Talk:Economy of Hong Kong

Debate

One can debate this point. Most regions of China do not have the control over land sales or labor immigration that the HKSAR has.

but compared to the rest of the People's Republic of China it has a very free economy.

That is also debatable. Hong Kong is a very attractive place to do business because it has good clean courts and a legal system which is absent from the rest of the PRC. A lot depends on what you mean by "free" but if you mean "absence of government" then this doesn't hold. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roadrunner (talk • contribs) 15:56, 11 September 2007 (UTC) Roadrunner 04:10, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Something does not have to be completely free to be more free than something else. Compared to the rest of the world Hong Kong has a very free market. Usually by "free-market" people mean a low amount of coercion either by the government or by criminals. So having a good legal system is usually required to have a free market. Most think tanks rate Hong Kong as one of the freest economies in the world, if not the freest. --Jayson Virissimo (talk) 06:02, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

This is strongly POV-- "The Economy of Hong Kong is widely believed, and some argue incorrectly, to be the most economically free in the world." I am a professional economist based in HK for the past 23 years, and I can't think of a single reliable source that would argue the perception of economic freedom is incorrect. -- DOR (HK) Dec 14, 2007

Contradiction

Hon

"The economy of Hong Kong has often been cited by people such as Milton Friedman and the Cato Institute as an example of the benefits of laissez-faire capitalism. However, many analysts believe that this characterization of the Hong Kong economy is not entirely accurate"

"However" points to a contradiction, while there isn't any: HK can be an example of the benefits of laissez-faire capitalism without being the perfect model. The words "the benefits of" should be removed to eliminate the contradiction. (Ori)

Per capita GDP

GDP per capita seems way too high. Anyone have a source on this info? novacatz 01:46, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

GDP per capita was HK$215,006 in 2006, equal to US$27,565. Source: http://www.censtatd.gov.hk/hong_kong_statistics/statistical_tables/index.jsp?charsetID=1&subjectID=12&tableID=030 --- DOR (HK) 17 Aug 2007

Similar results are shown in the CIA World Factbook. https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2004.html Rinke 03:25, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Macro-economic trend

I deleted the last line, 2008, as there is no reference to this being a forecast nor any citation. I refrained from extensively rewriting the entire table on issues such as definitions ("real GDP" in what currency, on what basis, etc), but it is clearly a problem. -- DOR (HK) Dec 14, 2007

History

I omitted the reference to Taiwan and the cultural revolution as both irrelevant and inaccurate. We already point to the hands-off approach pre-GPCR in Hong Kong, and Taiwan certainly would not be considered in the same laissez-faire class. Footnote also adjusted.(deleted material: "This model was developed in Hong Kong and Taiwan as a response to analyzing the cultural revolution effect in China. The Maoist era forecasted the production of steel, and the inability to produce led to the immediate collapse of the economy[5].") -- DOR (HK) Dec 14, 2007

GDP data also updated, as per new Chained 2005 national accounts. http://www.censtatd.gov.hk/hong_kong_statistics/statistical_tables/index.jsp?charsetID=1&subjectID=12&tableID=032 -- DOR (HK) Dec 14, 2007

Employment in Hong Kong

I have just flagged the Employment in Hong Kong article for copyright violation. It is an almost complete verbatim lift from [1]. I have noticed that the article is linked to various Hong Kong-related articles, including the Hong Kong featured article, via the Economy of Hong Kong navbox. Should a re-write be necessary, some local community help would be welcome and appreciated. Luke! 08:05, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

CIA factbook

We don't have to copy CIA Factbook's structure exactly you know.....67.0.66.220 04:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Transformation

It is unclear what the second table is measuring: GDP? If so, we have already established that data before 1971 was based on trade. --- DOR (HK) 17 Aug 2007

Present

It is unclear what point is being made in comparing a city to a continent-sized economy. A more useful comparison would be with New York City, London or even Singapore. --- DOR (HK) 17 Aug 2007

Intro Needs Work

"The Economy of Hong Kong is widely believed, and some argue incorrectly, to be the most economically free in the world. It has often been cited by economists such as Milton Friedman and the Cato Institute as an example of the benefits of laissez-faire capitalism. While the government, both under British and PRC rule, has occasionally intervened in the economy, the free market policy of Positive non-interventionism espoused by former financial secretary John James Cowperthwaite still largely drives economic policy today. It has ranked as the world's freest economy in the Index of Economic Freedom for 13 consecutive years, since the inception of the index in 1995[1][2]. It also places first in the Economic Freedom of the World Report.

However, critics of the view of Hong Kong as a laissez-faire capitalist state point out several flaws in this view of this region's economy. It is argued that the government has intervened to create economic institutions such as the Hong Kong Stock Market and has been involved in massive public works and extensive social welfare spending. All land in Hong Kong is owned by the government and leased to private users. By restricting the sale of land leases, the Hong Kong government keeps the price of land at what some would say are artifically high prices and this allows the government to support public spending with a low tax rate.[1]"

This doesn't really make any sense. Milton Friedman never said that Hong Kong was a perfect laissez-faire economy. He said it was the MOST laissez-faire. This simply means it is more laissez-faire than other comparable economies. This is an idea that is almost universally supported by mainstream economists(it was even mentioned in my undergraduate textbook). This whole section contradicts itself and doesn't really make a valid point either. Does anyone object to a rewrite of the intro? --Jayson Virissimo 19:19, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

It does not say perfect laissez-faire economy in the article. Are you reading an old revision? Benjwong 03:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

The problem was that the second paragraph contained a straw-man because it claimed critics disagree with people who believe Hong Kong is a laissez-faire capitalist city. No one ever said it was completely laissez-faire, simply that it was the "most" laissez-faire. I went ahead and fixed the paragraph. If anyone doesn't like the new wording let me know on the talk page. Thanks. --Jayson Virissimo (talk) 09:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Economic Freedom

"The Economy of Hong Kong is widely believed, and some argue incorrectly, to be the most economically free in the world."

This seems extraordinarily POV on a subjective issue. Furthermore a number of respected sources argue it is precisely that... which sources suggest it isn't the most economically free in the world? It isn't perfect laissez faire capitalism and it would certainly be false to assert that, but I'm unsure as to which economy is more free. At any rate unless someone brings up a good argument against such an edit, I intend to change the line to, "The Economy of Hong Kong is widely believed to be the most economically free in the world" in the near future. This statement is objectively true and seems more in line with expert consensus than the current version. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.27.147.228 (talk) 14:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)