Is the "Hong Kong" Libertarian Model a Solution for the 3rd World, or for the West?

Gene writes:

If the author bothered to do some research, they would find that Hong Kong’s well-developed economy is the product of the deregulation that libertarians strive for. Furthermore, Japan offers very little for welfare, with some citizens starving before they receive aid.

Yes but Hong Kong has a ton of social housing or government housing. It also has a monumental problem of very poor people who are more or less festering in some very rundown areas. The gap between the rich and the poor is simply off the charts insane.
The Hong Kong solution (basically no state, no regulation of business whatsoever and little to no social spending) is the model for the 3rd World forever now. The “Hong Kong model” has been more or less tried and failed in both the current 3rd World and in the West in the past. I don’t even think it works that well in Hong Kong, but that’s just the socialist in me.
The results have been disastrous. The West, including the US, had a more or less libertarian society along those lines in the 1800’s. The effects were similarly catastrophic, similar to 3rd world societies today.
Japan basically has a welfare state, but the welfare state is provided by the corporations instead of the government. But that’s equally opposed to Libertarian profit-maximization theories to have corporations wasting so much money on such profit-deflating “inefficiencies.”

Please follow and like us:
error3
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

0 thoughts on “Is the "Hong Kong" Libertarian Model a Solution for the 3rd World, or for the West?”

  1. Most of the developing world are free wheeling capitalist countries. It keeps money at the very top and keeps money in the hands of a small minority. There countries are always in turmoil because the lower masses will become envious and seek to stop the very stark money gap.
    Successful countries (America has tons of land – people just settled or moved away if they couldn’t find work) always threw the lower masses a bone in order for them to calm down and not start shit.

  2. People who remain on welfare for all or most of their life in the USA are that way out of choice and lifestyle. They have tendency to have kids they cannot afford, by more than one partner.

  3. People who remain on welfare for all or most of their life in the USA are that way out of choice and lifestyle. They have tendency to have kids they cannot afford, by more than one partner.
    I’m all for helping people out who really need it until they get on their feet, but come on, having kids too? Please!

  4. The HK model is pretty similar to Dubai, which neo liberal dipshits like Tom Friedman love to fawn over. I don’t know about HK, but in Dubai its privatized education and healthcare for everybody who isn’t an emirati (over 80% of the population). Business ethics are non existent, exploitation is of the charts and the gap in standard of living between upper and lower classes is obscene. There’s nothing good about a free for all Capitalist arena and retards like Bhabi should read Ahmad Kana’s brilliant article here: http://www.merip.org/mer/mer243/dubai-jagged-world

  5. “I don’t even think it works that well in Hong Kong, but that’s just the socialist in me.”
    Hi Robert,
    I think you are correct in this one. There is a good 3 parts investigative article on Hong Kong political economy recently at Asia Times website. The conclusion of the writers is that if you’re a tycoon/elite life in Hong Kong is very good, otherwise you’re screwed.
    The most worrying thing is according to the writers China has been aggressively trying to copy Hong Kong model. Imagine 1 billion restless people!
    Here is the link to the article. Please read from part 1. One of the writer Pepe Escobar is a left-leaning journalist. But the other writers are I assume Hong Kong residents, and they actually back up the article’s assertion with hard data and on-the-ground observation.
    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/NH04Cb01.html
    This is the link to part 3. But you should start reading from part 1. One of the interesting fact is that Hong Kong’s land ownership system is basically a legacy of British Colonial system where all land belong to the Crown. Everyone else must rent or buy from the Crown/Government. This means the HK government control the supply of land by auctioning them. Of course only tycoons can afford to buy land in a very expensive city like Hong Kong. This result in a few tycoons and their families controlling almost all land and infrastructure (electricity, water, telco, retail) in HK. So they effectively are oligopolies/cartels that siphon off money from the average HK’ers daily lives.
    Now the Chinese can easily copy this system since all land there officially belong to the Government.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.