利字當頭：土改

(Apple Daily, 7.30.2010)

有次獅子山學會聚會，外地來的嘉賓問世民：「香港有甚麼獨特的成功要素？」參與我們的聚會，自然是同道中人，如果說香港有自由市場，說了等於沒說。所以世民便提出兩個深層次論點：70年代之前，香港基本是個移民城市；由80年代起，香港有聯繫率和以賣地收入補貼公共開支的傳統。

1950年代至2000年，香港人口大概每10年左右便增加100萬人。1960年，每3個人中，便有1個是在香港不足10年。移民城市的新成員，許多是為了遠離另一個政府的壞主意而來，所以移民城市也傾向擁護自力更生的價值。聚會當天，參與者以西人居多，說到這裏，個個臉上都現出會心微笑。

1980年代，隨土生土長的人口增加，以及抵壘政策結束，移民城市的特點也漸漸消失。剛好在這時候，聯繫率出現，令香港不致走向完全的大政府福利社會。

鐵路基建也靠地產幫補
香港的福利其實不算差，試想，在低稅的大前提下，全民不問貧富都可享教育和醫療、公共房屋及綜援等，要是換了其他地方，如歐洲的福利國家，早就用舉債和財技，將開支負擔，轉移到下一代身上。也說不定，早就爆了大鑊。

偏偏香港得天獨厚，政府可靠賣地收入負擔開支，甚至乎連鐵路基建，也靠地產幫補。試想，可以不用面對加稅的政治壓力，但又可享受花費的樂趣，作為政客又怎會不心動？偏偏殖民地的文官，在連年的增長和財政盈餘下，也沒必要靠擴張來證明自己的存在價值，讓不干預的文化留傳下來。可惜，從近期的輿論看來，受盡這些好處的特區新一代，卻誓要來一場天翻地覆的土改。唉，難道真的像佛利民生前說："it is too good to hold."？
利世民

July 30th Friedman Legacy For Freedom

July 30th Friedman Legacy For Freedom - http://eepurl.com/Lf03

Hong Kong's Populist Turn: Milton Friedman Wouldn't Approve

The Wall Street Journal, July 20, 2010

The WSJ has published an editorial criticizing the establishment of the minimum wage law in Hong Kong, echoing the sentiments that Lion Rock has propounded for the past months. The article delineates the following:

• The competition policy proposal and the minimum wage law are part of a broader pattern that flies in the face of the Hong Kong free market traditions; this is evidence of the imminent shift toward a more bureaucratic state and politicized economy.
• Tsang's calculations in these matters are a result of "misguided populism," according to the WSJ; he seems to think that these laws are a way to assuage the dissent of a "small but noisy" group of people.
• The article warns that the government has thus far been fortunate enough to be able to fund the many subsidy programs it engages with - youth internships, for example - despite its relatively low tax rates for households and businesses. However, low taxes "aren't inevitable," according to the WSJ, and expansion of labor legislation could drastically change the situation as it stands.
• Milton Friedman is quoted as writing: "At the end of World War II, Hong Kong was a dirt-poor island with a per-capita income about one-quarter that of Britain's. By 1997, when sovereignty was transferred to China, its per-capita income was roughly equal to that of the departing colonial power, even though Britain had experienced sizable growth over the same period. That was a striking demonstration of the productivity of freedom, of what people can do when they are left free to pursue their own interests."

July 30th Friedman Legacy For Freedom

July 30th Friedman Legacy For Freedom - http://eepurl.com