# Hong Kong is NOT a libertarian success story **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 12, 2009, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927 "2009-01-12T16:34:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Lantern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d26b3c/32.png) [@Lantern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lantern)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/1 "2009-01-12T16:34:51Z")
In this [post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10679355&postcount=51)in the other libertarian thread **Sam Stone** described Hong Kong as a successful experiment in laisser-faire economics. I didn’t know much about the history of Hong Kong so I decided to do some googling. It turns that the laisser-faire nature of the Hong Kong economy has been greatly exaggerated by libertarians including Milton Friedman. This short [article](http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=284&Itemid=34)makes the main point that Hong Kong in fact saw massive government intervention in three crucial areas: housing, education and health care: > [@](#): > > At one time 60 percent of the people lived in subsidized housing, mostly rented cheaply from the government, and some in Home Ownership Scheme flats, provided with cheap land and sold to lower-middle-income households. Even now that public housing has low priority and the home ownership scheme has ended, some 50 percent of the people still benefit from this massive intervention in the marketplace. > [@](#): > > Hong Kong people have also enjoyed almost free medical treatment at government clinics and hospitals. Friedman was against “free” medicine elsewhere but failed to notice it in Hong Kong. Likewise, education, at least up to the secondary level has long been almost entirely funded by the government. In other respects Hong Kong may have been relatively less interventionist but clear it wasn’t run on libertarian lines. This web-[page](http://www.infoshop.org/faq/secC12.html)makes the same case in greater detail. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/2 "2009-01-12T16:58:20Z")
Anyone who sees Hong Kong as a libertarian wonderland really ought to spend some time in the Chungking Mansions. If the lawlessness and crapitude of the ghettoes of more regulated societies can be used as evidence of the failure of the boogeyman of socialism (whether real or perceived), then Chungking Mansions says a lot about libertarian Hong Kong. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/3 "2009-01-12T17:10:02Z")
Hong Kong also illustrates one of the political pitfalls of Libertarianism. It’s all nice in theory to talk about how every individual will be sovereign and will respect the rights of every other individual because the advantages of doing so will be so obvious. But as some of us have pointed out, sometimes a group of individuals will decide it’s more advantageous to band together and impose their will on others by force of numbers. We usually talk about bandit gangs robbing individual freeholders but as a metaphor, the People’s Republic of China taking over Hong Kong works. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/4 "2009-01-12T18:10:29Z")
They also do not and can not spend any money on defence, and they live in daily fear of the Red Chinese army walking in. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/5 "2009-01-12T18:13:20Z")
I think Somalia is a far greater example of a Libertarian nation. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/6 "2009-01-12T18:34:48Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > I think Somalia is a far greater example of a Libertarian nation. That’s not really fair. Standard libertarian doctrine calls for a central government with a monopoly on force, used to provide for national defense, policing, and enforcement of contracts. Somalia is pretty much anarchy. ---
**Author:** ![History\_Mystery\_and\_the\_Wolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/53a042/32.png) [@History\_Mystery\_and\_the\_Wolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/History_Mystery_and_the_Wolf)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/7 "2009-01-13T02:29:47Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > I think Somalia is a far greater example of a Libertarian nation. More specifically Somalia is the closest example we have of an anarcho-capitalist state. And it’s shit, of course. But the interesting point is whether it is less-shit than many of the other dirt poor countries with ‘functioning’ central governments that are the fair comparisons. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/8 "2009-01-13T05:21:32Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > They also do not and can not spend any money on defence, and they live in daily fear of the Red Chinese army walking in. Could the reason they don’t spend money on defence is because the Chinese government is responsible for it? The Chinese army has been in HK ever since the handover. ---
**Author:** ![China\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/779978/32.png) [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/9 "2009-01-14T00:08:29Z")
hong kong government has an unholy alliance with the big property developers for tax revenue, has cartels in most sectors, and has massively intervened in the stock market (in 1998 under joseph yam). government housing sucks with living area per person the size of a breadbox. the spin is good abount being a model but the reality far different. i lived there 5 years in the 90’s & 90’s . ---
**Author:** ![haymarketmartyr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/35a633/32.png) [@haymarketmartyr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/haymarketmartyr)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/10 "2009-01-14T00:17:43Z")
Wait a doggone minute. You mean that pure idealistic theoretical philosophical textbook libertarianism does not translate to the real world with real people with real problems and real differences between them. I am shocked!!! Libertarianism is the biggest fraud ever put forth outside of Berni Madeof. ---
**Author:** ![Rodgers01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b19c9b/32.png) [@Rodgers01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rodgers01)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/11 "2009-01-14T06:58:29Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Anyone who sees Hong Kong as a libertarian wonderland really ought to spend some time in the Chungking Mansions. > > If the lawlessness and crapitude of the ghettoes of more regulated societies can be used as evidence of the failure of the boogeyman of socialism (whether real or perceived), then Chungking Mansions says a lot about libertarian Hong Kong. Can’t say much about the larger topic of this thread, but IME this comparison is completely bogus. Sure, Chungking is seedy and kind of dangerous, but it’s really not that terrible, and from what I saw in my many wanderings around Hong Kong, that’s about as bad as HK ever got – not to mention that Chungking is just **one building** in the whole city (most of which really _is_ amazingly clean, prosperous, and safe). I’d choose Chungking any day over the vastly more dirty, dangerous, numerous, and spreadout slums I’ve seen throughout North America and parts of Europe (or mainland China, for that matter). So if that’s the measure of the success of libertarianism vs. socialism, I say bring on the Milton Friedman. ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 12:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/12 "2009-01-14T12:06:26Z")
> [@China\_Guy](#): > > hong kong government has an unholy alliance with the big property developers for tax revenue, has cartels in most sectors, and has massively intervened in the stock market (in 1998 under joseph yam)… I second this. HK is heavily cartelised in the goods and services the residents use. In international and trading sectors it is competitive but for domestic consumption residents are the slaves of the cartels. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/13 "2009-01-14T13:30:22Z")
> [@Sevastopol](#): > > In international and trading sectors it is competitive but for domestic consumption residents are the slaves of the cartels. You sure your name isn’t Robin Grey? ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/14 "2009-01-14T13:33:11Z")
Fairly sure, yes. Why? Who is Robin Grey? ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/15 "2009-01-14T13:36:50Z")
> [@Sevastopol](#): > > Fairly sure, yes. > > Why? Who is Robin Grey? Noble House character who is a British Socialist MP out to clamp down on HK’s free market system. It’s a joke, Son! I’m a pitchin’, you ain’t a catchin’ [/end channeling Foghorn Leghorn] ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/16 "2009-01-14T13:52:40Z")
Ooops [/wet blanket] Don’t get my wrong, I’m a huge fan of HK, one of the biggest. Fan that I am, I’m not blind to its flaws. They’ve done a lot with little more than enterprise. Which incidentally is why the mainland army will will never invade: There’s nothing to conquer. Short of a direct political challenge to Beijing, that will never happen. By comparison with the other international trading cities it lacks competition laws. There’s a body with a wide remit, the ICAC to make sure government and industry don’t get too close. In HK people talk commerce and government and inevitably the absence of competition in many sectors comes up. As to that unpronounceable ideology, HK’s success vis a vis it’s political system, IMHO is only half due to the light touch of regulation. The other half is that the ideology of regulation is facultative: Regulation is there to facilitate and open pathways, not there to prevent things happening. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/17 "2009-01-14T14:57:06Z")
Hong Kong is not perfect. It’s not a worker’s paradise. But you have to compare it to other locations in Asia where markets weren’t allowed to flourish, and which instead relied on government planning and heavy regulation of trade and commerce. Is there any doubt that Hong Kong was vastly more successful than any other country in the region, and that the standard of living was much better in Hong Kong than anywhere else in the region? You can take the same measuring stick and compare other countries before and after they allowed markets to work. Singapore is not heaven on earth, but compare it with the worker’s paradise of Vietnam, especially before Vietnam embarked on its own market liberalization program. Asia is a much, much wealthier continent today than it was 30 years ago. And without exception, the various countries in the area saw their economies boom and their standards of living rise in proportion to how many regulations and central plans they dropped and how much control they gave to the market. ---
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/18 "2009-01-14T15:16:06Z")
> [@Gorsnak](#): > > That’s not really fair. Standard libertarian doctrine calls for a central government with a monopoly on force, used to provide for national defense, policing, and enforcement of contracts. Somalia is pretty much anarchy. So even Libertarians believe that certain things (national defense, police, and contracts–presumably including property) should be socialized. Bunch of socialists wimps imposing their beliefs on everyone whether they want it or not! Seriously, the logic escapes me of deciding, for example, that protection of the person from other persons should be socialized but iit is evil to protect them from bacteria, viruses, bodily decay, etc. Of course I live in the Socialist Republic of Canuckistan. ---
**Author:** ![MichaelQReilly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@MichaelQReilly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelQReilly)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/19 "2009-01-14T15:28:55Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Hong Kong is not perfect. It’s not a worker’s paradise. But you have to compare it to other locations in Asia where markets weren’t allowed to flourish, and which instead relied on government planning and heavy regulation of trade and commerce. Is there any doubt that Hong Kong was vastly more successful than any other country in the region, and that the standard of living was much better in Hong Kong than anywhere else in the region? > > You can take the same measuring stick and compare other countries before and after they allowed markets to work. Singapore is not heaven on earth, but compare it with the worker’s paradise of Vietnam, especially before Vietnam embarked on its own market liberalization program. > > Asia is a much, much wealthier continent today than it was 30 years ago. And without exception, the various countries in the area saw their economies boom and their standards of living rise in proportion to how many regulations and central plans they dropped and how much control they gave to the market. Yeah, but so what. No one is arguing that free markets and capitalism aren’t a good thing. We are arguing against the deification of them that libertarians engage in. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927/20 "2009-01-14T16:27:40Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > Could the reason they don’t spend money on defence is because the Chinese government is responsible for it? The Chinese army has been in HK ever since the handover. This is like the Nazi Government being responsible for the Defence of Denmark in WWII. It’s an unwelcome foriegn army, it’s not there for their protection. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hong-kong-is-not-a-libertarian-success-story/480927.md?page=2)