Poverty in the midst of affluence : how Hong Kong mismanaged its prosperity / / Leo F. Goodstadt

• Record Nr.: UNINA9910462964603321
• Autore: Goodstadt Leo F.
• Pubbl/distr/stampa: Hong Kong : , : Hong Kong University Press, , [2013]; ©2013
• ISBN: 988-8268-43-0; 988-8180-93-2
• Descrizione fisica: 1 online resource (275 p.)
• Disciplina: 330.95125
• Soggetti: Poverty - China - Hong Kong; Cost and standard of living - China - Hong Kong; Electronic books.; Hong Kong (China) Economic conditions
• Lingua di pubblicazione: Inglese
• Formato: Materiale a stampa
• Livello bibliografico: Monografia
• Note generali: Description based upon print version of record.
• Nota di bibliografia: Includes bibliographical references and index.
• Nota di contenuto: Preface -- Introduction : pain, panic and poverty -- Crisis economics : private profits, public pain -- The business of government : less politics, no welfare -- Housing: unending crisis -- Social reforms : too little, too late -- Social reforms : the new poverty -- The undeserving poor -- An absence of advocates : how the 'welfare' lobby -- Lost its voice -- Conclusions : history repeats itself -- Bibliography -- Index.
• Sommario/riassunto: Hong Kong is among the richest cities in the world. Yet over the past 15 years living conditions for the average family have deteriorated despite a robust economy, ample budget surpluses and record labor productivity. Successive governments have been reluctant to invest in services for the elderly, the disabled, the long-term sick, and the poor, while education has become more elitist. The political system has helped to entrench a mistaken consensus that social spending is a threat to financial stability and economic prosperity. In this trenchant attack on government mismanagement, Leo Goodstadt traces how officials have created a "new poverty" in Hong Kong and argues that their misguided policies are both a legacy of the colonial era and a deliberate choice by modern governments -- not the result of ; economic crises. This book is highly relevant to the continuing debate about the efficiency of market forces in solving welfare "problems" and the claims put forward for the superiority of the private sector in meeting housing, health and educational needs.