rockypath

所以話你完全係盲嘅。之前個 post 就已經講咗毓民係信奉社會民主理念，亦即係 social democracy，係一個響 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-7-15 10:12

你識唔識分“口號”和“執行政策”的區別？

搞清楚之後再出來獻醜啦。

rockypath

Are you fxxking blind or just fxxking stupid? I've already said that:


When you have a democratic  ...
Lik 發表於 2011-7-15 10:17

如果香港現在就實行普選，那癲狗一黨自然就有機會當上特首。

但似乎他得不到什麼民意支持波，包括阿力你。  

rockypath

PK la you!

Who was the person that proposed and forced the government to raise "Fruit Money" to $1 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-7-15 10:19

我在問你有什麼執行政策而不是齋叫口號。

真是可笑，“ｆｒｕｉｔ ｍｏｎｅｙ＂ａｎｄ＂ｐｏｃｋｅｔ ｍｏｎｅｙ” 點可以與打倒官商勾結，地產霸權，解決社會問題，建了香港經濟相提並論。

點啊，看不懂支那文啊？

A$$hole!

rockypath

世界上無完美嘅人，而毓民自己亦有太多嘅 character flaws。

響組織管理嘅層面上，毓民亦多次承認佢唔係最好嘅人選（呢方面，大舊做得比較好）。

毓民嘅強項係論述、論政、同政策研究。
Lik 發表於 2011-7-15 10:44

不要說我屈你。 這些都是你自己講的吧？

你自己都說黃毓民得把口，不適宜做特首。 不是嗎？   。。。。。。。。 ｈａｈａｈａａａａａ （ｓｏｒｒｙ， 忍唔住添）。

rockypath

依家好似係你唔識支那文喎？定係對你來講，要搞雙普選原來唔係實質政策，而只係要來撈油水嘅口號？

明晒 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-7-15 10:47

我沒有說普選不是實際政策。 反而正是當它是個實際政策才問大家對黃毓民當特首的看法。

可惜連你這個死忠的弟子都不支持他。 真是令他老人家痛心。   哈哈哈。。。。 （又忍不住添）。

rockypath

我確實係話我唔認為毓民適合做特首。咁又如何？

反為係你呢個無恥之徒，廢up、發雞盲、抹黑別人還自己清白 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-7-15 10:57

講來講去你就是放不出個屁來。

就當普選是解決社會和經濟問題的不二法門。如果香港現在即時實現普選，當選的很可能還是現在的一班人馬或是與他們有相似理念，背景和能力的人。

連阿力你都不支持黃毓民當特首，這就是現實。

如此說來，普選又如何是解決社會和經濟問題的不二法門呢？


我想不肯面對現實的是阿力你吧！

rockypath

仆街，

我唔讚成毓民去做特首，因為我唔認為佢係特首嘅最佳人算。但如果聽日就普選特首嘅話，而參選人又係 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-7-15 11:50

仆街，

我講的難道不是事實嗎？ 你能否預測誰會被當選如果香港即時實行真正實際的普選？

是你們班仆街將普選議題與社會和經濟問題混為一談。 就像當年陳水扁製造的假象－支持台灣就要支持阿扁，要解決社會和經濟問題就要即時實現普選。

香港市民不會那麼容易被你們借民主之名來愚弄的。

講來講去，根本就係你呢隻賤種從來都唔相信民主、唔相信人民！去仆街啦！

rockypath

回復  rockypath

The first to deal with must be public housing (that's what our former Tung propose ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-7-15 08:08

Lik and his friends have presented their opinions and what they said were not out of our expectation at all the same old 三幅屁. It is fortunate that HK is not ruled under them.

I can only have short response for this complex issue since I had wasted too much time on educating Lik and need to catch up what I left behind.

I am not an expert neither in HK economy nor politic. I just share my thoughts and welcome meaningful feedback and corrections.

I agree with you that the issue of housing is the heaviest burden HK people are facing on daily basis and the HK government needs to address this issue urgently if it wants to maintain the social stability and economic growth.

However, I don’t think the government can tackle this issue directly. The impact created by the instability of the real state market will be too huge and forces the HK government to take any real state related policy with extreme caution.

Real state is one of the most fundamental investment options of HK people and businesses. You should understand what I want to say.

To ease the heat of the real state market, HK government must create other alternative investment options to allow the money to flow away from the real state market.

Before the government can create those alternative options, I don’t think it has the courage to implement any serious policy to discourage continuing investing in real state. It would be suicidal if the government does so since those capitals could flow out to other foreign markets which will be devastating to HK economy and its status as a world finance center. I think this should be one of the reasons the HK government dare not take actions on 地產霸權。   

I know I should elaborate more but I don’t have the time to do so. You can share your points if you are interested and I will respond at a later time.

P.S. -- I am curious to know when people demonstrated and demand the government to 打倒地產霸權, do they have any idea how to 打倒地產霸權 and the impacts after 地產霸權被打倒？ Part of 地產霸權 is actually their own invested money. It is ironic, isn't it?

rockypath

回復  rockypath

There is no simple solution that can minimize the impact without having a big hit  ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-7-16 11:24

Yes, when the real state gets too hot and the housing prices become unaffordable, we blame the government. However, real state has always been an important foundation and cornerstone to establish the prosperity of Hong Kong. Why didn’t the HK people praise the government for that?

HK is a free economy market and running under capitalism. The capital and investment behaviours are driven by profit and opportunities. When those people demonstrate on street and demand the government to 打倒地產霸權, how many of them have a clear idea of what they are asking for and what kind of objectives they want to achieve? Sorry, I don’t think so. Just like our dearest idiot LIK here. He also has no clue of what he said and what he wanted to achieve.

Let’s ask these questions.

1)        How many of these people did not have any investment in real state or relating business?
2)        How many of them actually want to see the real state market gets cold and the value of their real states go down?
3)        How many of them will believe their life and job securities won’t be affected if the real state market gets cold?

Does the HK government have the power to intervene the market and cool it down as demanded by those people? Yes, absolutely. However, what will the consequences be if the government did that?

First, where the free (hot) money will goes when the real state is no longer a viable market for investment? Most likely the easies choice will be the stock market. What can we expect? Bubble, of course. That will be a devastating situation.

Second, if the stock market crash, where will the money go? They will be likely pursuing other opportunities outside of HK.

The diminishing of HK as a world finance center will be roaming on the horizon.

It is always easy to say and hard to execute.

Will 普選 be a solution to this? Can you see how naive our dearest idiot LIK is?  

In my opinion, the HK government needs to take its surplus reserve to invest in the development of new economy and redirect the capitals to invest in those new opportunities (Our idiot LIK also opposed to this idea and he would rather take the $6000). Unless alternative opportunities are available, I don’t think the HK government can do much. What they can do is just easing the anger of people by building the “public housing” again, BUT at a SLOW pace.

rockypath

回復  rockypath

Ask one simple question. Do you think it worths that much to purchase an apartment ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-7-16 16:48

Whether an apartment unit worth its price is a relative measure but is not an absolute dollar amount. The same house won’t be sold for the same price at the Vancouver west end as if it is located at the east side.

Yes, people living in a healthy economy with decent living standard shouldn’t pay more than 35% of their income on shelter. However, why is not because their income is too low (relatively) instead the price of housing is too high?

Why the income level of average HK people cannot catch up with the price of housing is the key we should question the HK government and that is the key area the government can work on and should take the responsibility for.   

In my opinion, focusing on improving the income level instead of suppressing the prices of real state is a much healthier approach and as same to the economy.