Hong Kong - the consequences of conservative/libertarian economics (it's very bad)

[ThinClient]

The trick is that all libertarians are convinced that they're a natural elite, born smarter and better than everyone else, so the misery of the vast majority are irrelevant. Hence the applause for the abhorrent prospect of leaving billions to starve by "going Galt" (and the willingness to accept the absurd idea that the world would be substantially worse off long-term if we Raptured every CEO in the world tomorrow).

Your blanket statements are so wrong it's stupid.

I'm a libertarian and I don't feel elite one bit.

You're being absolutely sensationalist in your description of us. Entirely disingenuous of you, sir.

 

[BoberFett]

Your blanket statements are so wrong it's stupid.

I'm a libertarian and I don't feel elite one bit.

You're being absolutely sensationalist in your description of us. Entirely disingenuous of you, sir.

It is quite funny to hear Democrats talk like that, considering they're the ones that call anybody who disagrees with them stupid or beneath them, as they cheer on their heroes to rule from Washington like the kings of old.

But no, it's libertarians who think they're elite, LOL.

 

[BoberFett]

True, but we're living this lifestyle by borrowing money. Long after that iPhone is gone our children will be paying off that debt. Are cheap consumer goods really worth putting ourselves into bondage? (And not that good spanky kind.). I'm with São, shut it down while we still remember how to invent and make things.

I won't disagree with you, we've built a fairly impressive house of cards. I don't think anybody - politicians or consumers - have the cajones to truly do what would need to be done.

How do suppose the party that shuts the trade border down will do in the next election, with WalMart shelves sitting bare?

No... Republicans will continue to pretend there's no problem, and Democrats will pay lip service without doing anything other than maintaining the status quo.

 

[werepossum]

I won't disagree with you, we've built a fairly impressive house of cards. I don't think anybody - politicians or consumers - have the cajones to truly do what would need to be done.

How do suppose the party that shuts the trade border down will do in the next election, with WalMart shelves sitting bare?

No... Republicans will continue to pretend there's no problem, and Democrats will pay lip service without doing anything other than maintaining the status quo.

Oh, I quite agree. But that's us as much as the politicians. We're just not willing to lower our own standard of living to save our children and our nation. Although if you get a good education and a good job you can save your own children anyway.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Snort. Apartheid? Tell that to the Arabs in the Israeli parliament.

These ones?

"as of 2011, 13 of the 120 members of the Israeli Parliament are Arab citizens, most representing Arab political parties, and one of Israel's Supreme Court judges is a Palestinian Arab.[120]
Some Arab Members of the Knesset, past and present, are under police investigation for their visits to countries designated as enemy countries by Israeli law. This law was amended following MK Mohammad Barakeh's trip to Syria in 2001, such that MKs must explicitly request permission to visit these countries from the Minister of the Interior. In August 2006, Balad MKs Azmi Bishara, Jamal Zahalka, and Wasil Taha visited Syria without requesting nor receiving such permission, and a criminal investigation of their actions was launched. Former Arab Member of Knesset Mohammed Miari was questioned 18 September 2006 by police on suspicion of having entered a designated enemy country without official permission. He was questioned "under caution" for 2.5 hours in the Petah Tikva station about his recent visit to Syria. Another former Arab Member of Knesset, Muhammad Kanaan, was also summoned for police questioning regarding the same trip.[121] In 2010, six Arab MKs visited Libya, an openly anti-Zionist Arab state, and met with Muammar al-Gaddafi and various senior government officials. Gaddafi urged them to seek a one-state solution, and for Arabs to "multiply" in order to counter any "plots" to expel them.[122]

According to a study commissioned by the Arab Association of Human Rights entitled "Silencing Dissent," over the past three years, eight of nine of these Arab Knesset members have been beaten by Israeli forces during demonstrations.[123] Most recently according to the report, legislation has been passed, including three election laws [e.g., banning political parties], and two Knesset related laws aimed to "significantly curb the minority [Arab population] right to choose a public representative and for those representatives to develop independent political platforms and carry out their duties".[124] "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel

 

[Victorian Gray]

Yes. He claims they have Capitalism and free markets yet doesn't notice the socialized healthcare system.

<sigh>

"According to Index of Economic Freedom since the inception of the index in 1995,[23] Hong Kong has remained as the world's freest economy,"

"In terms of international comparison, with the most efficient and corruption-free application procedure, lowest income tax and lowest corporate tax as well as abundant and sustainable government finance that the government of Hong Kong consistently upheld the policy of encouraging (and supporting such as Cyberport and Hong Kong Disneyland (by Hong Kong International Theme Parks)) activities of private businesses."

"Taxation in Hong Kong raises revenues from the sale and taxation of land and through attracting international business to provide capital for its public finance, due to its low tax policy. According to Healy Consultants, Hong Kong is East Asia's most attractive business environment, in terms of attracting foreign direct investment (FDI).[33] This has led to Hong Kong being the 3rd largest recipient of FDI in the world."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Hong_Kong

 

[sao123]

You realize of course that in and of itself will lower the American lifestyle, correct? Our high standard of living depends on low wage foreign workers making stuff that we can buy cheaply.

The fact that an isolated economy is a zero-sum system... only means that to raise the lowest individuals, only the top must be lowered.

the widening income gulf has created the low American lifestyle, not prevented it.

 

[her209]

You really can't be taken seriously if you're advocating socialism. The US was built on Capitalism and produced vast wealth and prosperity. Capitalism is freedom and socialism requires force and infringes on liberty which you don't believe in.

The North was built on capitalism. The South was built on involuntary servitude and forced labor. And they also got their asses whooped for trying to leave the awesomeness that was the US.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The North was built on capitalism. The South was built on involuntary servitude and forced labor. And they also got their asses whooped for trying to leave the awesomeness that was the US.

Nope. Not nearly that simple. The north was industrializing and manufacturing was the main part of the economy. The south provided the raw materials for the textile mills and other things the north required. John Deere didn't run very well then and most things could not be done by machine. That didn't mean that slavery had to be had, but labor? Certainly. The north did despise the south for slavery and dismissed it's legitimacy with one hand and took what slavery produced with the other. I wouldn't get all thrilled about northern superiority.

 

[mammador]

er.. Culture?

 

[DucatiMonster696]

Seems like it.

I can't recall any conservatives bragging on HK.

I don't see how any of the OP's claims are proven by any comparison to HK. It's a different culture, a badly overcrowded city crammed on a small island.

I looked and didn't see any "metal cages". I just saw small bedrooms with stainless steel walls. Many Asians are known to live in small quarters. What's new?

Makes no sense to me.

Edit: Most of what the OP complains (low wage earners in small rooms etc) about may well be attributed to to a huge influx of unskilled Chinese from the mainland. Apparently they really opened up immigration from there 1997.

Fern

Yet despite all those failings via capitalism, Hong Kong works and has a respectable cost of living and standard of living. If they had been stuck with the 60's and 70's Maoist centrally planned economic stupidity (that the OP believes is the ticket to the workers paradise) the story being told would be completely different and horrific. Additionally what the OP does not want to discuss is why people in Asia flocked to Hong Kong which was/is due to economic opportunities available there and personal individual freedoms that you did not see in places like China.

Of course up until the Chinese themselves started embracing some of that "Evil Capitalism" and allowed free and private enterprise to take root and they freed up major parts of their economy. In essence Phokus would have us regress our economy and have it being run by political elites and an army of bureaucrats setting prices for what they feel was the "right price" on every single item in our economy, literally managing hundreds of millions, if not billions of prices for goods and services in an economy of our scale. All in the naive "hope" that it would promote "fairness" and a distort view of equality where the standard of living for everyone falls to be the same low standard seen in places which have embraced what the OP desires and views as being the "True Path".

Edit: Also when ranting about Hong Kong's minimum wage the OP never mentions or dares to discuss the cost of living in HK or the standard of living, neither does the OP mention who exactly makes up the bulk of minimum wage earners in HK or what would happen if that wage were to be pushed higher, especially in the long term and how businesses would react either. However we sure do get a lot of emotionally lace vitriol and spite filled opinions on capitalism.

 

[1prophet]

You realize of course that in and of itself will lower the American lifestyle, correct? Our high standard of living depends on low wage foreign workers making stuff that we can buy cheaply.

Our standard of living was pretty good before NAFTA, GATT, etc. , people used to go out of the way to buy made in America and even Sam Walton had such a sign hanging in the Walmarts back in the early 90's.

You weren't upgrading to the latest cell phone along with the "drain your wallet plans", cars cost less to buy and much less to fix, gasoline prices were much lower, healthcare was cheaper or free from the employees point of view, and of course college was much cheaper and in my opinion higher quality.

High school kids looked forward to getting a job even at minimum wage and weren't afraid of work in order to get something they wanted.

This whole idea of being able to buy lots of cheap throwaway stuff means we have a higher standard of living is a farce itself.

 

[Jhhnn]

Everyone in the world wants a piece of the consumerism that the US has been enjoying for decades. Unless you believe that the world economy can increase production capacity so that 10x as many people can enjoy the lifestyle we have (10x oil output?) then our purchasing power (just another term for standard of living) MUST decrease.

Dual income household is the notion that in a world of increasing competition for resources, putting your spouse to work can help you keep up with the Joneses.

If people lived in 1960s style homes and were content to own one car instead of two plus jetskis and motorcycles, one median income would be plenty to live off. But consumerism drives Americans, and we want all the stuff we see on TV. Americans are gullible, quite frankly.

Many people here point to how great Germany is, and how it must all be because workers are on the board of directors, and German corporations aren't greedy, or some other fantasy bullshit. But the fact is, the average American is the greedy one. The average American home is almost twice the size of the average German home. That means twice as much furniture and all the other materialistic bullshit to fill it. More cost to heat it and cool it. We also have 50% more vehicles per capita here than Germany. Think about that for a while, then decide if Americans should really whine about how awful we have it.

http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/how-big-is-a-house

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_vehicles_per_capita

Scale back your lives and then see how much money you really need to survive.

You want systemic problems? Start with the expectations of most Americans that we need to lives of luxury and materialism to be happy.

You entirely dodge the question of inequality in America. Just because you think that America needs to cut back on her lifestyle doesn't mean that the current distribution of income & benefits needs to be maintained.

That just makes it worse, not better.

 

[BoberFett]

The fact that an isolated economy is a zero-sum system... only means that to raise the lowest individuals, only the top must be lowered.

the widening income gulf has created the low American lifestyle, not prevented it.

A close economy is a zero sum game? Your post is so stupid, it's barely worth mocking.

 

[justoh]

So, in a snarky way, you've managed to point out that the U.S. is better than Cuba, and Hong Kong is better than China. Do you think your post accomplished pointing out anything that wasn't blatantly obvious? If my house is on fire, and I have to jump out the window into a pile of shit, I think the pile of shit is still a pretty good choice. Or, in other words, the relative rank of the U.S. vs. Cuba, Hong Kong vs. China is rather irrelevant.

Excellent point.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

You realize of course that in and of itself will lower the American lifestyle, correct? Our high standard of living depends on low wage foreign workers making stuff that we can buy cheaply.

It might be more accurate to say that "Our high standard of living depends on borrowing money, writing IOU's, and exchanging capital assets and real estate to purchase stuff made by foreign workers inexpensively."

It's just an illusion. We can't maintain a decades-long trade deficit forever.

 

[glenn1]

It might be more accurate to say that "Our high standard of living depends on borrowing money, writing IOU's, and exchanging capital assets and real estate to purchase stuff made by foreign workers inexpensively."

It's just an illusion. We can't maintain a decades-long trade deficit forever.

So if it's a trade deficit we can't maintain it, but if it's a budget deficit being used to spend on social welfare programs that's just fine?

 

[BoberFett]

It might be more accurate to say that "Our high standard of living depends on borrowing money, writing IOU's, and exchanging capital assets and real estate to purchase stuff made by foreign workers inexpensively."

Good point, it's both actually.

Cheap foreign labor + mountains of debt = American lifestyle bubble

It's just an illusion. We can't maintain a decades-long trade deficit forever.

No, but politicians on both sides are intent on maintaining the illusion, because anything less will cost votes.

 

[BoberFett]

You entirely dodge the question of inequality in America. Just because you think that America needs to cut back on her lifestyle doesn't mean that the current distribution of income & benefits needs to be maintained.

That just makes it worse, not better.

And what exactly do you believe shrinking the distribution inequality would change exactly? I'm looking for specifics.

Would people drive nicer cars? Have bigger houses? Buy more electronics? Eat better food? Wear nicer clothes?

 

[BoberFett]

Our standard of living was pretty good before NAFTA, GATT, etc. , people used to go out of the way to buy made in America and even Sam Walton had such a sign hanging in the Walmarts back in the early 90's.

You weren't upgrading to the latest cell phone along with the "drain your wallet plans", cars cost less to buy and much less to fix, gasoline prices were much lower, healthcare was cheaper or free from the employees point of view, and of course college was much cheaper and in my opinion higher quality.

High school kids looked forward to getting a job even at minimum wage and weren't afraid of work in order to get something they wanted.

This whole idea of being able to buy lots of cheap throwaway stuff means we have a higher standard of living is a farce itself.

I won't argue with any of that.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

So if it's a trade deficit we can't maintain it, but if it's a budget deficit being used to spend on social welfare programs that's just fine?

I don't think I ever suggested that a budget deficit for social welfare programs is a good thing.

 

[Michael]

Was just in HK yesterday. Seemed fine to me.

Michael