Singapore lessons for HK


It’s not often a Singapore election can really be called interesting, let alone relevant to Hong Kong – but today’s is. The ruling People’s Action Party will win, partly on its own SIN-Oppositionmerits, but also because a rigged voting system and decades of media bias and legal intimidation have ensured a de-facto one-party state, with an opposition that is splintered and too amateurish-looking to credibly claim an ability to govern.

But the PAP’s majority in elections has been on a downward trend. The autocrat-technocrat rulers’ vison of the future is at odds with that of much of the people. Essentially, the PAP has come to focus on economic growth as an end in itself; the nation’s population exists to boost GDP. More and more residents in the wealthy city-state are thinking it should be the other way round – the economy exists to benefit the people.

Much of this will sound familiar to us in Hong Kong: a weak opposition, and a government that is devoted to ‘development’ and treats quality of life as a hindrance. Specifically, both populations are suffering from high prices and crowding, as their apparently demented officials try to cram more and more humans – ‘talent’ or ‘tourists’ – from outside into their limited spaces.

Both city-states are mismanaged. In Singapore, the PAP-run state harms the economy and the people’s wealth by controlling – and messing up – much of big business and savings. In Hong Kong, cartelized tycoon interests co-opted by the Communist regime in Beijing are entitled to directly plunder the economy and population.

Singaporeans’ discontent is rising at a time when social media are sharply reducing the old impact of official censorship. The result is those big turnouts at exhilarating opposition rallies. We can only hope that Hong Kong’s pro-democracy politicians might spend a few minutes away from ranting about stuff no-one cares about to watch some of these gatherings. The Singapore opposition are addressing the issues that get people angry. This is how you do it. Shut up about whether you’ll talk with Chinese officials or why some ex-member of your ‘party’ is barred from your self-absorbed little meeting – get out there and talk tourists, housing, healthcare.

To give a small example… Liberal Party top bozo Vincent Fang has hastily backtracked from his call to lift limits on the number of cans of milk powder people can carry out of Hong Kong.


A prompt Localists’ protest against Mainland traders in Sheung Shui put his demand in context: ordinary residents suffering so the ‘retail sector’ (essentially landlords) can make more money. A bunch of kids called him and his cronies out for being greedy and selfish. Where were the pro-dems? Even a South China Morning Post editorial today dares question the Cram More People In Forever mentality of the Liberal Part and our zombie bureaucrats who have proclaimed tourism a ‘pillar industry’ and thus believe they must expand it at any cost…


For a true picture of the value of mass tourism, see how Macau’s GDP has plummeted as far as Greece’s, yet Macau people have barely noticed; unemployment is as low as ever. They never saw this amazing boom in the first place. I declare the weekend open with a free idea for any economist looking for a doctoral thesis subject – they’re so hard to find these days. It is a comparison between the influx of gold and silver from the New World into Spain in the 16-17th Century and the swamping of Hong Kong with Vincent Fang’s precious Mainland tourist-shoppers today. The thesis should examine the effects of these phenomena on consumer prices and purchasing power, and to what extent the infusion of wealth is captured by a tiny elite, does more harm than good, or is even just illusory.

And here’s Amos’s take.

This entry was posted in Blog. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Singapore lessons for HK

  1. PCC says:

    “Get out there and talk tourists, housing, healthcare.” And education.

  2. gweiloeye says:

    and in other news Michael Tien extolling the reason for the stagnant improvement (to the rest of us we say declining) quality of English:

    “…Tien argued that English standards in Hong Kong were not really declining, but the weakest link – WRITING AND SPEAKING- had not improved.”

    Umm now I am lost for words.

  3. stinky foot says:

    We could go on and on about declining English standards. That must be why the bank-faker scammers hired Filipinos to cold call saying I’m from HSBC. Got a number of those.
    Your best line is: ‘Much of this will sound familiar to us in Hong Kong: a weak opposition, and a government that is devoted to ‘development’ and treats quality of life as a hindrance’.

    Does the water/lead issue prove the point? We could go on. I am still trying to get my head around this government’s risible response to a major health issue. If they cannot or will not address this issue, then I opine that if a major outbreak of infectious disease occurs again (remember SARS) this dismal gov. is not and will not be up to the mark.

  4. @gweiloeye – that only leaves listening – and that’s something Tien and his fellow politicians don’t seem to have much expertise in either – unless the voice comes from the north.

  5. Nimby says:

    Is giving & recieving a bribe/favour considered part of “Body English”?
    In that case, CY and his cohorts, particularly Eddie, are all fluent – fluent enough to pass the CCP party exams.

  6. dimuendo says:

    Munchkin Amos is fucking articulate and fucking well infomed although a little fucking frightening given his fucking obsession with fucking facts, which just possibly distracts from his fucking message by repeated use of fucking (although clearly to get up Singapora’s nose).

Comments are closed.