rockypath

Do you have no fxxking idea what "having difficulties in making ends meet" mean? It means you are ba ...
Lik 發表於 2011-2-27 12:49

Your arguments just base on “perhaps this and perhaps that”.

First, how would you know how the family use their cash bonus? You are already stupid enough to promote your “nice meal policy”. How would that help them ease their living burdens especially if they spend the money on one-go on a nice meal? In addition, a sudden increase in consumer spending will add the risk of inflation.

Second, direct subsidy will make sure the assistance will directly meet the end needs. In addition, it will be an on-going relief to help the families to deal with their problems.

Third, if the assistance is delivered through subsidy, the government has a way to monitor its effectiveness and is able to make adjustment or improvement in next budget year.

Last, the possibility of some people could be missed out by this method is not a critical point to defeat this method since it can be always improved to minimize this impact. And I believe the impact would be much less than your “nice meal” idea.

Have I shown your stupidity enough?

rockypath

Indeed it is stupid to start with,
ask the homeless people which would they prefer:
a hot meal in th ...
somewhereintime 發表於 2011-2-27 13:09

Why don't you go back to Hong Kong and fight for the homeless on this budget?

You don't even know who are the main core of the fighting team.
   
Stupid guy. Get your brain straight first.

Lik

去仆街啦你～

基層家庭有錢收嘅話，係得你先至會咁撚戇車來攞咗舊錢去食餐魚翅撈飯。稍為有腦嘅都會識得呢度攞多少來買餸、果度攞少少來買返件衫俾女女，慢慢逐啲逐啲咁來搣啦。食餐 one go meal 就 fing 晒舊錢？人地係窮，唔係好似你咁係低能㗎！

而我亦講咗9億幾次咁樣用錢法無能力令通脹加劇。你自己唔撚識、唔撚睇、唔撚認就少都唔該你咪撚講你啲廢物論述。再者，鬍鬚曾住資入強積金來派錢明益啲 fund 佬、免差餉俾有物業嘅人（而且係越多物業就得益越多），咁樣呢啲本身已經比基層市民更有能力應付通脹嘅人多咗錢就唔會加劇通脹，但基層市民將啲錢用返落社會來改善自己生活就會令通脹惡化？你呢啲乜撚野仆街邏輯來㗎？

Direct subsidy will make sure the assistance will directly meet the end needs？件鬍鬚曾自己都講到明叫你班死窮鬼有事就去搵社處求助，而唔係去搞佢、質問佢、同質疑佢個財政預算案呀！不爭嘅事實就係，特衰政府扶貧嘅 track record 極差，由金融風暴果陣減咗綜緩錢到今日一直都未加返，到加生果金要資產審查啲老人家，再到近日嘅區區果＄600嘅交津都唔肯實行雙軌制，每一件事都印證住呢個特衰政府同你一樣係幾咁仆街！靠佢啲 subsidy 來make sure 啲 assistance will directly meet the end needs？有需要嘅人餓撚死晒都未見到一個崩呀，仆街！

If the assistance is delivered through subsidy, the government has a way to monitor its effectiveness and is able to make adjustment or improvement in next budget year? 狗官思維僵化，所謂嘅 monitor 咪又係搞埋啲無敵資產審查同迫啲子女簽衰仔紙之類嘅折墮賤招？你以為我成日diu佢善財難捨、冤枉甘心係假嘅、係老屈佢嘅？

Possibility of some people could be missed out by this method is not a critical point to defeat this method since it can be always improved to minimize this impact? 如果特衰政府係公平、公正嘅話，咁香港嘅貧富懸殊就唔會係全世界第一啦！淨係單單從今次財政預算案你就可以睇到佢有無 miss 到任何人，又有無 minimize 到呢個幫助不均嘅問題。生果金同綜緩出雙糧都係每個人攞多＄4千零蚊，而攞緊綜緩嘅就接近係最弱勢、最需要緩助嘅人。但我之前都講過，fund佬今次就大有斬鑊賺到笑，有樓、有能力對抗吓通脹嘅人就越多樓越受惠。咁樣又係唔係 minimize 咗接受唔到任何幫助嘅 N無人士？有係唔係公平咁去幫助有需要嘅人？

去死啦，你條賤精！

-力

rockypath

送你內地一個詞 － 腦殘。

Do you have the brain to tell whether HK government has done its part to help the poor and which method provide a more effective way to help the poor are two different issues.

Just because the government has not done its part to help the poor, you use it as the support of your opinion?

Did you really have a degree in computer science? Did you learn about logic? Do you know what a false logic is and as well as a true logic?

How stupid.

Lik

LOL～

點解次次都係俾我駁到你一棟到無，然後你就借啲易唔聲唔聲咁再問其他問題來轉移視線？點解我又唔見你情理兼備、深入淺出咁講解吓你果啲所謂嘅偉論？

次次都齋問人夠唔夠薑回答你，好喇，我答咗你你又自己走頭。

成日話人無膽匪類，但真正仆街果個卻係你。

快啲返去舔阿爺屎眼啦，賤種～

-力

rockypath

LOL～

點解次次都係俾我駁到你一棟到無，然後你就借啲易唔聲唔聲咁再問其他問題來轉移視線？點解我又唔見 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-2-27 14:29

Just look at how you defend yourself.

Because the government did not do xxxx, therefore cash is the way to go; because the government did not do xxxx, cash is the only form of assistance to be accepted.

Were you ever able to put these two forms of assistance side by side to compare their effectiveness? No, you had not and I don't think you will.

Can you see your stupidity now? I have no expectation from you.

kingkong123

Just look at how you defend yourself.

Because the government did not do xxxx, therefore cash is  ...
rockypath 發表於 2011-2-27 14:38

    好明显你是用睾丸思考的人

rockypath

好明显你是用睾丸思考的人
kingkong123 發表於 2011-2-27 17:14

你連睾丸都沒有，能對你說的話有什麼要求嗎？沒有！

kingkong123

你連睾丸都沒有，能對你說的話有什麼要求嗎？沒有！
rockypath 發表於 2011-2-27 17:45

    甘你就是承认自己用睾丸思考啦

rockypath

甘你就是承认自己用睾丸思考啦
kingkong123 發表於 2011-2-27 17:50

沒有睾丸的人當然以為其他人是用睾丸思考。