and explaining why it is not an "illogical practice" but rather the limited amount of abuse and waste is IMO an acceptable price to pay.Examples and evidence are all abound in the developed West that there is clearly a lot of abuse and waste which resulted in governments taking on insane amount of debts. How is this illogical practice "world class"?
If we are going to compare then I'd like to point out that in 2006-7 for example social welfare spending accounted for 54.7% of the HKSAR government spending. The UK figure for 2010 was about 60%. Not really all that different.
Last edited by paenme; 01-10-2010 at 11:01 AM.
The 2010 - 2011 Budget - Budget Speech
A more detailed revenue breakdown on page 8 here: http://www.budget.gov.hk/2010/eng/pd...briefing-e.pdfOur estimated recurrent expenditure on education, health and social welfare for 2010-11 will reach around $130 billion, accounting for 56 per cent of recurrent government expenditure.
For the UK (from http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/News...2010/DG_188507 ):
Last edited by PDLM; 01-10-2010 at 11:18 AM.
Ok, HKD130BN for 7M people that is about 1500 pounds per Hker v. 551BN pounds (before interest) for 61M people which comes to 9,000 pounds per Brit. Need we say more?
Last edited by paenme; 01-10-2010 at 11:28 AM.
Retired judge, wife face jail over fraud - The Standard
So per head HK is at about HK$16,000 and the UK at HK$88,000. So, very, very crudely the UK spends about 5 times as much per head on social stuff as HK does.
But, of course, the tax structures are completely different and at very different levels between the two places.