Free 5,000 Dollars from Hong Kong SAR government

[Parxland]

Is the CCP bribing hong kong into submission now?

[Bombadil]

I never really got the economic logic of direct stimulus as opposed to government investment. $25 to a restaurant and $25 to a school has the same effect on aggregate demand (assuming the differences in MPC between the chains of spending are irrelevant), but the second has a much greater effect on GDP in the long run, since (certain) government investments like education or physical infrastructure tend to have massive returns to GDP compared to private investment. The HK government really ought to be spending this money on improving economic infrastructure, whether that be transportation, education or whatever.

Oh they're investing in education alright, just not in the way one would one want.

The Chief Executive, Carrie Lam, said on Saturday that Hong Kong must boldly push ahead with patriotic education.

She said youngsters had been misled - and their values must be rectified.

Speaking at a forum, the CE said the SAR had lacked patriotic education, both before and after the handover.

She said in the past national education had been stigmatised by certain groups of people with ulterior motives and in the media, adding that this had undermined students' sense of national identity and led to serious consequences.

She said loving one's country was entirely justified while betraying it was a serious crime.

She urged those in the education sector to attach importance to promoting patriotic education.

[Infected Mushroom]

I never really got the economic logic of direct stimulus as opposed to government investment. $25 to a restaurant and $25 to a school has the same effect on aggregate demand (assuming the differences in MPC between the chains of spending are irrelevant), but the second has a much greater effect on GDP in the long run, since (certain) government investments like education or physical infrastructure tend to have massive returns to GDP compared to private investment. The HK government really ought to be spending this money on improving economic infrastructure, whether that be transportation, education or whatever.

I feel that Hong Kong’s infrastructure is already very good. Our public transportation system is so good that owning a car is an option/luxury. It’s unheard of in the west. Buses, trains, and ferries connect everything. The airport is AMAZING.

What infrastructure do you have in mind?

I don’t know if we have any power plant or water issues.

[Bombadil]

I never really got the economic logic of direct stimulus as opposed to government investment. $25 to a restaurant and $25 to a school has the same effect on aggregate demand (assuming the differences in MPC between the chains of spending are irrelevant), but the second has a much greater effect on GDP in the long run, since (certain) government investments like education or physical infrastructure tend to have massive returns to GDP compared to private investment. The HK government really ought to be spending this money on improving economic infrastructure, whether that be transportation, education or whatever.

I feel that Hong Kong’s infrastructure is already very good. Our public transportation system is so good that owning a car is an option/luxury. It’s unheard of in the west. Buses, trains, and ferries connect everything. The airport is AMAZING.

What infrastructure do you have in mind?

I don’t know if we have any power plant or water issues.

Public housing, as opposed to selling off reclaimed land for billions so developers can build luxury apartments.. the whole Kowloon water front is an absolute eyesore.. convert busses to electric, all those unused rooftops that could generate solar power..

..loads of things they could do.

[Infected Mushroom]

I feel that Hong Kong’s infrastructure is already very good. Our public transportation system is so good that owning a car is an option/luxury. It’s unheard of in the west. Buses, trains, and ferries connect everything. The airport is AMAZING.

What infrastructure do you have in mind?

I don’t know if we have any power plant or water issues.

Public housing, as opposed to selling off reclaimed land for billions so developers can build luxury apartments.. the whole Kowloon water front is an absolute eyesore.. convert busses to electric, all those unused rooftops that could generate solar power..

..loads of things they could do.

Are electric buses and solar power on a large scale realistic?

Also, why invest in environmental technology when cities to the north don’t care and their pollution will keep floating over and have regional effects?

The advantages of this scheme is that it’s private-party investment and market-driven. So the people will, in the aggregate, spend money on what they care about through consumerism. So whatever sector ends up benefitting the most will be the one consumers are willing to spend on.

[Infected Mushroom]

I never really got the economic logic of direct stimulus as opposed to government investment. $25 to a restaurant and $25 to a school has the same effect on aggregate demand (assuming the differences in MPC between the chains of spending are irrelevant), but the second has a much greater effect on GDP in the long run, since (certain) government investments like education or physical infrastructure tend to have massive returns to GDP compared to private investment. The HK government really ought to be spending this money on improving economic infrastructure, whether that be transportation, education or whatever.

Eh? Really?

I love getting 5,000 though. And at my workplace, everyone else is thrilled. The plan meshes well with the city’s identity.

If you had a choice between getting X dollars from the US government (or wherever you’re from) or trusting them to spend/invest it in some public program… which would you go with? You expect government to be able to spend the money properly?

[Bombadil]

Public housing, as opposed to selling off reclaimed land for billions so developers can build luxury apartments.. the whole Kowloon water front is an absolute eyesore.. convert busses to electric, all those unused rooftops that could generate solar power..

..loads of things they could do.

Are electric buses and solar power on a large scale realistic?

Also, why invest in environmental technology when cities to the north don’t care and their pollution will keep floating over and have regional effects?

The advantages of this scheme is that it’s private-party investment and market-driven. So the people will, in the aggregate, spend money on what they care about through consumerism. So whatever sector ends up benefitting the most will be the one consumers are willing to spend on.

One of those cities has already converted all their busses and taxis..

Shenzhen is a city that has reached a future that the U.S. can only dream about.

The city, home to about 12 million people, has made a wholesale conversion to electric transportation, with 16,000 Electric Buses and 22,000 Electric Taxis, as Fully Charged explains in the video at bottom (via Electrek and InsideEVs).

Shenzhen is the home base of BYD, one of the largest electric vehicle makers in the world.

What’s the upside to all those electric buses?

“First of all, they have zero emissions and no pollution,” as one of the bus drivers explains in the video at bottom.

“Second is, no noise. Third is, they’re easy to operate,” the driver says, adding that driving a diesel bus previously was a strain on her arms.

Link

I used to live in Causeway Bay and the noise of those fucking busses was ridiculous.. and given the high rise nature of HK all those fumes stay trapped at street level.

Given the developer owners of HK busses wouldn't spend a penny on upgrades then a lot of this cash could have gone on subsidies to get it done.

[Bombadil]

I never really got the economic logic of direct stimulus as opposed to government investment. $25 to a restaurant and $25 to a school has the same effect on aggregate demand (assuming the differences in MPC between the chains of spending are irrelevant), but the second has a much greater effect on GDP in the long run, since (certain) government investments like education or physical infrastructure tend to have massive returns to GDP compared to private investment. The HK government really ought to be spending this money on improving economic infrastructure, whether that be transportation, education or whatever.

Eh? Really?

I love getting 5,000 though. And at my workplace, everyone else is thrilled. The plan meshes well with the city’s identity.

If you had a choice between getting X dollars from the US government (or wherever you’re from) or trusting them to spend/invest it in some public program… which would you go with? You expect government to be able to spend the money properly?

Lol..

For the 5,000… I intend to spend it aggressively on restaurants and extra drinks every few nights.

[Infected Mushroom]

Eh? Really?

I love getting 5,000 though. And at my workplace, everyone else is thrilled. The plan meshes well with the city’s identity.

If you had a choice between getting X dollars from the US government (or wherever you’re from) or trusting them to spend/invest it in some public program… which would you go with? You expect government to be able to spend the money properly?

Lol..

For the 5,000… I intend to spend it aggressively on restaurants and extra drinks every few nights.

I know several people who want to use the money to buy some expensive dresses and perfumes. I was like…

“Hmmmm do they take Octopus Card?”

[Infected Mushroom]

Are electric buses and solar power on a large scale realistic?

Also, why invest in environmental technology when cities to the north don’t care and their pollution will keep floating over and have regional effects?

The advantages of this scheme is that it’s private-party investment and market-driven. So the people will, in the aggregate, spend money on what they care about through consumerism. So whatever sector ends up benefitting the most will be the one consumers are willing to spend on.

One of those cities has already converted all their busses and taxis..

Shenzhen is a city that has reached a future that the U.S. can only dream about.

The city, home to about 12 million people, has made a wholesale conversion to electric transportation, with 16,000 Electric Buses and 22,000 Electric Taxis, as Fully Charged explains in the video at bottom (via Electrek and InsideEVs).

Shenzhen is the home base of BYD, one of the largest electric vehicle makers in the world.

What’s the upside to all those electric buses?

“First of all, they have zero emissions and no pollution,” as one of the bus drivers explains in the video at bottom.

“Second is, no noise. Third is, they’re easy to operate,” the driver says, adding that driving a diesel bus previously was a strain on her arms.

Link

I used to live in Causeway Bay and the noise of those fucking busses was ridiculous.. and given the high rise nature of HK all those fumes stay trapped at street level.

Given the developer owners of HK busses wouldn't spend a penny on upgrades then a lot of this cash could have gone on subsidies to get it done.

Then the city must have changed a lot. The last time I went there a few years ago I remember thinking… “My my… this is the most polluted cities I’ve EVER visited in a long time.”

There was rubbish everywhere on the streets, people were spitting left and right, and there was an endless army of cars and buses (you could literally see the black smoke rising). The air was so polluted it almost felt solid.

But it’s possibly they’ve reformed.

[Conservative Republic Of Huang]

I never really got the economic logic of direct stimulus as opposed to government investment. $25 to a restaurant and $25 to a school has the same effect on aggregate demand (assuming the differences in MPC between the chains of spending are irrelevant), but the second has a much greater effect on GDP in the long run, since (certain) government investments like education or physical infrastructure tend to have massive returns to GDP compared to private investment. The HK government really ought to be spending this money on improving economic infrastructure, whether that be transportation, education or whatever.

Eh? Really?

I love getting 5,000 though. And at my workplace, everyone else is thrilled. The plan meshes well with the city’s identity.

If you had a choice between getting X dollars from the US government (or wherever you’re from) or trusting them to spend/invest it in some public program… which would you go with? You expect government to be able to spend the money properly?

From the stance of self-interest? I want the money direct. From the detached stance of economics, the public good is best furthered through government investments, rather than consumer spending. If there's no physical infrastructure projects, throw it at education. Education is the gift that keeps on giving (GDP).

Of course, throwing money at the people directly is best for the government maintaining popularity.

[Infected Mushroom]

Eh? Really?

I love getting 5,000 though. And at my workplace, everyone else is thrilled. The plan meshes well with the city’s identity.

If you had a choice between getting X dollars from the US government (or wherever you’re from) or trusting them to spend/invest it in some public program… which would you go with? You expect government to be able to spend the money properly?

From the stance of self-interest? I want the money direct. From the detached stance of economics, the public good is best furthered through government investments, rather than consumer spending. If there's no physical infrastructure projects, throw it at education. Education is the gift that keeps on giving (GDP).

Of course, throwing money at the people directly is best for the government maintaining popularity.

Eh? But I thought consumer spending accounted for the majority of GDP. Or not?

[Conservative Republic Of Huang]

From the stance of self-interest? I want the money direct. From the detached stance of economics, the public good is best furthered through government investments, rather than consumer spending. If there's no physical infrastructure projects, throw it at education. Education is the gift that keeps on giving (GDP).

Of course, throwing money at the people directly is best for the government maintaining popularity.

Eh? But I thought consumer spending accounted for the majority of GDP. Or not?

I'm sure in medieval Europe, men created the majority of the GDP. Doesn't mean that females are less capable of contributing to GDP. The direct effect of education spending is the same as the direct effect of consumer spending. However, in the long run, someone with better and more education contributes more to GDP, so it also has a powerful, indirect effect that does not occur immediately. Iirc, in the US, $1 spent on education produces around $8 or $9 in GDP in the long run.

[Bombadil]

Eh? But I thought consumer spending accounted for the majority of GDP. Or not?

I'm sure in medieval Europe, men created the majority of the GDP. Doesn't mean that females are less capable of contributing to GDP. The direct effect of education spending is the same as the direct effect of consumer spending. However, in the long run, someone with better and more education contributes more to GDP, so it also has a powerful, indirect effect that does not occur immediately. Iirc, in the US, $1 spent on education produces around $8 or $9 in GDP in the long run.

Like I said earlier, they are investing in education, they're invested in fucking it up to be in accordance with the party line, they've even created prescriptive answers you should learn as opposed to applying any critical thinking to a subject.

In fact even more broadly, China has identified revamping education to have a far more patriotic citizenry..

Why China cracked down on education and upended a US$70 billion tutoring industry, with millions of jobs and students affected

‘Discourse and ideology need to be controlled by the central government’, and Beijing ‘aims to rectify education itself’, industry insider says

Link

[Conservative Republic Of Huang]

I'm sure in medieval Europe, men created the majority of the GDP. Doesn't mean that females are less capable of contributing to GDP. The direct effect of education spending is the same as the direct effect of consumer spending. However, in the long run, someone with better and more education contributes more to GDP, so it also has a powerful, indirect effect that does not occur immediately. Iirc, in the US, $1 spent on education produces around $8 or $9 in GDP in the long run.

Like I said earlier, they are investing in education, they're invested in fucking it up to be in accordance with the party line, they've even created prescriptive answers you should learn as opposed to applying any critical thinking to a subject.

In fact even more broadly, China has identified revamping education to have a far more patriotic citizenry..

Why China cracked down on education and upended a US$70 billion tutoring industry, with millions of jobs and students affected

‘Discourse and ideology need to be controlled by the central government’, and Beijing ‘aims to rectify education itself’, industry insider says

Link

A shame, but hardly unexpected. What is strange is that they chose to call it "patriotic education," the same name as Shinzo Abe's Sinophobic war crime revisionist project.

[Saiwania]

The direct effect of education spending is the same as the direct effect of consumer spending. However, in the long run, someone with better and more education contributes more to GDP, so it also has a powerful, indirect effect that does not occur immediately. Iirc, in the US, $1 spent on education produces around $8 or $9 in GDP in the long run.

Bah, education isn't everything. Look at what happened to education in the US, throwing unlimited money at universities in the form of federal loans just cause tuitions to increase beyond inflation without limit as to be unaffordable for most. Frankly, I don't want state subsidy or taxpayer money to be going to advancing Liberal propaganda amongst the nation's youth and backing curriculum that only ever has bad things to say about the country and its history and legacy. Look at all the stupid crap in the form of amenities that certain universities are spending on.

I believe that individuals can spend money better than universities can, which just do "research" that rarely bears fruit. The only higher education institutions I'd trust are those with a hard STEM background. Money going to the Humanities is money flushed down the toilet.

[Conservative Republic Of Huang]

The direct effect of education spending is the same as the direct effect of consumer spending. However, in the long run, someone with better and more education contributes more to GDP, so it also has a powerful, indirect effect that does not occur immediately. Iirc, in the US, $1 spent on education produces around $8 or $9 in GDP in the long run.

Bah, education isn't everything. Look at what happened to education in the US, throwing unlimited money at universities in the form of federal loans just cause tuitions to increase beyond inflation without limit as to be unaffordable for most. Frankly, I don't want state subsidy or taxpayer money to be going to advancing Liberal propaganda amongst the nation's youth and backing curriculum that only ever has bad things to say about the country and its history and legacy. Look at all the stupid crap in the form of amenities that certain universities are spending on.

I believe that individuals can spend money better than universities can, which just do "research" that rarely bears fruit. The only higher education institutions I'd trust are those with a hard STEM background. Money going to the Humanities is money flushed down the toilet.

Here comes the famous economist who once said "jobs are just on paper." Excuse me if I think raising people out of poverty is more important than your fantastical abstractions about the Volk or whatever. Got any empirics, or just more editorializing?

[Infected Mushroom]

Bah, education isn't everything. Look at what happened to education in the US, throwing unlimited money at universities in the form of federal loans just cause tuitions to increase beyond inflation without limit as to be unaffordable for most. Frankly, I don't want state subsidy or taxpayer money to be going to advancing Liberal propaganda amongst the nation's youth and backing curriculum that only ever has bad things to say about the country and its history and legacy. Look at all the stupid crap in the form of amenities that certain universities are spending on.

I believe that individuals can spend money better than universities can, which just do "research" that rarely bears fruit. The only higher education institutions I'd trust are those with a hard STEM background. Money going to the Humanities is money flushed down the toilet.

Here comes the famous economist who once said "jobs are just on paper." Excuse me if I think raising people out of poverty is more important than your fantastical abstractions about the Volk or whatever. Got any empirics, or just more editorializing?

Education’s become something of a race to the bottom though, with a college degree uncritically being required to do anything and with massive stretches of college years being a waste. Educational funding would just facilitate further credentialism.

While I think infrastructure may be worth investing it, education isn’t worth as much as it used to.

[Infected Mushroom]

The direct effect of education spending is the same as the direct effect of consumer spending. However, in the long run, someone with better and more education contributes more to GDP, so it also has a powerful, indirect effect that does not occur immediately. Iirc, in the US, $1 spent on education produces around $8 or $9 in GDP in the long run.

Bah, education isn't everything. Look at what happened to education in the US, throwing unlimited money at universities in the form of federal loans just cause tuitions to increase beyond inflation without limit as to be unaffordable for most. Frankly, I don't want state subsidy or taxpayer money to be going to advancing Liberal propaganda amongst the nation's youth and backing curriculum that only ever has bad things to say about the country and its history and legacy. Look at all the stupid crap in the form of amenities that certain universities are spending on.

I believe that individuals can spend money better than universities can, which just do "research" that rarely bears fruit. The only higher education institutions I'd trust are those with a hard STEM background. Money going to the Humanities is money flushed down the toilet.

I do think that having each person spend the 5,000 how they want is going to lead to a better and more natural economic outcome than the government taking that money in the aggregate and throwing it at some big, bureaucratic program

[Conservative Republic Of Huang]

Education’s become something of a race to the bottom though, with a college degree uncritically being required to do anything and with massive stretches of college years being a waste. Educational funding would just facilitate further credentialism.

In the same sense, people on the brink of starvation probably appreciate and value food more, and waste less, than those who have an abundance of food. Doesn't mean we should restrict the food supply and starve people so they learn not to waste food.

I do think that having each person spend the 5,000 how they want is going to lead to a better and more natural economic outcome than the government taking that money in the aggregate and throwing it at some big, bureaucratic program

In the same sense, people on the brink of starvation probably appreciate and value food more, and waste less, than those who have an abundance of food. Doesn't mean we should restrict the food supply and starve people so they learn not to waste food.

[Gim]

Education’s become something of a race to the bottom though, with a college degree uncritically being required to do anything and with massive stretches of college years being a waste. Educational funding would just facilitate further credentialism.


Economics is not based on aesthetic appeal. What does "natural" mean? Why is something better if it is "natural"?
While I think infrastructure may be worth investing it, education isn’t worth as much as it used to.

In the same sense, people on the brink of starvation probably appreciate and value food more, and waste less, than those who have an abundance of food. Doesn't mean we should restrict the food supply and starve people so they learn not to waste food.

Only if leftover food(from supply store or manufacturer) went to the needy.

[Conservative Republic Of Huang]

In the same sense, people on the brink of starvation probably appreciate and value food more, and waste less, than those who have an abundance of food. Doesn't mean we should restrict the food supply and starve people so they learn not to waste food.

Only if leftover food(from supply store or manufacturer) went to the needy.

An imperfect analogy, admittedly. The main point is that a slight disadvantage does not outweigh a much larger advantage.

[Gim]

Only if leftover food(from supply store or manufacturer) went to the needy.

An imperfect analogy, admittedly. The main point is that a slight disadvantage does not outweigh a much larger advantage.

It was my sincere thought. That way, we reduce food waste.

[Conservative Republic Of Huang]

An imperfect analogy, admittedly. The main point is that a slight disadvantage does not outweigh a much larger advantage.

It was my sincere thought. That way, we reduce food waste.

Which is why it is an imperfect analogy, since that is immaterial in the actual situation.

[Gim]

It was my sincere thought. That way, we reduce food waste.

Which is why it is an imperfect analogy, since that is immaterial in the actual situation.

True. I mean the richer get richer and hoard more, as the lesser get lesser and hoard less.