I think buying back the ownership of those 3 cross-harbour is feasible (providing the purchase price is reasonable) and letting management privatized. This way not only lower the cost pressure of other public transits but also maintains a stable profit margin. It's just politically risky... It's quite a win-win-win condition between the present owner, the government and the public.
BTW, IMO I don't like the idea of privatization on major traffic route like bridges, highways or tunnels... That should be the asset belong to all the general public.
其實我響 post #2已經基本上講晒今次份財政預算案有幾不濟,但我想再講吓政府dum$6000入強積金呢個問題。
...
叫你派錢就係等啲小市民最少都有多少彈藥來保住自己嘅民生、抗吓出面嘅通脹。其實講真,我絕對相信港府如果夠薑買起三條隧道、國有化巴士公司,淨係呢度已經可以大減市民嘅交通費同商戶嘅運輸費用。再買起埋領匯嘅話仲可以令少商戶有返啲生存空間。但你個特衰政府就保守同看守到不得了,對民間一無所知,害死香港同香港人。成班狗官真係唔死都無用!
Lik 發表於 2011-2-25 10:39
Hong Kong government will not buy the tunnels and the bus companies. Why don't you say they should buy the banks, telecom companies supermarkets and all the restaurants?
Just nonsense crap from you again.
其實我響 post #2已經基本上講晒今次份財政預算案有幾不濟,但我想再講吓政府dum$6000入強積金呢個問題。
所謂嘅派錢:注$6000入佢地嘅強積金戶口。香港人真係要再一次咁多謝你呀!我今日已經窮到山窮水盡,就來連飯都無得開,但係強積金就要65歲先有得攞。我未夠65已經死Q咗啦?再者,香港強積金嘅管理費係全世界嘅基金之中最高嘅一群,而自強積金實施已來,絕大部份嘅人嘅強積金都係蝕錢嘅。但你特衰政府卻偏偏要繼續泵多啲錢入去,咁唔係益基金公司同大鱷,仲可以係啲乜?
Lik 發表於 2011-2-23 10:47