args

Universal Suffrage in Hong Kong

To begin, we must accept the premise that "All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development." This is enshrined in international law by the United Nations [1] and there can be no legitimate justification for any regime to deprive its citizens of their fundamental human right to choose their own leaders, yet my opponent has valiantly attempted to do so in the case of Hong Kong. I must admit, I was very surprised to read that "about 1.1 million of the people have only kindergarten or no education level at all. About 82 per cent of the population does not pay tax, and 51 per cent of the people receive housing subsidies from the (Hong Kong) government." Personally, I have never seen much evidence of social deprivation in Hong Kong, although I did once see some Filipino domestic workers camping in a pedestrian underpass near the Star Ferry pier, which was quite bizarre! However, my opponent insists that over four fifths of the population don't pay tax. This would suggest either mass unemployment or wholesale tax evasion. Therefore, I decided to research my opponent's claims using alternative sources and discovered that unemployment is below 5% [2], very low by international standards, while literacy is 93.5% [3], not bad for a city where 1.1 million of 7.1 million inhabitants have no education beyond kindergarten! Regarding tax, Hong Kong has one of the lowest rates of corporate and salary taxes in the world. There is a flat corporate tax while there are four marginal tax brackets on income of 2%, 7%, 12% and 17%. Furthermore, in 2011 Hong Kong taxpayers actually received a 75% tax rebate, so there seems little incentive for Hong Kongers to risk prosecution by evading taxes. {4,5} Meanwhile, with a per capita GDP of US$50,700 people in Hong Kong are among the richest in the world, making more money per person on average than Americans, Japanese, Germans or Britons. To put their wealth in perspective, the per capita GDP of mainland China is only US$9,100. [6] 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 [7] and most people in Hong Kong are easily able to purchase private health insurance, while the Hong Kong government already provides limited welfare for children and the elderly. 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. In conclusion, Hong Kong is an extremely prosperous city and is so successful because the people of Hong Kong are industrious and self-reliant - that is the reason that they are in such a healthy financial position compared to countries like Greece who are on their knees due to a relative lack of work ethic of their population. Another city state in South East Asia, Singapore, also has a productive workforce. The average Singaporean earns US$60,900 per year and, as such, are among the very few in the world with a higher per capita GDP than Hong Kong. However, Singapore is a parliamentary republic with a democratically elected government. There is no reason for the people of Singapore to vote for politicians promoting the introduction of a welfare state any more than there is any reason for the people of Hong Kong to, that is if they had the opportunity, which they don't, but according to international law, should. Thank you. [1] http://www.un.org... [2] http://www.indexmundi.com... [3} https://www.cia.gov... [4] http://www.guidemehongkong.com... [5] http://www.china-briefing.com... [6] https://www.cia.gov... [7] http://www.globalpropertyguide.com...