Sing Pao 11.3.77
Tin Tin Yat Po 11.3.77
Hong Kong Times 11.3.77
Hong Kong Daily News 11.3.77
Ming Pao Evening News 10.3.77
Ming Pao Evening News 8.3.77
PART II
Extracts from Editorials
५
Zile
Dredget
FURTHER COMMENTS ON THE 1977/78 BUDGET
Expanded Public Assistance Scheme
The revised scheme will not only assist those people who are in financial difficulties but will help promote social stability.
We feel that public assistance must be set at a level necessary for basic subsistence, otherwise the whole scheme will be a waste of effort. The level of public assistance should not be set too low but should be based on the actual cost of living.
A sound social welfare system will instill a sense of belonging into the people of Hong Kong and make taxpayers more willing to pay their dues.
Hong Kong is a very special place where there is a wide gap between the rich and the poor. Only with improved social services will we find the task of achieving social stability easier.
The expanded public assistance scheme should be welcomed by the public.
A truly effective social welfare system was implemented in Hong Kong three to five years ago but progress has admittedly been fast. This reflects that the authorities have devoted a great deal of effort to this field.
A virtue of the Chinese people is that unlike foreigners, they don't want to live on hand-outs if they can help it. Therefore, the authorities should try their best to help the unemployed, and should not put too many restrictions on their applications for assistance.
We believe the Government would achieve more positive results and at the same time save a lot of trouble if instead of using the human and financial resources and the time on unemployment benefits, it expended these on finding jobs for the unemployed.
Undeniably, everyone has a certain degree of idleness . . . and this part of human nature shows there is danger that provision of unemployment benefits will discourage initiative and hard work.
Personal Allowance
In view of inflation, the personal allowance for salaries tax should have been raised from $10,000 to $12,500 a long time ago. No conditions should have been attached to this belated decision.
In a society suffering from inflation, each taxpayer will have to pay more and more taxes because of the progressive tax system.
If a man's pay rise every year just manages to offset the rate of inflation, his purchasing power will not have increased even after 10 years. But he will have to pay more taxes because "on the surface he is earning more".
The Government will be the real beneficiary in such a situation. It will sit back and reap the profits.