Laissez-faire vs interventionism

    Updated: 2013-01-15 05:49

    By Kui-Wai Li(HK Edition)

      Print Mail Large Medium  Small 分享按鈕 0

    For decades prior to 1997, the free port status of Hong Kong has meant that a freer economic policy of "laissez-faire" has been the practice. While economic freedom allowed individuals to pursue their own economic goals, the government before 1997 served as a "referee" that softened various societal conflicts, provided relevant infrastructure suitable to growth and development, and implemented adequate and needed social policies. However, laissez-faire economy did not operate in a vacuum, as the Hong Kong government intervened crucially in a number of economic areas, including the supply of water, rescue of commercial banks from financial crises on various occasions, provision of public housing for the households whose members had only low skills, for public utilities, and negotiations in the textile export trade.

    In the 1970s, the financial secretary of the day coined the term "positive non-interventionism" to articulate Hong Kong's economic policy. "Non-intervention" probably referred to a system of capitalist economy, while "positive" would mean that the government would be "hands off" in the local economy as much as possible.

    Being a free market and open and a small city economy, it was appropriate for Hong Kong to pursue a more flexible policy so that economic growth would flow along with the rest of the world. Thus, popular requests in much of the 1970s and 1980s for the government to become involved in R&D and to engage in a more proactive industrial policy similar to that of Singapore and South Korea was not entertained. Looking back, GDP development in Hong Kong was not weakened when compared to other "dragon economies" in East Asia.

    Since the turn of the century, the Hong Kong economy has suffered unprecedented economic recession, after the outbreak of the Asian financial crisis in 1998. Various short-term, demand-driven economic policies were pursued in order to rescue the Hong Kong economy.

    While Hong Kong experienced unprecedented fiscal deficits in some years and there were calls for fiscal restructuring, the fiscal system by and large remained unchanged, probably protected under various articles of the Basic Law. The more recent terminology has been "small government, large private sector" to indicate the "backseat" feature of the government in economic affairs. Since 1984, welfare expenditures in Hong Kong had been increasing, and exacerbated by the rapid rise in income and economic overheating in much of the 1990s. As such, due to the frequent occurrence of fiscal surpluses, laissez-faire economic policy coexisted with a handsome welfare policy in Hong Kong.

    The term "positive non-interventionism" may be conceptually confusing, as "non-intervention" should imply inaction and that could not be positive or negative. Instead, what has happened is that the government has for decades been "positively intervening" the economy in order to promote growth, rescue economic crises, assisted the needy and to stabilize the macro-economy in order to avoid extreme hardship.

    Economic freedom has permitted individuals to progress, businesses to prosper and economy to grow. The principle of "laissez-faire" has not been implemented only as a policy, but has been accepted as an attitude that most people in Hong Kong have adopted, as it has been as successful in bringing peace, prosperity and upward mobility to people from all walks of life in Hong Kong.

    Despite the occasional call for more "intervention", there is indeed a need to make a distinction between "assistance" and "intervention" in the freest economy here in Hong Kong. "Intervention" implies the unneeded action by government officials on the private lives of individual households and families, even though they are the recipients of social welfare. What Hong Kong needs is a strong and effective welfare system that provides assistance to needy families, who should equally be given the right to decide on their use of the assistance, and not intervention and duplicated welfare assistance. It is the effective system that Hong Kong cherishes, but it should exclude people with vested-interest in public decisions and personality-driven behavior. In short, it is welfare assistance that is provided, and severe economic "intervention" in the life of private individuals, households and businesses should best be avoided.

    Economic development is a long-term affair, and growth requires consistency and sustainability in economic policies, though politicians and welfare activists do use economic tools for their short-term political goals. The attitude of a laissez-faire policy has become part of daily life in Hong Kong, and this should not be politicized into an instrument of ideological divide. Economic instruments that have led Hong Kong to its past achievement should best be kept.

    The author is an associate professor of the Department of Economics and Finance at City University of Hong Kong.

    (HK Edition 01/15/2013 page3)

    中文字幕人妻在线视频不卡乱码 | 中文字幕乱码人妻无码久久| 亚洲日本中文字幕天堂网| 久久Av无码精品人妻系列| 中文精品99久久国产 | 日韩人妻无码精品久久久不卡| 亚洲?v无码国产在丝袜线观看| 亚洲av永久无码精品古装片| 日本高清不卡中文字幕免费| 高清无码中文字幕在线观看视频| 性无码专区无码片| 最好看的电影2019中文字幕| 亚洲AV无码专区在线播放中文| 无码精品一区二区三区免费视频| 国产AV无码专区亚洲AV漫画| 天堂网在线最新版www中文网| 午夜成人无码福利免费视频| 国产亚洲3p无码一区二区| 亚洲日韩激情无码一区| 国产成人无码区免费内射一片色欲 | 日韩精品无码中文字幕一区二区| 一级中文字幕免费乱码专区| 中文字幕亚洲综合精品一区| 中文在线天堂网WWW| 无码专区6080yy国产电影| 成人无码午夜在线观看| 色欲狠狠躁天天躁无码中文字幕| 亚洲精品无码高潮喷水在线| 中文字幕一区二区三区永久| 精品久久久无码中文字幕天天| 色欲综合久久中文字幕网| 久久亚洲精品中文字幕三区| 亚洲中文字幕无码一久久区| 中文精品久久久久人妻不卡 | 亚洲国产精品无码久久一区二区| 天堂Aⅴ无码一区二区三区 | 久久精品无码一区二区WWW| 69ZXX少妇内射无码| 亚洲va无码va在线va天堂| 亚洲精品无码AV人在线播放 | 亚洲AV中文无码乱人伦在线观看|