%
  • John Tsang

    5 14.29%
  • Someone Else

    13 37.14%
Reply
Page 6 of 16 FirstFirst ... 345678914 ... LastLast
Like Tree67Likes

2017 Hong Kong CE *lection - Discuss

  1. #51

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,278
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast
    It is a policy that started in the 1970's to redistribute wealth in the UK.

    https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publi.../bns/BN162.pdf
    Huh? Jake van der Kamp outlines a solution to public housing by Richard Wong. I quoted a blog entry by Richard Wong. Ironically, Richard Wong never mentions flats to be sold for $1. That's just Jake's crazy talk.

    What does it have to do with the UK? I suggest you read up on their right-to-buy scheme. Doesn't sound like a roaring success to me. The UK comes dead last in the OECD for social mobility. I wouldn't choose them as an example for Hong Kong's social ills.

    The best performer for social mobility is Denmark where 20% of the population lives in social housing.

    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast
    There is a need for social housing but only for those who really need it rather than just want it (because it is cheap)
    There's absolutely a need for social housing. It's gotten many people out of slum-like conditions and helped countries to build a successful and healthy workforce. As you are aware, Hong Kong hasn't reached its demand for public housing, hence the slums, aka subdivided flats, have returned. If you want to reduce social housing tenants, then work on wages. If people can afford something better, then they will choose better. Some may not choose to do so, but that doesn't mean we should pull the rug out from underneath everyone's feet. Did I already tell you? Bar benders, concretors, and people in IT don't need public flats. Groundskeepers for public parks and food stall workers do.

  2. #52

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    9,740
    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant
    What does it have to do with the UK?.
    Again. It was a social policy that started in the UK in the 70's rather than in the mind of a HK professor in 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant
    What does it have to do with the UK? I suggest you read up on their right-to-buy scheme. Doesn't sound like a roaring success to me. The UK comes dead last in the OECD for social mobility. I wouldn't choose them as an example for Hong Kong's social ills.
    Yes the UK is bad at social mobility. The possibility of the rich becoming poor is extremely unlikely. But you are probably correct the schemes to try to create fairer society should not be tried in Hong Kong as they have not worked as well as they should of in the UK. There clearly is no need to try to break the cycle of poverty in Hong Kong. Just throw up a few more subsidised houses and all will be good. Oh dear
    Last edited by East_coast; 22-02-2017 at 06:12 PM.
    TheBrit likes this.

  3. #53

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,278
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast
    Again. It was a social policy that started in the UK in the 70's rather than in the mind of a HK professor in 2016



    Yes the UK is bad at social mobility. The possibility of the rich becoming poor is extremely unlikely. But you are probably correct the schemes to try to create fairer society should not be tried in Hong Kong as they have not worked as well as they should of in the UK. There clearly is no need to try to break the cycle of poverty in Hong Kong. Just throw up a few more subsidised houses and all will be good. Oh dear
    Now you're talking strawmen. There's lot of stuff that can be done. Why not improve public housing by giving residents more say in the running of their communities. This would be a lot more communal and introduce a democratic process into those communities. It's a lot better than just giving ownership to those people and creating a market that will just as easily exploited by developers as the private market.

  4. #54

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    9,740
    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant
    Now you're talking strawmen. There's lot of stuff that can be done. Why not improve public housing by giving residents more say in the running of their communities. This would be a lot more communal and introduce a democratic process into those communities. It's a lot better than just giving ownership to those people and creating a market that will just as easily exploited by developers as the private market.
    Given the current political climate any a cynic would guess that monies will be funneled through DAB friendly associations. Transferring wealth is surely much better than giving a seat on a committee dominated by the establishment political party. Also far less public housing is needed and vouchers given to allow people to rent in the private sector getting rid of the stigma of living in a government project

  5. #55

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,278

    Because the stigma of cage homes and subdivided flats is so much better? There's nothing to be ashamed about social housing especially when enjoying some ownership via democratic rights. If instead of ownership, people put their focus on livelihood issues, they'd be a lot more successful at creating successful community. As I said previously, the focus should be on improving incomes, not whether or not they live in public housing. Diversifying the job market, raising the minimum wage, regulating working hours, and compensating additional work is all part of that.


  6. #56

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    9,740
    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant
    Because the stigma of cage homes and subdivided flats is so much better? There's nothing to be ashamed about social housing especially when enjoying some ownership via democratic rights. If instead of ownership, people put their focus on livelihood issues, they'd be a lot more successful at creating successful community. As I said previously, the focus should be on improving incomes, not whether or not they live in public housing. Diversifying the job market, raising the minimum wage, regulating working hours, and compensating additional work is all part of that.
    "A study by the Hong Kong Professional and Senior Executives Association (HKPSEA) in 2010, found that 21 percent of the post-80s generation had experienced downward mobility and 74 percent had experienced no mobility over the past five years. Over half of them believed that social mobility was worse than 15 years ago. "

    But isn't Hong Kong "down streaming" with the middle and lower streams gradually getting worse in real terms and social mobility also getting worse. Yes concrete has been poured but society is poorer overall.
    TheBrit and shri like this.

  7. #57

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,278

    It's not something a right-to-buy scheme will solve though. As I said, diversification of the job market is key here. Raising the minimum wage by a drastic amount will increase wages while at the same time force employers to increase productivity. They'll be forced to invest into technology and innovation.

    As for housing, my idea of democratic communal spaces goes hand in hand with this proposal. Revitalization neighbourhoods on a communal level can develop creative and innovative spaces, which can have the effect of creating new industries on a grassroots level.

    Redeveloping public housing: A bet worth taking | Hong Kong - Politics, Policy, Government & Diplomacy


  8. #58

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    13,766
    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant
    It's not something a right-to-buy scheme will solve though. As I said, diversification of the job market is key here. Raising the minimum wage by a drastic amount will increase wages while at the same time force employers to increase productivity. They'll be forced to invest into technology and innovation.
    Raising the minimum wage will encourage employers into investing in automation. There will be fewer jobs, instead of paying someone 32 dollars an hour to take your order at McDonalds they'll invest in touchscreen ordering. This is already happening with the minimum wage at pitiful levels, it will only accelerate if it is raised.

    Security guards will be replaced with security cameras connected to a event detection algo with localised response centres in each district, staffed by half a dozen employees at any time rather than one per building as now.

    Civil servants will be replaced with online services and front line employees will be relegated to spent one minute checking identity and other documents in a centralised venue.

    All these moves are already under way, raising the minimum wage will be great news for companies selling robots, systems and software. It will be shit for the people who lose their jobs.

  9. #59

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    9,740
    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant
    It's not something a right-to-buy scheme will solve though.
    It is one of many tools that should be taken. Hong Kong has far too many people in government housing

    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant
    diversification of the job market is key here.
    Picking winners??? Helatcare, finetch, software, green energy, education. High land prices stifles Hong Kong as well as the fear of mainlandization

    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant
    Raising the minimum wage by a drastic amount will increase wages while at the same time force employers to increase productivity.
    A target minimum wage should be set based on a ratio to the medium wage with a 15 year plan to get there. No more silly annual reviews.

    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant
    Revitalization neighbourhoods on a communal level can develop creative and innovative spaces, which can have the effect of creating new industries on a grassroots level.
    Redeveloping clapped out housing estates is hardly a radical policy.

    So to summarize to make Hong Kong Great again we should continue to keep doing what we are doing but with a few extra seats on the housing estate committee.

  10. #60

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    9,740
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBrit
    All these moves are already under way, raising the minimum wage will be great news for companies selling robots, systems and software. It will be shit for the people who lose their jobs.
    People are pretty adaptable. Given a sensible pace society will adapt. Just that for 20 years wages have been stagnant primarily due to subsidised housing. 15-20 years are probably needed to up the floor on wages.

Reply
Page 6 of 16 FirstFirst ... 345678914 ... LastLast