Hello Hamoon, <<Hong Kong democracy>> ... eh, well, uhm, we do not actually have a one for one voting system, and as the economy is the freest in the world when judged by your heritage foundation, meaning almost perfect, i suspect a one for one system that attempts improvements will, by inference, likely mess up perfection, even if only by enabling electoral-enabled theft.
As to ... <<don't be so quick to forget that it was due to protections of Britain and the US that prevented the communist chinese from seizing the colony and providing you the ability to have the such a free economy>>
... I am confused, because by your logic, China will do China wants to do, and so I would have thought what Britain, the colonial master, and its master, the US wants for HK would carry no weight. If so, it then must be because China wants the best for HK, which then of course deserves a vote from me if I had one.
Which way is it?
When Maurice and you make up your collective mind about Hong Kong's freedom and Tibet's analog, let me know.
Chugs, J |
