Poor govt and poor people go together

    Updated: 2013-10-23 06:31

    By Stephen Vines(HK Edition)

      Print Mail Large Medium  Small 分享按鈕 0

    The Hong Kong government used to pump out lists for the overseas media that boasted about the highest per capita ownership of Rolls Royce cars, the most expensive apartments etc., etc. The idea was to show how prosperous this place was. Hong Kong continues to be prosperous but maybe, just maybe, there is now a slight reticence in boasting about all this conspicuous consumption.

    After years of focusing on the acquisition of wealth for a very small number of people, attention has recently turned to the disturbing situation where some 20 percent of the community lives below the poverty line. This enormous wealth gap puts highly developed Hong Kong on a par with the worst instances of wealth distribution in Africa and South America.

    For the first time in its history the government has published a poverty line and, if officials are to be believed, a more determined attempt is to be made to tackle the problem of poverty. Lamentably this determination has been accompanied by declarations from the top down to the effect that poverty problems are somewhat intractable and incapable of big solutions.

    This may well turn out to be a self-fulfilling prophecy because the Hong Kong government has a long record of putting poverty eradication measures on the back burner. Indeed the last administration was so dismissive of doing anything that, instead of giving financial support to the poor, it decided to dish out a HK$6,000 bonus to everyone, including billionaires.

    Moreover the new government poverty line poses distinct problems because it is based on earnings below the median income instead of identifying poverty by measuring basic needs, a method used on the mainland and elsewhere.

    Poor govt and poor people go together

    The government has not issued targets for poverty eradication, something the European Union did back in 2010 while some countries, such as Ireland and Britain, set even more ambitious targets.

    Hong Kong officials avoid targets and confine themselves to speaking vaguely about consultations. To be fair their caution reflects a general distrust of what might be called the creation of a "dependency culture", where large numbers of poor people await government handouts and are given a disincentive to work.

    The ethos of self-help remains strong in Hong Kong and, because this is largely a hard-working immigrant society, many people believe that they and their families alone are responsible for themselves. Traditionally there have been low expectations of what the government may have to offer and the low tax regime was seen as a quid pro quo for the general stinginess of the government in helping out the poor.

    Meanwhile disparities in income have grown and the bulk of the population is no longer first-generation immigrants. As society develops Hong Kong people are developing a strong sense of communal responsibility, as opposed to exclusively focusing on the family unit. With this comes a higher expectation of what the government can and should do.

    Officials have been slow to catch up with these rather important shifts in opinion and because their advisory bodies are largely populated by the well-heeled who have no experience of poverty, those closest to the government put this issue well down on the list of things to do.

    Were poverty reduction to be given high priority it would not only involve monetary support to the needy but requires a raft of non-cash measures which will make life better for those below the poverty line. Most experts in this field agree that the best way out of the poverty trap is through education and although Hong Kong has a comprehensive public education system it is clear that at the crucial primary stages, resources devoted to working class districts are distinctly inferior to those enjoyed by the middle class.

    At the other end of the age spectrum where the elderly poor tend to be in greater need of medical care, Hong Kong still has a shameful system of forcing very old people to queue for hours in public clinics and the government provides nursing homes that fulfill basic requirements but not much else.

    It will be argued and often is by complacent government officials that in absolute terms the Hong Kong poor are generally better off than their counterparts elsewhere in Asia. This is true but remains an astonishing excuse for complacency in a wealthy society with a sizable underclass. The contrast of great wealth and great poverty is one that asks for trouble.

    Even if this trouble does not morph into violence or some other form of extreme protest, the fact is that unequal societies, with high levels of sophistication, cannot flourish indefinitely as the wealth gap keeps expanding.

    This is not a prophecy of mass civil unrest anytime soon but it is a warning of what can happen. Even in the unlikely event that there are no social or political consequences of growing inequality there is such a thing as civic responsibility and doing the right thing.

    Oh, did I forget to mention that Hong Kong's treasury is in the unusual position of being stuffed full of money so it can certainly afford to spend more on doing the right thing.

    The author is a former newspaper editor who now runs companies in the food sector and moonlights as a journalist, writer and broadcaster.

    (HK Edition 10/23/2013 page7)

    精品无码国产污污污免费网站| 六月婷婷中文字幕| 中文字幕亚洲精品无码 | 人妻无码第一区二区三区| 熟妇人妻中文字幕无码老熟妇| 久久久久久无码Av成人影院| 中文字幕精品久久久久人妻| 中文有码vs无码人妻| 高清无码在线视频| 无码人妻精品中文字幕免费| 日本欧美亚洲中文| 亚洲精品无码永久中文字幕| 精品人妻无码专区中文字幕| 无码乱人伦一区二区亚洲一| 国产成人麻豆亚洲综合无码精品| 久久精品中文无码资源站| 亚洲成在人线在线播放无码| 免费看又黄又无码的网站| 亚洲AV永久青草无码精品| 日日日日做夜夜夜夜无码| 亚洲制服中文字幕第一区| 亚洲人成无码网WWW| 性无码专区一色吊丝中文字幕| 国精无码欧精品亚洲一区| 无码专区狠狠躁躁天天躁 | 亚洲国产精品无码中文字| 日韩精品中文字幕第2页| 久久久噜噜噜久久中文福利| 乱人伦中文无码视频在线观看| 无码国模国产在线无码精品国产自在久国产 | 无码人妻精品中文字幕免费东京热 | 中文字幕无码无码专区| 中文字幕人妻无码一夲道| 亚洲中久无码不卡永久在线观看| av无码专区| 亚洲AV蜜桃永久无码精品| 精品无码久久久久久国产| 无码AV大香线蕉| 国产区精品一区二区不卡中文| 中文字幕亚洲综合精品一区| 一本一道色欲综合网中文字幕|