范徐的所謂高企民望何來?

1.是哪些階層的人支持她?
--------------
2.范徐：基本法23條立法並非洪水猛獸
更揚言上任後會重視基本法23條
卻仍然表示擁有高企民望,不擔心影響
--------------
3. 假設23條立法後, 市民討論政府時意見不合, 發生尋釁滋事vs言論自由時, 存在予盾?
--------------
4. 你對"五十年不變"有何看法?
--------------
5. 對比曾叔叔與董伯伯後, 不少人直言: 現在才知道董伯伯的好。
你認為下一屆特首上任後, 會出現: "現在才知曾叔叔的好。" 的言論嗎?
-------------------------------------------
6. 我的看法
香港現時的狀況, 大慨是"貧者愈貧,富者愈富"
甚至有多少人對政治時事一慨不理, 但求兩餐溫飽
若所有人都對政治時事不關心, 我們豈不是像羊群一樣被養在欄中任人魚肉?
23條立法我是積極反對的, 上街活動我也有抽時間參加
但若然全港700萬人只有上街那50萬人關心時事(甚至有些幕後人士) 那剩下的500餘萬人口是怎麼的? 成為中共的盲目支持者?還是成為後知後覺黨?
吐糟一點說, 政府真的很窩囊, 最底工資不但沒有保障基層市民, 甚至搗爛他們的飯碗
也許我不是高官我不明白他們的苦處~
討論一下吧

如果向那些大企業開刀，迫他們對工人福利一些，不要經常加價，建一些一般人負擔也起的樓，就不會有那麼多怨氣，不過那些大企業沒有什麼良心，只會賺到盡，榨乾一般平民的錢，所以才有那麼多怨氣。政府硬定條例迫使大企業幹好一些嘛...我怕過不到立法會一關。

...其實最大問題是，香港經濟甚至是政府的庫房收入也是那些大企業托起的，硬來的話股市分分鐘會倒下，政府也可能入不敷出，所以政府才不敢硬來...

最低工資 < 我暫時覺得是那些為罵政府而罵政府「報紙」所「創造」出來的事實，現在暫時看來最低工資搗爛飯碗的情況其實很少，但是被那些「報紙」唱大。我要用引號括著「報紙」二字因為那些已經不是報紙，已淪為「故事紙」了

本篇文章已被 耒戈氏 於 May 28 2011, 13:09 編輯過

既然說到23條......

行為先不說，至少這方面的言論在香港是大把大把的存在，很多人是從心底希望中共完蛋的。某些人習慣把「分裂國家、煽動叛亂、顛覆中央人民政府」當成他們的「言論自由」，對23條自然心懷極大的抵觸。

這部分恐怕也會讓某些人十分不安。

我覺得要是幾百萬人裡找不出任何聲音懷念某一屆特首，那才奇怪。

如果你覺得香港現在的問題癥結在於23條或者說如何擺脫中央箝制維護自由這些方面，那我也沒什麼好說的。

在我看來，23條的問題解決與否，其政治象徵意義要大於法律本身的意義。盡快通過也好，繼續拖著也好，其實影響不了國家大局，也改變不了香港的現狀，只是這類話題拖得越久，便越是會分散人們的注意力。若港人真的想要改變甚麼，恐怕首先需要更加務實一些，不要總是好高騖遠地爭意識形態，占道德高地(比如平反六四，聲援民運，反對一黨專政等等，經常被一些政治黨派跟其他議題綑綁在一起，形成一個整體的政治價值觀)，那些議題也許重要，但關心與了解是兩回事，後者需要知識與經驗的累積，無法靠一些臉譜化的口號認知而速成。如果能暫時放下這方面的分歧，撇除那些附加價值觀的影響，把焦點集中到民生經濟和本土政治議題之上，香港的民主政治作為不同階層之間的利益協商機制，大概會更有效。從這個角度看來，如果有更多的人不把23條立法視為洪水猛獸，確實是一件好事。

我舉手!
我認為董建華是麥理浩二世，如果董建華有麥理浩同樣的獨裁權力只會做得比麥理浩更好。
同樣道理用現在耳完的標準要找麥理浩碴都很容易

我舉手!
我認為董建華是麥理浩二世，如果董建華有麥理浩同樣的獨裁權力只會做得比麥理浩更好。
同樣道理用現在耳完的標準要找麥理浩碴都很容易

現在掌握香港政治權力的是中共/北京，但中共恐怕不了解香港民情，或沒有心/能力去調整香港產業結構和人口/住房問題，從這衍生的民怨恐怕不是中共樂見的。至於董建華也好，曾叔叔也好，或這個標題上的范徐也好，在大方向上的政令都要聽中央的，換不同的人選其實也不會有分別。只是純以立場的consistency(以前不會有人覺得范徐要當特首的話會推23條吧)和識見(vs唐唐)來說，我認為梁振英來操盤中央鞭長莫及的細務是最好的。就像這topic所說的，范徐已經暗示要推行23條，唐英年也表示香港除了李嘉誠外七百萬人都是廢渣了。相比之下，梁振英親左親中的立場，可說不值一晒了。當然，反過來說，我也有想過這種思考模式其實正是中共所希望的，可能之前久未表態的范徐和一向表現條屌fing的唐英年，都只是幌子也說不定。

本篇文章已被 茶水小妹蘋兒 於 May 29 2011, 05:18 編輯過

想起當年香港民衆沒投過一票曾蔭權卻在街上向大家謝票

實在有點不倫不類

我舉手!
我認為董建華是麥理浩二世，如果董建華有麥理浩同樣的獨裁權力只會做得比麥理浩更好。
同樣道理用現在耳完的標準要找麥理浩碴都很容易

現在掌握香港政治權力的是中共/北京，但中共恐怕不了解香港民情，或沒有心/能力去調整香港產業結構和人口/住房問題，從這衍生的民怨恐怕不是中共樂見的。至於董建華也好，曾叔叔也好，或這個標題上的范徐也好，在大方向上的政令都要聽中央的，換不同的人選其實也不會有分別。只是純以立場的consistency(以前不會有人覺得范徐要當特首的話會推23條吧)和識見(vs唐唐)來說，我認為梁振英來操盤中央鞭長莫及的細務是最好的。就像這topic所說的，范徐已經暗示要推行23條，唐英年也表示香港除了李嘉誠外七百萬人都是廢渣了。相比之下，梁振英親左親中的立場，可說不值一晒了。當然，反過來說，我也有想過這種思考模式其實正是中共所希望的，可能之前久未表態的范徐和一向表現條屌fing的唐英年，都只是幌子也說不定。

我現在倒是有點想梁振英當選﹐唐唐說好聽點是不知民間疾苦(是的這已經是說好聽點)﹐范太則老矣。

這點我倒要為唐澄清李+x論是被斷章取義

全文

The road to rich pickings
Chief Secretary Henry Tang has no time for the notion that property tycoons unfairly rule the roost in Hong Kong, saying that they should be held as inspirations

Henry Tang Ying-yen rejects the idea that property tycoons unfairly dominate Hong Kong.

On the contrary, the chief secretary thinks Hong Kong's most successful people should be held as inspirations.

Instead of complaining about the wealth and power of the city's richest man, Tang says, young people should ask themselves: "Why can't I become the next Li Ka-shing?"

Tang's remark was made in response to growing discontent with developers among people unable to afford their own homes because of surging prices. For them, "end property hegemony" has become a catch phrase. Hundreds of people marched last Sunday to protest about the issue. Asked if he thought such hegemony existed, Tang said: "No."

"I would not use the word `hegemony'. I would only say Hong Kong offers free and open opportunities for people to create their universe and realise their dreams," he said. "Hong Kong is a fair and open society. It is full of opportunities for those who are prepared to capture them."

Tang said the developers started small and deserved the rewards of their efforts. "Li Ka-shing, Lee Shau-kee, Kwok Tak-seng - all came from very humble beginnings," he said in reference to the founders of the Cheung Kong (SEHK: 0001), Henderson and Sun Hung Kai property empires.

"It's not as if they were born with billions ... So Hong Kong has rewarded them for their hard work," said Tang, whose family runs large textile businesses. Property developers were not the only people to get rich in Hong Kong, the chief secretary said.

"I believe property developers have a role to play in our economy ... They are just, I use the word `just', part of the business community. They have been very successful, I agree. Previous government policies have contributed to foster the build-up of very large companies. It is a fact of life.

"It is not just the property developers who are doing very well here. We have traders ... we have people who run entertainment."

Tang went on to cite examples.

"Lan Kwai Fong is not a property development project per se ... imagine if Allan Zeman decides to take his company public, that'll probably do better than Milan Station, which was 2,100 times oversubscribed. Milan Station is not a property developer. We have a lot of successful businesses out of their innovation, out of their hard work, and they are prepared to take risks with their investment and they become successful."

What about young people's increasing complaints about a lack of social mobility?

"That's a very pessimistic view of their own future," Tang said. "Bill Gates was very young. He did not even complete his college education. He became very wealthy by being innovative. Steve Jobs became very wealthy, also first-generation wealth ... We have people who can accumulate wealth if they are innovative, work hard and take risks."

Tang said every young person who complained about the success of Li Ka-shing should ask the soul-searching question: "Why can't I become the next Sasa? What can't I become the next Milan Station? Why can't I become the next Li Ka-shing?"

His comments mirrored a controversial public speech he gave in January. Speaking on the theme "Dissatisfaction of the post-'80s generation", he criticised young people for simplifying social problems by claiming government-business collusion, and warned that excessively radical protests could backfire.

Acknowledging there was a widening wealth gap in Hong Kong, the chief secretary said education and integration with the mainland economy were two keys.

"If you measure the top 10 per cent versus the bottom 10 per cent, it is widening. The reason is that we are becoming more and more of a knowledge-based economy. We have to continue to invest in education so that those who are less competitive in a knowledge-based economy can become more competitive. And we can also mitigate by further integration with the mainland."

Tang, who heads the new Community Care Fund which aims to expand assistance to the needy with government money and business-sector donations, added that the city had a safety net to ensure those most in need were taken care of.

"I believe that the nature of a net is that how many are left out depends by how tight the weave is ... I believe our safety net is becoming tighter and tighter, meaning we are helping more and more people, less and less people are dropping off the edge."

不過以香港泛政治化的環境;樣衰就是罪;講太陽在東邊升起都是錯

我那句當然是誇張，談不上是不是斷章取回來的義。至於我原本所抱持的態度，以及一般人所指責唐英年說的是"年輕人應自問為何不能成為李嘉誠"，根本就是這句

"
Instead of complaining about the wealth and power of the city's richest man, Tang says, young people should ask themselves: "Why can't I become the next Li Ka-shing?""

按此邏輯，唐英年亦應自問為何成不了李嘉誠，娶不到莊月明，坐不上香港經濟爬升的快車，巧取豪奪不到成為香港首富。一般人的指責並沒有老屈了唐英年

本篇文章已被 茶水小妹蘋兒 於 Jun 3 2011, 03:08 編輯過