This Forum has been archived there is no more new posts or threads ... use this link to report any abusive content
==> Report abusive content in this page <==
Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Why don't we model after Hong Kong?
03-24-2014, 09:49 AM
Post: #1
Why don't we model after Hong Kong?
Hong Kong's economy is the most free in the world:

There is virtually no poverty
The GDP per capita (PPP) is 51,000, 87 times that what it was in the 1960's.
One of the lowest tax rates globally
No central bank/federal reserve equivalent

In addition, Hong Kong has the world's highest average IQ according to IQ and wealth of nations, and is one of the best in average academic performance.
Kitten/Kim:
The policies in place in Hong Kong correspond with economic growth throughout the world. Places with the highest tax rates and government intervention, such as western Europe, tend to have stagnating or shrinking economies. Virtually all of the countries that have the highest growth rates also have relatively limited government intervention. India's economy quadrupled after economic liberalization. China was one of the poorest countries in the world per capita, but now has a gdp per capita over 30 times higher since the economic liberalization under deng xiaoping.
Joshua:
As previously stated, economic liberalization brought tremendous growth in both India and China, both extremely populous countries.
Hilarious:
The United States does not have the most economic freedom. Many countries-Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Switzerland, etc. Have considerably greater economic freedom.

Also, Hong Kong is self-governing.
G:
Can you point out a larger country that did not benefit after economic liberalization?
Kim:
Even in western Europe, greater economic freedom correlates with economic growth. Countries like the U.K and Sweden rate higher in economic freedom than countries like France and Germany and similarly have higher growth rates.

Are you arguing that a higher tax rate does not correspond with less economic growth?

Ads

Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-24-2014, 10:00 AM
Post: #2
 
It's also the size of a municipality.

And they've got good public health care and education.

Ads

Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-24-2014, 10:08 AM
Post: #3
 
Good question. I worked with a guy that has duel citizenship from there. He developed Alzheimer's and his family sent him there where treatment was free and the homes for Alzheimer's patients are among highest rated in the world.

His family so much as said they would never think of treating him here in this country.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-24-2014, 10:19 AM
Post: #4
 
Hong Kong is too small a sample to be using. Part of the reason there's little poverty in Hong Kong is because it's so expensive to live there, meaning that poor and less educated people simply live elsewhere. Students from families with wealth and highly-educated parents are more likely to do better, themselves.

You could get similar results by looking at wealthy neighborhoods in the United States. It just isn't a realistic model for the country as a whole.

Edit: it's disingenuous to compare growth rates of western Europe and the United States to those of China and India. Their economies have a lot of growth potential because there are many services their citizens are lacking in that are already provided in the West, and their catching up in terms of technological development also accounts for a lot of the growth. It's much easier to catch up than it is to grow when you're already at the top. As for economic liberalization, it's negatively affected many countries--many countries in eastern Europe saw a decrease in living standards after communism, because of private monopolies and oligarchies sprang up. A bad system that was meant to provide for all was replaced with a bad system that was only meant to provide for some.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-24-2014, 10:24 AM
Post: #5
 
I'm not sure it is clear that successful policies in a city municipality will translate to successful policies in the world's third most populous nation.

A big part of it is, in my opinion, the rigid anti-corruption laws they have in place. Their economy is free, yes, but when you break the rules you are imprisoned. In the United States, when you break the rules, you are bailed out with taxpayer money.

Additionally, the tax money that is raised in Hong Kong is used for roads, schools, hospitals, and public services -- not to feed the military-industrial complex like tax revenue is used to do in the United States.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-24-2014, 10:40 AM
Post: #6
 
We have a statist problem that benefits from the crony regulated corruption they have put in place to serve themselves.
Hong Kong and several other southeast Asian countries are good examples of what the economy can be like without government corrupting it.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-24-2014, 10:45 AM
Post: #7
 
The former British Crown Colony isn't real. It's economy is based on illusion, the illusion of money.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-24-2014, 11:01 AM
Post: #8
 
Hong Kong is in China. China is communist, under a dictatorship, and has plenty of sweatshops. The US economy is the most free in the world. That doesn't mean that we don't have problems, but we do still have the most free economy in the world.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-24-2014, 11:11 AM
Post: #9
 
The SIZE of Hong Kong makes alot of that possible. We have over 300 million people to worry about.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-24-2014, 11:24 AM
Post: #10
 
dont you mean Taiwan
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)