args

Universal Suffrage in Hong Kong

Here are my rebuttals: "There seems, therefore, little need for a welfare state in Hong Kong - only the minority of people at the margins of society would benefit from a welfare state whereas the majority of citizens have no need for state welfare and would not, therefore, vote for a politician that argued that taxes should increase to pay for it." Not only the minority benefits from a welfare state. Everyone does. When taxes are decreased, everyone pays less; when healthcare is increased, everyone gets more benefits. Although there might seem to be no need for a welfare state, that will not stop people from wanting one, as everyone welcomes policies that benefit them. Taxes will actually increase, as the tax rebate percentage will become lower, the money used for welfare. "Regarding tax, Hong Kong has one of the lowest rates of corporate and salary taxes in the world." Hong Kong has very low tax, but that does not mean prices of products will not increase because of a slightly higher tax rate. It"s all simple math. The tax increases by ten dollars; the price increases by ten or even more. The cost of production increases by one dollar; the price increases by one dollar or more. In the end, the consumers/customers still suffer. "So we can see that the average person in Hong Kong earns a very good salary and pays very little tax and, therefore, has a high disposable income. Property is expensive in Hong Kong, true, but it is still less expensive than London"" No, the average person in Hong Kong does not earn a very good salary. The average annual income in Hong Kong is 530,530 HKD, which is 66,316 USD. However, the average annual income in New York, another metropolis, is 87,026 USD! In New Jersey, it is 76,962 USD; and in Washington State, 77,584 USD. The average annual salaries in Rhode Island, Nevada, Utah, California, Colorado, Georgia etc are all higher than that in Hong Kong! (Refer to: www.averagesalarysurvey.com) The reason why Hong Kong has a high average salary is because of a few billionaires, such as Li Ka Shing, the 8th richest person in the world according to Forbes, having a net worth of US 31 billion, the world's largest operator of container terminals and the world's largest health and beauty retailer. Li Shao Ki, another billionaire, has a net worth of US 17 billion, is ranked the 24th, and the Kwok family ranked the 26th . However, not many billionaires live in the mentioned places that are as rich as Li, and considering that Hong Kong has a smaller population than a state in the US despite having a dense population, the average salary is pulled up. (Refer to: http://www.forbes.com...) Secondly, I would like you to check out this site: http://www.thepovertyline.net... You will find that, to be under the poverty line in Hong Kong is easier than in the US, and if you click into the respective "countries" under the Developed Countries tab, you will find that things are cheaper in the US than in Hong Kong. I would like to note that my opponent has not rebutted my point about a universal suffrage election in the LegCo leading to the emergence of populism, and that although there might not be need for Hong Kong to be a welfare state, it does not mean the people will not want more welfare. I would like to thank my opponent for bringing up new points and I look forward to seeing his rebuttals.