溫哥華老友記討論區 - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: 公民黨：不接受派錢方案 [打印本頁]

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-1 22:29 標題: 公民黨：不接受派錢方案

請問阿力和阿ＳＯＭＥ－公民黨是否在無視香港人的心聲，公然與香港人作對？

＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝

公民黨：不接受派錢方案
(明報)2011年3月2日星期三 11:55

公民黨立法會議員余若薇表示，不接受財爺的派錢方案。

余若薇表示，公民黨不要政府派錢，而是希望政府能針對性地幫助有需要的市民，如全民退休保障計劃等。

她認為，政府完全沒有接受民主派提出的改善方案，而是僅僅為了箍票而約見建制派議員，宣布派錢方案。

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-3-1 22:32

請問阿力和阿ＳＯＭＥ－公民黨是否在無視香港人的心聲，公然與香港人作對？

rockypath 發表於 2011-3-1 22:29

There will be morons who protest, one way or another.

作者: ricrick 時間: 2011-3-1 23:16

本帖最後由 ricrick 於 2011-3-1 23:18 編輯

余若薇的想頭太大了，全民退休保障計劃當然都要做，但現在衰特首真係采你有味，比6千暗口費好過

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-1 23:35

From the government's standpoint, 比6千暗口費 is a much easier option to take.

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-3-2 00:33

政府治理地方又好，國家又好，其實響政策上都須要響短期、中期、同長期三方面着手。而三樣野裡面，我會話短期政策係係有着燃眉之急，而中長期嘅 overall 重要性卻係大過短期嘅事項。

財政預算案未出爐之前，可以見到嘅係香港政府庫房水浸，但到處卻係官富民窮。叫你特衰政府派錢係可以等市民可以享受到即時性嘅舒困，但咁做並不代表你其他中、長線嘅野就可以唔做。偏偏，太多賤狗就鍾意搬弄是非、歪曲事實，講到好似短、中、同長期嘅政策全部都係 mutually exclusive，只能三選一，而不能同步安排及進行。

我睇到嘅係：余女神同大狀黨反對只有短期派錢嘅，但卻無中、長期建議嘅方案。咁並唔完全代表佢地反對派錢。

而佢亦確實無鬧錯鬍鬚曾同特衰政府：因為從鬍鬚曾只係親疏有別咁接見保皇黨同接受佢地嘅所謂提議（其實毓民等人好幾年前已經叫你個特衰政府派錢同搞全民退休保障計劃），但又完全莫視民主派所提出嘅中、長性策略。

咁做並非係同港人作對。但當然，企阿爺同保皇黨果邊嘅賤人就梗係會用盡一切辦法來扭曲民主派所講嘅說話。

-力

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-2 02:07

政府治理地方又好，國家又好，其實響政策上都須要響短期、中期、同長期三方面着手。而三樣野裡面，我會話短 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-3-2 00:33

真是要寫個服字比你。面皮有成尺厚。之前邊個要喊打喊殺一定要派現金？又每係阿力你呢只癲狗。

以加見勢頭唔對路，即刻轉口風扮死狗。

作者: fy789 時間: 2011-3-2 09:30

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: 快樂牛郎 時間: 2011-3-2 09:54

全民退休保障計劃 is a joke

If you don't have enough savings to retire
just fxxk yourself

people live way too long nowadays

作者: 快樂牛郎 時間: 2011-3-2 09:57

retirement policy is such a misuse of resources.
most resources are spent on people who are NO LONGER productive

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-3-2 10:14

政府治理地方又好，國家又好，其實響政策上都須要響短期、中期、同長期三方面着手。而三樣野裡面，我會話短 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-3-2 00:33

The US/Canada are going bankrupt.

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-3-2 10:17

你之前話一定絕對要派錢才可舒困，依家又講中長線改善窮困，咁邊度有咁多錢兩樣都做好呀？
fy789 發表於 2011-3-2 09:30

Don't have the $$ to do both? Are you blind or stupid or both?

Read this again and tell me how much $$ the HKSAR gov has in reserves:

http://www.info.gov.hk/hkma/eng/press/2011/20110209e3.htm

Giving out money has the most immediate impact in alleviating the poor's daily needs, and it is the most fair and indiscriminate method of returning the wealth the stupid SAR government has amassed to the public. Plus, if the government really doesn't have enough money to do all of the short, medium, and long term policies, it would still make sense to spend a sizable amount on the short term needs first.

If you are already starving and you only have $10 in your pocket, are you gonna tell me you'd rather save it all in your RRSP that you'll withdraw when you turn 65? or are you gonna go spend $5 to buy yourself a loaf of bread to eat first?

Stupid idiot...

-Lik

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-3-2 10:32

本帖最後由 peter236 於 2011-3-2 10:41 編輯

Don't have the $$ to do both? Are you blind or stupid or both?

Read this again and tell me how muc ...
Lik 發表於 2011-3-2 10:17

The US/Canada are going bankrupt. What are you going to say about this?

Why doesn't your Canada government give out cash?

作者: fy789 時間: 2011-3-2 10:38

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-2 11:23

點解唔見唐人街阿嬸 (Somewhereintime) 出聲咧？之前唔係一副大義凜然的面孔咩？以加做縮頭烏龜粒聲唔出？

作者: chobit 時間: 2011-3-2 13:54

I really don't like the idea of giving out the $6000- to anyone over 18.

The money should be given to qualify individuals who are low income, or on wellfare.

To some people $6000 is more than a month of the salary, while for many other people, those are just extra pocket money.

If they can save 30% on not paying those wealthy individuals, then increase the $6000 by 30% to those who need the money, isn't that better??

作者: 快樂牛郎 時間: 2011-3-2 14:08

I don't like the idea of handing out free money, period.

I would rather have the government hire a bunch of unemployed to do community work.

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-3-2 14:28

I don't like the idea of handing out free money, period.

I would rather have the government hire a ...
快樂牛郎發表於 2011-3-2 14:08

This is what Mr Lik called democracy. Doing what the people want, otherwise there will be a million people marching on the streets and Mr Lik will be posting anti-Hong Kong articles here like crazy.

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-2 14:42

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-3-2 15:03 編輯

I really don't like the idea of giving out the $6000- to anyone over 18.

The money should be given ...
chobit 發表於 2011-3-2 13:54

Just watch HK news report, $6000 等於揀紙皮阿婆一年的收入。 She was so delighted for the money. Many 中產 are also very happy. Some of them already 大吃一餐當慶祝 before actually receiving the money, some are planning for a vacation and a C9 is going to buy a luxury hand bag. 商家都非常期待這塊肥豬肉的降臨（this is a direct quote of a HK news reporter).

For many people, $6000 is just extra money, but does the 揀紙皮阿婆 really receive the help she needs? What happen next year if the government has no cash bonus to give out? Anyone really care for her?

I just 鄙視 those guys cry out loud everyday proclaiming how they care for the poor and attack people who hold a different opinion from theirs. But when the time come, they totally ignore the opportunity to fight for people in need.

Fxxk them.

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-3-2 15:06

I just 鄙視 those guys crying out loud everyday proclaiming how they care about the poor and attacking people who hold a different opinion from theirs. But when the time come, they totally ignore the opportunity to fight for people in need.

Fxxk them.
rockypath 發表於 2011-3-2 14:42

Are you gonna go fxxk yourself then?

You said it yourself -- the Ah Por was absolutely delighted for the money she received. I've read personal accounts of how a tea restaurant dishwasher lady with overjoyed with tears when the customer told her that the government is giving out $6k of cash now instead of stuffing it into her MPF account that she won't be able to access until 65.

Are these not the people you speak of that are in need? Are these not the same folks that I have repeated mentioned that requires immediate assistance?

And let me remind you -- you are against handing out $$ right from the start.

As per your very specific instructions, I'm saying this to you right now -- FXXK YOU!

-Lik

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-2 15:11

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-3-2 15:23 編輯

Are you gonna go fxxk yourself then?

You said it yourself -- the Ah Por was absolutely delighted f ...
Lik 發表於 2011-3-2 15:06

Just quote directly what I said if you have the gut to do so, coward.

When did I support putting the money into 強積金？ Give me the quote. Coward.

If you have the gut, just quote what I said what I believe the government should do to help the poor. Dare to do so?

I wait for you. If you cannot quote what I had said. Just fuxk yourself.

By the way, you still do not have the gut to answer me - how will your "nice meal" policy help the poor and needed? 我真係想知道個Ｄ中產大食一餐之後對Ｄ洗碗阿嬸解決貧困問題有什麼幫助？Ｄ阿嬸係唔係要多謝因為有多幾只碗洗啊？
Coward Lik, just fuxk yourself la.

作者: Prelude 時間: 2011-3-2 15:15

Giving money out is just an easy way out, but people will just suffer from it.
Not the best method.

There are other short term ways to benefit the low income people who wants to work.
Even if the efficiency is below 80%, it's still better than just give money out.

Ah Por will be delighted this year, and cry the next 10 years.

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-3-2 15:33

Just quote directly what I said if you have the gut to do so, coward.

When did I support putting the money into 強積金？ Give me the quote. Coward.

If you have the gut, just quote what I said what I believe the government should do to help the poor. Dare to do so?

I wait for you. If you cannot quote what I had said. Just fuxk yourself.

By the way, you still do not have the gut to answer me - how will your "nice meal" policy help the poor and needed? Coward Lik, just fuxk yourself la.
rockypath 發表於 2011-3-2 15:11

I never said you supported putting money into MPF. I just said you are a fxxking retard because while you said you despise "those guys crying out loud everyday proclaiming how they care about the poor and attacking people who hold a different opinion from theirs. But when the time come, they totally ignore the opportunity to fight for people in need." This description fits you perfectly, because you are precisely proclaiming how you care about the poor, but when the time comes (for the poor folks to receive money), you totally ignore the opportunity of how this can help the poor. In English, you are the perfect example of what "hypocrite" means.

Now, how is it possible that the $6k being given out will not help the poor and those in need? The cardboard-collecting Ah Por wouldn't haven't to keep on doing the back-breaking work of collecting cardboard this year. Is that not how she has been helped? The tea restaurant dish washer lady that I mentioned earlier might be able to work a few hours less each day so that she wouldn't have to kill herself with her usual 16 hour, 2-job work days. She'd be able to get a little more rest. Has she not been helped as a result?

As I have said before -- FXXK YOU, prick!

-Lik

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-3-2 15:39

Ah Por will be delighted this year, and cry the next 10 years.
Prelude 發表於 2011-3-2 15:15

Not if the SAR government use this borrowed time to implement other longer term poverty assistance programs and overhaul their overwhelming policy bias towards the rich.

As I have said many times, you implement the short term assistive measures because they have the most urgency. And then you plan for and implement the more important medium and longer term stuff. That way, Ah Por will be delighted this year, and continue to do so in the next 10 years.

-Lik

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-2 15:43

I never said you supported putting money into MPF. I just said you are a fxxking retard because whi ...
Lik 發表於 2011-3-2 15:33

Coward Lik. Just quote directly what I said, and put what you said side by side.

Let people on LYK to see exactly what you said and what I said.

Dare to do so?

Just answer me - how will your "nice meal" policy help the poor? Dare to answer it? What a coward.

作者: Prelude 時間: 2011-3-2 15:48

Not if the SAR government use this borrowed time to implement other longer term poverty assistance ...
Lik 發表於 2011-3-2 15:39

You always change your stand point.
There is always an extension of what you meant, right?

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-3-2 15:51

Just answer me - how will your "nice meal" policy help the poor? Dare to answer it? What a coward.
rockypath 發表於 2011-3-2 15:43

戇撚鳩嘅盲丙，你條廢問題，我前後最少答咗你9次喇！唔撚識字就等我再 post 多次俾你睇：

Now, how is it possible that the $6k being given out will not help the poor and those in need? The cardboard-collecting Ah Por wouldn't haven't to keep on doing the back-breaking work of collecting cardboard this year. Is that not how she has been helped? The tea restaurant dish washer lady that I mentioned earlier might be able to work a few hours less each day so that she wouldn't have to kill herself with her usual 16 hour, 2-job work days. She'd be able to get a little more rest. Has she not been helped as a result?

去食屎啦，仆街！

-力

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-3-2 15:57

You always change your stand point.
There is always an extension of what you meant, right?
Prelude 發表於 2011-3-2 15:48

呢個世界上，有乜野事唔係一步一步咁來？最迫切嘅目標達到之後，自然係要往下一個目標進發。講得好聽就叫做「循序漸進」，講得唔好聽，你叫佢做「得一想二」亦都得。

我就唔信你去識姐姐仔果陣，拖咗佢隻手仔之後就唔想去嘴佢呀？

-力

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-3-2 15:57

戇撚鳩嘅盲丙，你條廢問題，我前後最少答咗你9次喇！唔撚識字就等我再 post 多次俾你睇：

去食屎啦，仆街 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-3-2 15:51

what is canada doing to help the poor?
when is canada going to balance the budget?

作者: MoiRhapsody 時間: 2011-3-2 17:09

我又黎啦~~
1，派三百幾億會刺激通漲？？香港每年總消費為一萬億，多個0.03%現金會刺激通漲？另外香港個俱俱七百萬把口就夠食大中國十三億人口既糧食既需求而加價？
2，理得佢什麼fxxking扶貧計劃通通都係得個講字。兩年前個乜乜醫療基金批左五百億，到呢家都係冇郁過。回水先至最實際。
3，乜乜長線貧窮政策好過派錢？好老實，你係冇可能令一個五十幾歲係酒樓洗碗搵6千幾既呀嬸可以搵萬五，亦都冇可能令執紙皮既婆婆變

作者: 快樂牛郎 時間: 2011-3-2 18:28

乜乜長線貧窮政策好過派錢？好老實，你係冇可能令一個五十幾歲係酒樓洗碗搵6千幾既呀嬸可以搵萬五，亦都冇可能令執紙皮既婆婆變MoiRhapsody 發表於 2011/3/2 17:09

that's right
forget about those 5x years olds
their lives are OVER

who you want to help are those kids in poverty so they don't repeat what their parents did

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-3-2 18:34

that's right
forget about those 5x years olds
their lives are OVER

who you want to help are those kids in poverty so they don't repeat what their parents did
快樂牛郎發表於 2011-3-2 18:28

咁點解你又唔提倡年過50、月入不足5千、總資產值唔夠5萬就拉去打靶？

有病...

-力

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-2 20:32

I asked some people that I know for their opinions on “派現金”. None of them support this action. They, in fact, criticize the government for not applying the surplus in a more responsible way.

In summary, they do not agree every HK citizen needs this $6000. The money should be used in a better way to help the poor and people having trouble to find a job. The government can increase financial assistance to seniors and low-income families. Upgrade employment retraining program and facilities to help people who are |淘汰 by the society due to their outdated work skills or the elimination of the whole industry.

Some of people I asked are not well-off and they only receive an average income (~10-15K). However, they feel they can take care of themselves and there are many people needing extra help than themselves and they don’t mind to contribute their $6000 to help those families. I guess they might hope the government would help them out if one day they are also淘汰 by the society when they turn older.

This should make it clear why I 鄙視 those hypocrites.

作者: MoiRhapsody 時間: 2011-3-2 20:55

哈，我問十個住香港既朋友九個都贊成啵~

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-3-2 21:10

哈，我問十個住香港既朋友九個都贊成啵~
MoiRhapsody 發表於 2011-3-2 20:55

$6000 is not enough, we need $10000 or more.

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-2 21:46

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-3-2 22:08 編輯

哈，我問十個住香港既朋友九個都贊成啵~
MoiRhapsody 發表於 2011-3-2 20:55

How did you ask your friends?

Will the people I asked take the money? Yes, of course they will.

Are they happy for receiving the extra pocket money? Yes, they are.

Do they think the money should be used in a better way? Yes, they agree the money should be used in a better way.

As usual, what can I expect from you guys?

作者: MoiRhapsody 時間: 2011-3-2 23:19

on 9, 派左6000齋今年仲有600幾億任佢玩，
何况，呢個係2011/2012年既財政預算，係短期既野，任何千秋萬世既唔該去搵曾蔭權既施政報告度嘈!！！

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-2 23:48

on 9, 派左6000齋今年仲有600幾億任佢玩，
何况，呢個係2011/2012年既財政預算，係短期既野，任何千秋萬世 ...
MoiRhapsody 發表於 2011-3-2 23:19

You still didn’t get what people mean? Such an idiot.

People are not satisfied with how the government uses the surplus but NOT how much surplus the government has.

Get it? Idiot.

作者: MoiRhapsody 時間: 2011-3-2 23:50

you are idiot.
most of the ppl welcome the 6k.

作者: MoiRhapsody 時間: 2011-3-2 23:58

真係好撚神奇，有人認為傷左唔好嘥藥水急救止血呀～去補身啦～～～
真係痴撚線，派左錢唔可以做其他野既？
派撚左就冇錢做其他野既？
真係好撚on 9

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-2 23:58

you are idiot.
most of the ppl welcome the 6k.
MoiRhapsody 發表於 2011-3-2 23:50

Of course, I welcome the extra pocket money as well.

However, does it mean it shouldn't be used in a better way?

Get it? Idiot.

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-3 00:01

真係好撚神奇，有人認為傷左唔好嘥藥水急救止血呀～去補身啦～～～
真係痴撚線，派左錢唔可以做其他野既？
...
MoiRhapsody 發表於 2011-3-2 23:58

Why don't you go to ask 公民黨 why they are such stupid.

They should invite you to be their party advisor. When are you going to fly back to teach them how to be smart?

作者: MoiRhapsody 時間: 2011-3-3 00:05

哈？
你真係有病，
講唔贏就發晦氣，
真係痴撚線!

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-3-3 00:10

However, does it mean it shouldn't be used in a better way?
rockypath 發表於 2011-3-2 23:58

點解我從來都只係見你條契弟講埋晒啲假大空，又虛無漂渺嘅說話嘅呢？再唔係就只係識一輪嘴不停咁問人，再唔係就呱呱叫咁咪人有無吉士去正面會答你嘅低能問題（雖然其實已經前後直接答咗、仲要徹底推翻晒你所講嘅廢話）。

點解唔見你所講嘅說話有啲論述、有啲見地嘅呢？

無料就收嗲啦，廢柴～（知唔知「廢柴」點解呀，死蠢？

）

-力

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-3 00:15

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-3-3 00:24 編輯

點解我從來都只係見你條契弟講埋晒啲假大空，又虛無漂渺嘅說話嘅呢？再唔係就只係識一輪嘴不停咁問人，再 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-3-3 00:10

Did you ever dare to answer my questions directly?

Ok, give you one more chance. Just answer me.

How would your "nice meal" policy help the poor and needed? If you had answered this question directly, just COPY AND PASTE your answer here.

I wait for your answer.

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-3 00:19

哈？
你真係有病，
講唔贏就發晦氣，
真係痴撚線!
MoiRhapsody 發表於 2011-3-3 00:05

I never expecting to 講贏 you idiot just like I won't expect a pig can understand a human language.

公民黨 certainly does not hold the same opinion as yours. Is there anything you want to say to them?

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-3-3 00:20

本帖最後由 peter236 於 2011-3-3 00:23 編輯

點解我從來都只係見你條契弟講埋晒啲假大空，又虛無漂渺嘅說話嘅呢？再唔係就只係識一輪嘴不停咁問人，再 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-3-3 00:10

你條契弟廢柴,收聲喇.

When will Canada pay you cash?
Balance the budget?

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-3-3 00:21

答咗你9萬幾次啦，低能兒。你唔厭，我都厭晒喇...

-力

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-3 00:23

答咗你9萬幾次啦，低能兒。你唔厭，我都厭晒喇...

-力
Lik 發表於 2011-3-3 00:21

As usual and expected.

YOU NEVER HAVE THE GUT TO FACE ME DIRECTLY.

You coward can only say - "I already answered your question" when you actually never did!

作者: MoiRhapsody 時間: 2011-3-3 00:32

真係好撚得意，摑到佢應一應都仲呃自己人地怕左佢咁，你唔厭，我都厭喇～～～～

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-3 00:34

真係好撚得意，摑到佢應一應都仲呃自己人地怕左佢咁，你唔厭，我都厭喇～～～～ ...
MoiRhapsody 發表於 2011-3-3 00:32

Don't BS anything else. Just tell us what do you have to tell 公民黨.

Why do you not have the gut to tell us?

作者: MoiRhapsody 時間: 2011-3-3 00:38

你都幾得意，我都講到清清楚楚派錢同長線計劃冇抵觸，公民黨自然係要收皮。
有啲野唔撚洗畫公仔畫出腸下嘩？idiot!

作者: chobit 時間: 2011-3-3 01:24

本帖最後由 chobit 於 2011-3-3 01:27 編輯

IMHO, I just don't think any of the money should be spent on wealthy individual or families.

If I were to be in HK, I would probably still take the $6K, then try to use a small portion for myself an family, then spend a good potion in donation. I am not just BS. I currently work for a non-profit agency knowing that I am making less money than if I would to work for a normal business, I also contribute a small portion of my income to United Way, & donate items to our agency auction dinner and other events from time to time.

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-3 02:32

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-3-3 02:59 編輯

你都幾得意，我都講到清清楚楚派錢同長線計劃冇抵觸，公民黨自然係要收皮。
有啲野唔撚洗畫公仔畫出腸下嘩 ...
MoiRhapsody 發表於 2011-3-3 00:38

Listen up, Idiot.

I tell you clearly one more time.

The focus and problems is NOT about 短線和長線計劃有冇抵觸. The problem is NOT EVERY HK CITIZEN needs this $6000 and it can be used in a more helpful and effective way to help the poor and needed.

I don't think the government should give this cash to people who will spend it on a nice meal, vocation or luxury hand bag. I don't agree with Lik's "nice meal" policy and will not believe it can help the poor and needed.

GET IT? IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!

P.S. In order to prevent Idiot Lik trying to fool people again, I would like to say this to Lik to his face - people who would spend this extra money on a "nice meal" is NOT likely the people like 揀紙皮阿婆或洗碗阿嬸 but the 中產或有錢老細. Don't try to use 洗碗阿嬸 as an example to defend your "nice meal" policy and to fool readers.

作者: MoiRhapsody 時間: 2011-3-3 03:45

listen up , idiot,
I will tell you once and only one now.
the focus and the problem is not about "not every hk citizen needs this $6000"
Giving out cash indiscriminately as long as you have HK ID is the quickest and most effective way to help the poor and needed.
adding any other filtering procedures is a waste of time and increasing the administration fee, also it will create more chaos.
you are pretty dumb for not knowing this.
打中文啦!假洋鬼子!！！！

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-3 04:15

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-3-3 04:24 編輯

listen up , idiot,
I will tell you once and only one now.
the focus and the problem is not about "no ...
MoiRhapsody 發表於 2011-3-3 03:45

For the sake of you idiot, I repeat once more.

Right from the beginning, I opposed the idea of giving out cash and said the surplus should be used in a better way to help the poor and need. And more importantly, invest in developing the new economy so that people who lost their job can be retrained and find new opportunities.

For the immediate short term help, the government can provide financial assistance directly to individuals and families that are needed. But not to those who will spend the money on a nice meal, vocation or luxury bags. The money they are going to receive should be spent on helping the poor and needed instead.

Additional administration cost is your argument for giving out cash to everyone? How funny, how stupid and lack of social responsibility.

As I already said from the beginning, the government is not willing to commit into a long term plan to help the poor and needed and same as you guys - the hypocrites.

我不鄙視你還可以鄙視邊一個？

作者: MoiRhapsody 時間: 2011-3-3 05:14

醒下啦PK,呢個政府搞乜都死，醫保，數碼港，中醫藥中心，遊輪港，副學士，乜撚都喎晒。
派6k就最直接，唔撚洗拖，行政費你又知唔知可以高到乜撚野程度？？？lack of social responsibility？呢啲咁虛無既字都用？？你唔好去死？？呢個政府我冇份選嫁屌你!！！個social responsibility係姓曾個仆街度呀關我地撚事。
你呢條神經病人只見樹木不見森林，借啲易抽私人水，我最鄙視就係你呢種小人。

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-3 05:48

醒下啦PK,呢個政府搞乜都死，醫保，數碼港，中醫藥中心，遊輪港，副學士，乜撚都喎晒。
派6k就最直接，唔撚 ...
MoiRhapsody 發表於 2011-3-3 05:14

區區六千蚊就買起你的良知和社會責任。佩服佩服。

對你呢種人，我真是無言以對。

作者: MoiRhapsody 時間: 2011-3-3 07:10

屌你啦，上綱上線你就最撚叻～！～

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-3-3 11:19

IMHO, I just don't think any of the money should be spent on wealthy individual or families.
chobit 發表於 2011-3-3 01:24

I wouldn't worry too much about the money going to wealthy individuals and families.

At the core of the issue here is fairness and equality. The government surplus came from the taxpayers, which means every HK citizen should be entitled to receive the rebates. By giving money to every person with valid HKID, it is the fairest, most indiscriminate method with the absolute lowest administrative costs.

You might say that wealthy people should not receive this money, as the money could be put to better use by the poor. But in this case, I would argue that equality and fairness takes precedence. At the very least, every HK citizen should be entitled to collect this rebate. Whether the person actually goes to collect it is entirely his personal decision. This follows directly from democratic principles in that regardless a person's background, education, wealth, etc., they should be entitled to the same number of votes. Whether the person actually exercises this right is his personal decision, but in the name of equality and fairness, he should at least be entitled to it.

Another thing to keep in mind is the value (of worth) and opportunity costs associated with collecting this money. To different people, the value of the same sum of money is different. To someone in poverty, this $6k would be worth a lot more than the same $6k is worth to Lee+x. Because of this, the incentive to go collect this money is dramatically higher for those who need this money the most. For those who are wealthy enough that may or may not need this money, it may not be worth their trouble because of the opportunity costs that's involved. And hey, if they choose to go collect it, I see it as part of their citizenship rights.

And don't forget -- for those such as yourselves (and even Rocky dude or fy-whatever as he proclaims) who believes or advocates that this money should only be spent on the poor and those in need, you are entirely free to not just talk your talk, but also walk your walk by collecting this money first, and then donate it in its entirety to a charity of your choice. Then the money would really go towards helping those in need as you have wanted.

But I very seriously doubt Rocky dude / fy-whatever will live up to his words. I await to be proven wrong, and if I am proven wrong, I will issue a public apology here on LYK to these two jokers.

-Lik

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-3-3 11:33

本帖最後由 peter236 於 2011-3-3 11:35 編輯

I wouldn't worry too much about the money going to wealthy individuals and families.

At the core o ...
Lik 發表於 2011-3-3 11:19

When is Canada giving you the cash that poor Canadians all need in fairness?
oops, we forget that Canada is in big debt.

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-3-3 11:35

醒下啦PK,呢個政府搞乜都死，醫保，數碼港，中醫藥中心，遊輪港，副學士，乜撚都喎晒。
派6k就最直接，唔撚 ...
MoiRhapsody 發表於 2011-3-3 05:14

you moron, it is because the people themselves are not good enough to do it, not the government.

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-3-3 11:44

For the immediate short term help, the government can provide financial assistance directly to individuals and families that are needed. But not to those who will spend the money on a nice meal, vocation or luxury bags. The money they are going to receive should be spent on helping the poor and needed instead.
rockypath 發表於 2011-3-3 04:15

撚樣，去仆街啦你。

你想靠特衰政府去有些地搞扶貧措施？去搞長遠幫助脫貧嘅政策？我話俾你聽，只要一日無普選，特狗都只係需要向阿爺交代，而並非向人民交代。而無須向人民交代亦即係佢無需要有效地搞好扶貧、脫貧工作。

回歸十幾年來根本就有晒版俾你睇：強積金從討論到落實研究到立法，前後搞咗好多年。而即使搞咗，亦只係一大pat神憎鬼厭嘅臭屎，仲要年年蝕錢、年年俾人罵。綜緩、生果金、交津等等香港又無咩？做咗出來，一樣係做到一pat屎咁，對需要幫助嘅人來講只係好過無，而並非真正咁可以幫助到佢地。

所以都係果句：靠呢個小圈子選出來嘅特衰政府？聽PK啦～

-力

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-3-3 11:44

I wouldn't worry too much about the money going to wealthy individuals and families.

At the core o ...
Lik 發表於 2011-3-3 11:19

When is Canada giving you the cash that poor Canadians all need in fairness?
oops, we forget that Canada is in big debt.

Mr Lik, you are no fuc king economist or financial analyst. Just STFU la.

作者: fy789 時間: 2011-3-3 12:35

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-3-3 15:42

本帖最後由 peter236 於 2011-3-3 15:49 編輯

屈力力先生最鐘意知少少，扮代表。又鐘意企喺道德高地，指罵別人，不過佢就最下流。
好多post 都係偏激同為 ...
fy789 發表於 2011-3-3 12:35

Mr Lik 條英國仔，自以為事，人又吋,把口又臭。佢自己就係PK仔喇.

作者: mcjohnjohn 時間: 2011-3-3 18:16

I really don't like the idea of giving out the $6000- to anyone over 18.

The money should be given ...
chobit 發表於 2011-3-3 05:54

小弟極度贊成! (雖然小弟應該會成為冇份收錢既"受害者"都係咁話)

作者: mcjohnjohn 時間: 2011-3-3 18:57

Mr Lik 條英國仔，自以為事，人又吋,把口又臭。佢自己就係PK仔喇.
peter236 發表於 2011-3-4 07:42

好耐冇見Peter 仔打中文了! 呢篇野花左幾多時間打?

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-3 20:25

At the core of the issue here is fairness and equality.
Lik 發表於 2011-3-3 11:19

What a shameless Idiot, Lik.

First, how many people would agree with you that the core of the issue is fairness and equality? Can you tell us what your definition of “fairness” and “equality” is? According to your position, all HK citizens should “eat themselves” regardless they are wealthy or poor. If it is the case, why should we provide financial assistance and public housing to low-income families and seniors? Isn’t it unfair that the government uses the hard-earned money from other citizens and public resources to help those useless people who cannot support themselves? Shouldn’t they take care of themselves for the sake of “equality”?

The core to me is SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY.

Second, do you even know what “opportunity cost” mean before BSing? If the government just deposit the $6000 directly the bank account of those wealthy people, what is the “opportunity cost” for those people? (just want to tell you, your understanding of “opportunity cost” is wrong. Find out what it means before BS again).

Third, just want to tell you, I will collect this $6000 if I am eligible and spend it on a NICE MEAL as suggested by you since it can help out the poor and needed.

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-3-3 22:51

Ha! An attempt to "reason" with me here, huh? That's pretty rare for an idiot like you.

We can go into an endless debate to differentiate the semantic difference between "fairness and equality" and "social responsibility". But at the end of the day, social responsibility is part of the equation in ensuring fairness, but the reverse is not true. What that means is, by claiming that you believe the core issue here is "social responsibility", you are really agreeing with me that the core of the issue here is "fairness and responsibility".

You obviously do not understand why there is an opportunity cost involved in reclaiming the $6k here, so let me educate you right now. There is no telling at this point how the government will issue the $6k rebate. Perhaps it will be directly deposited into people's bank account as you suggest. Perhaps there needs to be an HKID verification process before the funds will be issued. But which account will the money be deposited into? At the very least, the HK citizen need to let the SAR government know. The steps that the person must take, the time that he needs to spend on informing the government, etc. These are his opportunity costs because he could have spend that time on doing something else.

I am certainly not that smart, but know that I am at least smarter than you think, and I am most certainly smarter than you are. Then again, being smarter than you is probably not that hard a thing to achieve since you are pretty much an idiot.

If you were eligible for the $6k, how you spend that money is entirely your choice. But if you do spend it on a nice meal, I'm sure part of the costs would go towards the wages of the poor.

-Lik

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-3-4 01:28

ut at the end of the day, social responsibility is part of the equation in ensuring fairness, but the reverse is not true. What that means is, by claiming that you believe the core issue here is "social responsibility", you are really agreeing with me that the core of the issue here is "fairness and responsibility".
Lik 發表於 2011-3-3 22:51

First, if you do not understand what I mean, then just ask me and I will explain it again for the sake of you idiot.

Second, tell us what is the relationship between "social responsibility" and "fairness & equality" by your definition?

Third, what is the role of government in the society today? Do you need me to give you hint? If you are smart as you claimed, you should be able to understand what I mean and why I asked this question.

Show us how smart you are.

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-3-4 10:07

STFU la, rocky dude. The only fxxking thing you know is ask, ask, and ask. 99 times out of 100, that's the only thing you do. If you think I will waste 15 minutes answering the stupid questions that you asked in 1, think again.

Until you're ready to do some 15 minute explanation on your part, you can keep yapping alway all by yourself.

-Lik

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-3-4 11:17

STFU la, rocky dude. The only fxxking thing you know is ask, ask, and ask. 99 times out of 100, that ...
Lik 發表於 2011-3-4 10:07

So why doesn't Canada learn from Hong Kong and give out cash to help the poor now?
Just answer this question, you coward.

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-3-4 11:41

So why doesn't Canada learn from Hong Kong and give out cash to help the poor now?
Just answer thi ...
peter236 發表於 2011-3-4 11:17

撚樣，

加拿大係行福利主意嘅國家。你竟然夠膽死攞會照顧自己國民嘅加拿大同一個接近去到叫你自生自滅、由得你死、弱肉強食嘅香港比較？戇撚鳩...

而且仲要同一段說話 copy and paste 四次...五毛灌水同表現無恥嘅能力真係冠絕全球。

-力

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-3-4 12:39

本帖最後由 peter236 於 2011-3-4 12:44 編輯

撚樣，

加拿大係行福利主意嘅國家。你竟然夠膽死攞會照顧自己國民嘅加拿大同一個接近去到叫你自生自滅、 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-3-4 11:41

hahaha, 無恥Lik, I just want to make sure you read my questions, and there is no way you can pretend not to see them.

Canada is a high tax country, but still has high debt. If Canada wants to "look after" the people in the long term, then it should stop borrowing money and reduce the public debt.
You dare not talk about Canada/US/UK huge public debt and the coming bankruptcy.

Hong Kong is low tax, and still has big surplus which is good long term.

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2011-3-4 12:56

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-3-4 13:23 編輯

回復 74# peter236

If population is still growing and the GDP growth rate is faster than the debt increase, the situation is not that bad...

But as you said, I agree that a surplus budget is always better than a deficit budget in the long run... A better resource allocation to stop wasting should be the way to go.

Compared to HK and Canada, I feel like Canada better as it has more potential to growth in a healthier way.

In HK, productivity relies heavily and solely on human captials, this type of system can ultimately crashed if there is no buffer between the rich and the poor. The system does not know how to regulate itself without rules/regulations applied, so sad...

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-3-4 15:37

本帖最後由 peter236 於 2011-3-4 15:39 編輯

回復 peter236

If population is still growing and the GDP growth rate is faster than the debt incr ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-3-4 12:56

The thing Canada is good at is the natural resources, which Hong kong does not have. So you can't blame HK for relying on human captials.
Again, Canada will do relatively well as long as booming China is buying a lot of natural resources.

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2011-3-4 15:40

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-3-4 15:58 編輯

回復 76# peter236

Same as HK and everywhere around the world, we need the $$$ from China.

I'm not blaming HK to rely heavily on human capital, I just don't feel like the HK SAR government has done something to improve the allocation of human resources. Having fight for that many years finally got a minimum wages bill to start at $28/hr, quite ASTONISHING... Is it supposed to be the wages 10 years ago?

Do you have any good idea how to solve the "in-work poverty" problem?

歡迎光臨溫哥華老友記討論區 (http://www.loyaukee.com/forum/)