still a long way from’ Most’. By most I would assume 5 million or so.Original Post Deleted
still a long way from’ Most’. By most I would assume 5 million or so.Original Post Deleted
Washington's interest in HK is linked more to the fortunes of American firms in the city. This is a big part of why the national security law seems like a serious mistake - disincentivizing American presence through intensified surveillance and vague legal standards that could lead (as far as we know) to prison terms on the mainland for innocent mistakes means there's less of a reason for the US to maintain HK's status, which makes capital flow and a host of other things harder for China.
Yes, the national security law absolutely introduces new uncertainities for US businesses. Even if they are not saying so with their public statements, US firms in HK are certainly reassessing their position in this city privately.
On the whole, American firms makes money using HK as base to do business with China by utilizing the safeguard of a sound legal system in this city. That was fine with Washington because they did not see US companies doing business with China as a security threat. Now that calculation is changing. If Washington regard China as a strategic rival, then they would no longer feel US businesses making money through the Chinese market as a sound policy. They will change this arrangement. They might not do this all at once, as that will damage US business interest severely, but gradually over time, Washington will cut off the Chinese market from Western capital and technology.
Indeed. And of course also the satay, Hainan Chicken rice and laksa.
But I feel I need to state a caveat. I was pointing to the differences in potential working environment based on differences in the international political environment facing Singapore vs Hong Kong. I am not saying Singapore is superior across-the-board over HK in terms of all job opportunities or working conditions. In fact, as someone who has spent time in Singapore, I find the city rather dull and boring after a while. HK by contrast always is edgier and more exciting. And some jobs may potentially be more promising career-wise in HK. It all depends on the particular individual circumstances.
However, if someone wants to cast their eye wider and understand the long-term prospects and implications of both cities, then no doubt Singapore as it stands now enjoys clearer stability and reliability. While HK is facing a lot of unknown question marks at this point.
Last edited by Coolboy; 17-06-2020 at 10:43 AM.
since everyone are talking about what is around them, among the 100+ Singaporeans in my watsapp group and social circles, i have saw maybe 10-20 left due to the protest and having lost their job because of the covid virus, not a single one is leaving because of the national security law... so that is a good relativity..
granted one can say, if you have roots in the country, then to you the control of your behavior becomes a bigger issue, than in a country where you treat yourself like a transiting residence trying to cream better money off..
but for a foreigner, these are also happening. So how much difference is Singapore from HK to a working expat ??
https://www.straitstimes.com/politic...ters-shanmugam
https://thediplomat.com/2019/10/sing...the-spotlight/
And for that matter of facts, locals being detained under the ISA in Singapore can be detained without trial for infinite amount of time...
So the stability and reliability, are achieved because of authoritarian law imposed on people living in the country, which is precisely what HKers are fighting not to impose and stated by you guys as the reason what foreigners are trying to leave HK ? isn't that contradicting ?
You are misunderstanding my post. Authoritarianism is not the deciding factor per se, its where those states chooses to ally themselves with that matters, whether its to the West with benefits of access to Western markets, capital and technology, or against the West and the isolation and other consequences that go with it. The Arab Gulf states are certainly non-democratic regimes, but they are predominantly aligned with the US. Singapore is authoritarian but its government is responsive to its citizens in ways that the HK government is not. More importantly because it is orientated fundamentally to the West, Singapore has that stability and reliability that investors cherished, those are precisely the things that is increasingly being questioned in HK. That is what I meant by reliability and stability, not draconian laws per se, but who the state choose to ally with.
Therfore, its not the security itself that matters, it is how that law impacts Western interest. Draconian Singaporean laws generally do not harm Washington or Brussel's interest. However, HK national security law may harm Western interest, because it is exercised by Beijing, and Beijing is increasingly at odds with Washington.
Last edited by Coolboy; 17-06-2020 at 11:48 AM.
The "working expat" in HK is much more likely to be caught up in "national security" problems between Beijing and the US, UK, Australia etc. Singapore doesn't view with paranoia or claim to see these countries' "influence" in every domestic activity it views as a threat or with displeasure.