Is Hong Kong Really The Libertarian Paradise Libertarians Claim It To Be?

[ZiprHead]

(clipped prom political humor images posted by you know who)



Hong Kong has government provided public transportation (not all), socialized healthcare (not just socialized health insurance), every bit of land is owned by the government and the government controls the rental rates.

Pollution has been a problem there and the government is now stepping in to alleviate that problem.

The government is heavily involved in taxation, land use, money supply, and the minimum wage.

So why is it considered a Libertarian paradise?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

(clipped prom political humor images posted by you know who)

View attachment 25169

Hong Kong has government provided public transportation (not all), socialized healthcare (not just socialized health insurance), every bit of land is owned by the government and the government controls the rental rates.

Pollution has been a problem there and the government is now stepping in to alleviate that problem.

The government is heavily involved in taxation, land use, money supply, and the minimum wage.

So why is it considered a Libertarian paradise?

It is libertarian in comparison to the rest of China. That's about it.

 

[Harry Bosch]

(clipped prom political humor images posted by you know who)

View attachment 25169

Hong Kong has government provided public transportation (not all), socialized healthcare (not just socialized health insurance), every bit of land is owned by the government and the government controls the rental rates.

Pollution has been a problem there and the government is now stepping in to alleviate that problem.

The government is heavily involved in taxation, land use, money supply, and the minimum wage.

So why is it considered a Libertarian paradise?

Well, it was relatively libertarian before China took it over. Not any more!

 

[Elixir]

Well, it was relatively libertarian before China took it over. Not any more!

Yabut it's still the best libertardians can come up with.
Well no - their best is to call Venezuela an example of "socialism".

 

[Metaphor]

If I were an Uighur Muslim, I know which I'd pick between Hong Kong and China.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

If I were an Uighur Muslim, I know which I'd pick between Hong Kong and China.

If I were anyone but the OP, I know which I'd pick.

There have been a lot of changes to Hong Kong since it was ceded back to mainland China, but it wasn't the policies of China that made Hong Kong an economic powerhouse.

 

[laughing dog]

From the responses in this thread, one would glean that a libertarian paradise is anywhere that is not as repressive as China.

 

[Elixir]

From the responses in this thread, one would glean that a libertarian paradise is anywhere that is not as repressive as China.

Except Norway or Venezuela.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Why do people keep repeating the fantasy that Scandinavia is Socialist?

 

[DBT]

Why do people keep repeating the fantasy that Scandinavia is Socialist?

Most, if not all, western democracies are a blend of capitalism and socialism.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Why do people keep repeating the fantasy that Scandinavia is Socialist?

Most, if not all, western democracies are a blend of capitalism and socialism.

That's called a "Mixed Economy". They also include Keynesianism, Monetarism, and Welfarism.

 

[marc]

Why do people keep repeating the fantasy that Scandinavia is Socialist?

Pretty much every proposed policy that conservatives/libertarians say is extreme socialism and will lead to economic disaster either exists in Scandinavia, or their policies go much further than the ones proposed here.

 

[DBT]

Why do people keep repeating the fantasy that Scandinavia is Socialist?

Most, if not all, western democracies are a blend of capitalism and socialism.

That's called a "Mixed Economy". They also include Keynesianism, Monetarism, and Welfarism.

''Welfareinsm'' being a form of socialism. What we call 'Socialism' may take several different forms. Sometimes what we label 'Socialism' not being Socialism at all.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

''Welfareinsm'' being a form of socialism. What we call 'Socialism' may take several different forms. Sometimes what we label 'Socialism' not being Socialism at all.

Redistribution of wealth, otherwise called a generous social safety net, is not collective ownership of the means of production.

Whether those policies have worked as well as some claim is a different issue.

Why do people keep repeating the fantasy that Scandinavia is Socialist?

Pretty much every proposed policy that conservatives/libertarians say is extreme socialism and will lead to economic disaster either exists in Scandinavia, or their policies go much further than the ones proposed here.

If a critic of redistribution uses the word "socialism" in their criticism, people like you jump in to say "oh no, you can't call it socialism, because it isn't collective ownership of the means of production."

If a fan of redistribution uses the word "socialism" in their praise, people like you jump in to say "damn right that is socialism".

Based on that, can I assume you define "socialism" not in terms of the policies it promotes, but only if the person using it is doing to in a positive manner? Is "socialism" not a policy but simply a synonym for "I like it and think it is good"?

 

[Derec]

Well no - their best is to call Venezuela an example of "socialism".

Well it's certainly more of an example of actually existing socialism than the capitalist countries like Sweden and Denmark.

 

[Derec]

Why do people keep repeating the fantasy that Scandinavia is Socialist?

Most, if not all, western democracies are a blend of capitalism and socialism.

I would not call it a blend exactly. They are merely capitalist countries with a strong safety net.

 

[DBT]

Why do people keep repeating the fantasy that Scandinavia is Socialist?

Most, if not all, western democracies are a blend of capitalism and socialism.

I would not call it a blend exactly. They are merely capitalist countries with a strong safety net.

That safety net entails socialist Ideals of collective welfare. Which does not mean that western democracies are Socialist in true sense of the term, which I did not say or claim, only that there are values in common between them, a blend. It was the state (public money) that bailed out private industry, the banks etc, during the GFC, for example.

 

[Derec]

That safety net entails socialist Ideals of collective welfare. Which does not mean that western democracies are Socialist in true sense of the term, which I did not say or claim, only that there are values in common between them, a blend. It was the state (public money) that bailed out private industry, the banks etc, during the GFC, for example.

Socialism is about public ownership of means of production. Not really about welfare.
Why is it so important for some to use the word "socialism" when they mean "social democracy"?

 

[DBT]

That safety net entails socialist Ideals of collective welfare. Which does not mean that western democracies are Socialist in true sense of the term, which I did not say or claim, only that there are values in common between them, a blend. It was the state (public money) that bailed out private industry, the banks etc, during the GFC, for example.

Socialism is about public ownership of means of production. Not really about welfare.
Why is it so important for some to use the word "socialism" when they mean "social democracy"?

Socialism entails more than just it's defining element of public ownership of the means of production....which itself is meant as a form of public welfare. There are also different forms and flavours of socialism.

To add:

Different types of socialism

''Socialism is an economic and political ideology concerned with greater equality of distribution and proposing solutions which involve greater co-operation and social solutions. Socialism is often associated with the concept of state ownership of the means of production. The aim is to run industry in the interests of society rather than in the interests of a few property owners. However, there are many variants of socialism from the Command economy of State-Communism (e.g. Soviet Union) to libertarian socialism which advocates voluntary councils of workers taking responsibility for their local business.''

One example being given:


Democratic socialism

Democratic socialism differs from state communism in that the state is not all powerful, and the political system remains democratic. Democratic socialism is associated with the Socialist parties of western Europe. They generally propose a mixed economy – with state ownership of key industries, like coal, electricity, water and gas, but allow private enterprise to operate in the rest of the economy. Democratic socialism proposes a progressive tax system to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor – through the provisions of a welfare state. Democratic socialism is often associated with the Nordic countries – where the government takes approximately 50% of GDP, but also there is thriving market economy, giving a high standard of living.

 

[ruby sparks]

Why is it so important for some to use the word "socialism" when they mean "social democracy"?

Hey, in those countries, the word socialism did not become an automatic bogeyman pejorative the way it did in your country, where the rich and powerful endlessly brainwashed people with exaggerated scare stories so that they could fool them into thinking that a system which fosters obscene wealth inequalities and social injustices is a good thing. In those countries, they have this thing called society. You can google it.