Board logo

標題: 訂最低工資 時薪33至35元 [打印本頁]
作者: 至尊豪庭9    時間: 2008-10-5 10:09     標題: 訂最低工資 時薪33至35元

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: peninsula    時間: 2008-10-5 11:18

引用:
原帖由 至尊豪庭9 於 2008-10-5 10:09 發表
薪2 ...
Terrible. Too low!
作者: Rainybreeze    時間: 2008-10-5 23:41

$33一個鐘, 一日做十個鐘, 一個月做廿四日, 月薪 = $7,920, OK嗎?
作者: public59    時間: 2008-10-6 09:17

引用:
原帖由 Rainybreeze 於 2008-10-5 23:41 發表
$33一個鐘, 一日做十個鐘, 一個月做廿四日, 月薪 = $7,920, OK嗎?
沒有絕對answer. 但以保安員及清潔工人來說, 應該是OK.
作者: moxfactor    時間: 2008-10-6 18:33

"不可低於綜援水平"

冇人覺得Ｄ拎綜援既拎得太多, 要用綜援來比較最低工資而唔係倒番轉?

冇明確殘疾(體能或心理), 長期病患或低於65歲根本唔應該可以申請綜援.

有手有腳既乞丐唔應該當作人類處理.  夜班普通住宅大廈既保安(唔使點做野嗰種) 都開價$8000.  冇工開係自己攞嚟, 呢D廢物冇權問政府攞錢.
作者: 至尊豪庭9    時間: 2008-10-6 19:19

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: 至尊豪庭9    時間: 2008-10-6 19:25

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: 至尊豪庭9    時間: 2008-10-6 19:28

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: 至尊豪庭9    時間: 2008-10-6 19:31

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: peninsula    時間: 2008-10-6 21:40

引用:
原帖由 至尊豪庭9 於 2008-10-6 19:19 發表
傾緊,唔夠可以加,唔好心急!
OK la - start from a base first.
作者: Rainybreeze    時間: 2008-10-7 01:42

引用:
原帖由 至尊豪庭9 於 2008-10-6 19:25 發表

一日十粒鐘?你當人係黑奴呀?你唔好話一日十八粒鐘,合理每日八粒(包食飯時間)廿六日,得個6864都唔係高啦!!
哦, 一日十粒鐘, 你就先入為主唔連飯鐘同休息, 就係黑奴.

我都當長短周, 你就要全長. 喂, 美國同祖國都係四十小時一周. 其餘加班另計. 祖國仲定明每星期最少要有一日休息.
你講野咁大聲, 要跟咩規矩, 你講清楚喇.
講時講, 你做邊行, 如果係會計就精彩.
作者: kcpw0n    時間: 2008-10-7 02:42

引用:
原帖由 Rainybreeze 於 2008-10-7 01:42 發表


哦, 一日十粒鐘, 你就先入為主唔連飯鐘同休息, 就係黑奴.

我都當長短周, 你就要全長. 喂, 美國同祖國都係四十小時一周. 其餘加班另計. 祖國仲定明每星期最少要有一日休息.
你講野咁大聲, 要跟咩規矩, 你講 ...

講時講, 你做邊行, 如果係會計就精彩.


會計就應該唔係,佢叫豪廷9,咁應該同大廈~看門或
食蕉有關掛 (估吓啫)
作者: CAB    時間: 2008-10-7 04:27

Funny...d公司講紧炒人

and these people are asking for min. wages....
作者: public59    時間: 2008-10-7 12:05

引用:
原帖由 至尊豪庭9 於 2008-10-6 19:28 發表

唔OK,8小時一日(包食飯時間)26日,8500蚊(唔計扣強積金)就OK!
用你這標淮, 現時全港薪酬結構都要大改.

現時, 很多文職員工, 都是7K to 8K (未扣強積金), 工時也大多超過9小時, 加班沒錢補, 特別是會計行業
作者: CAB    時間: 2008-10-7 13:27

他们要争取的东西，足足迟了一个经济循环！
作者: peninsula    時間: 2008-10-7 13:40

引用:
原帖由 CAB 於 2008-10-7 04:27 發表
Funny...d公司講紧炒人
and these people are asking for min. wages....
2 different issues!
作者: CAB    時間: 2008-10-7 13:54

but better ask for 失业保障 now。

政府跟企业一齐减肥，炒左班副局长，政治助理 （又”副“又”助理“，单是个名已经话俾你知是冗员！），用来做失业救济金！
作者: 毛球    時間: 2008-10-7 17:42

引用:
原帖由 至尊豪庭9 於 2008-10-6 07:28 PM 發表

唔OK,8小時一日(包食飯時間)26日,8500蚊(唔計扣強積金)就OK!
依家d寫字樓一般文員都係約7-9千蚊月薪連強積金返5日半8-9小時一日包食飯時間OT冇錢補, 最低工資要達到你d條件咁其他職位待遇全部都要相應調高, 僱主人力成本增加一係加價, 消費者支出又大左即係得個吉, 一係將公司北移甚至結業致失業率增加, 到時齊齊等致府救濟.
作者: apaceman1010    時間: 2008-10-7 18:58

沒有絕對answer,不低於綜援水平. , 應該是OK
作者: peninsula    時間: 2008-10-7 20:42

引用:
原帖由 CAB 於 2008-10-7 13:54 發表
炒左班副局长，政治助理 （又”副“又”助理“，单是个名已经话俾你知是冗员！）.
Excellent idea!
作者: 至尊豪庭9    時間: 2008-10-7 21:47

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: 至尊豪庭9    時間: 2008-10-7 21:49

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: 至尊豪庭9    時間: 2008-10-7 21:55

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: 至尊豪庭9    時間: 2008-10-7 22:00

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: 毛球    時間: 2008-10-7 23:17

引用:
原帖由 至尊豪庭9 於 2008-10-7 10:00 PM 發表

要北移一早移左啦,商家佬有錢(賴)到盡啦,加咁多租夠增加成本啦,你唔小下??
我幾時有小你?
作者: 理魯竇    時間: 2008-10-7 23:29

我都係打工仔，
我覺得打工仔爭取權益係天經地義，
但不適宜將商人或僱主妖魔化，
咁對解決問題係無幫助。
作者: public59    時間: 2008-10-8 00:25

引用:
原帖由 至尊豪庭9 於 2008-10-7 22:00 發表
時代
要北移一早移左啦,商家佬有錢(賴)到盡啦,加咁多租夠增加成本啦,你唔小下??
但如果成本不斷增加, 便會迫使雇主將可以遷移工序轉向低成本的地方.特別在電子資訊發達,的時代, 很多文書, 後勤的工序都可以遷移.

本人都是打工仔, 不斷受到高層的壓力, 如何可以減少人手, 節省成本.
作者: peninsula    時間: 2008-10-8 20:42

引用:
原帖由 理魯竇 於 2008-10-7 23:29 發表
我都係打工仔，
。
Not all employers are bad.
作者: 至尊豪庭9    時間: 2008-10-8 20:57

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: 至尊豪庭9    時間: 2008-10-8 21:08

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: Rainybreeze    時間: 2008-10-8 22:01

引用:
原帖由 peninsula 於 2008-10-7 13:40 發表

2 different issues!
你可以話係different issues,但係絕對有莫大關係, 而唔可以唔去作出考慮.

簡化作出比如, 最低工資一出, 一定會影響 "所有" 行業, 最前線, 茶餐廳, 7仔, 百佳, 零售, 後勤有會計, 文員, 雜工, 送貨. 個市好既時候, 咪加價. 大家有多d咪洗多d.

個市唔好, 左減右治之後, 都要加價. 大家咪飲少杯咖啡, 出少d街, 洗少d錢, 睇下邊個失業先.  高通脹加高失業, 好似叫"stagflation".

以往經濟出問題, 都係工業支持住, 生產力出口. 但係今次會有d唔同.  有無留意東莞10億救中小企. 銀碼係小, 重點係姿態, 有無朋友做廠?  同佢地傾傾, 問題係好嚴重.

首先搞清楚, 我唔係反對最低工資.  但係做野一定要睇大勢時機.  對或者錯係好主觀既一回事, 不過, 現實就客觀到不得了, 唔好同我講一步就可以到烏托邦.

車要維修找車房, 病要睇醫生, 電路要交比工程師.  依定美國經濟出問題都係由 Bernanke 同 Paulson 諗計去處理. 咩叫專業知識. 而我地香港尊貴議員, 有幾多專業知識, 大家心裡有數.  

尊貴議員唔識唔係問題, 無人可以識所有野, 咪聽取專業意見, 然後基於 "香港整體利益", 而唔係 "私人主觀執著, 或者政治分數, 票源利益" 來做野.
民主嗎, 好似長毛係"高票"當選, 咪睇下佢地點做.

最低工資, 咪最低工資.  經濟出問題, 就唔好一句說話, "行政失當",  班尊貴議員就好似完全無責任.
作者: CAB    時間: 2008-10-8 22:14

If it's cleaning, security, fast food etc, then eventually this will be passed on to everybody, higher mgn't fee, food prices...it's all of us paying the bill, no free lunch.

If SMEs, many of the owners actually not earn that much (or maybe even lower than salary man). But they created jobs for others, and take risks (think of those toys recall, toxic paints etc, easily they will lose all they have), & i think they deserve some respect.

Actually, most SME owners earn their fortune from stocks & property investments. Their biz can't create a fortune to them.
作者: public59    時間: 2008-10-8 22:37

引用:
原帖由 peninsula 於 2008-10-5 11:18 發表

Terrible. Too low!
What's acceptable hour rate from your point of view?
作者: public59    時間: 2008-10-8 22:42

引用:
原帖由 至尊豪庭9 於 2008-10-8 21:08 發表

都話要走一早走左啦,而家夠冇最低工資啦,可以走的商家佬咪一樣走,走唔到的就一定要留0係香港,清潔,保安,等好多都走唔到,你咪用以偏概全呢招黎拆啦,冇人信呀.
你老細想減人手叫佢執左間野啦,咁就唔使請人囉,小你老 ...
我老細都是打工仔, 他都要比人小.
作者: Jeff9394    時間: 2008-10-9 09:57

引用:
原帖由 public59 於 2008-10-8 00:25 發表
但如果成本不斷增加, 便會迫使雇主將可以遷移工序轉向低成本的地方.特別在電子資訊發達,的時代, 很多文書, 後勤的工序都可以遷移.
本人都是打工仔, 不斷受到高層的壓力, 如何可以減少人手, 節省成本.
傻啦!!! 呢幾年唔流行遷移, 家下流行關門大吉
作者: peninsula    時間: 2008-10-10 21:02

引用:
原帖由 public59 於 2008-10-8 22:37 發表
What's acceptable hour rate from your point of view?
At least $40. Now, things are so expensive and economy is going down the tube.
作者: Rainybreeze    時間: 2008-10-11 20:25

引用:
原帖由 peninsula 於 2008-10-10 21:02 發表

At least $40. Now, things are so expensive and economy is going down the tube.
物價同經濟係的而且確既事實, 但係$40 最低工資係咪答案?

遠既, 高地價房屋問題, 有人曾經想用8萬5公屋來做答案.

近既, 尊貴既黃議員, 叫取消強積金, 就每個香港人張來都會退休保障. 人口老化會點? d錢響邊到來?

千絲萬縷, 如果真係高d最低工資就可以解決問題, 不如比夠時薪$100, 我都想大家多d錢洗.
作者: peninsula    時間: 2008-10-11 20:42

引用:
原帖由 Rainybreeze 於 2008-10-11 20:25 發表
物價同經濟係的而且確既事實, 但係$40 最低工資係咪答案?
遠既, 高地價房屋問題, 有人曾經想用8萬5公屋來做答案.
近既, 尊貴既黃議員, 叫取消強積金, 就每個香港人張來都會退休保障. 人口老化會點? d錢響邊到 ...
There must be a basis.
作者: Rainybreeze    時間: 2008-10-11 21:29

引用:
原帖由 peninsula 於 2008-10-11 20:42 發表

There must be a basis.
Not only there must be a basis; there HAS been a basis, which HAS been dictated by the market.
The concern is whether the government should intervene the labor market? how should it be done? what are the consequences of such intervention?

There aren't simple answers, but one thing for sure is, hopefully, someone who knows what he/she is talking will answer this questions for Hong Kong.
作者: public59    時間: 2008-10-12 01:10

引用:
原帖由 peninsula 於 2008-10-10 21:02 發表

At least $40. Now, things are so expensive and economy is going down the tube.
It makes sense to have a higher min hour rate if things are so expensive.
But if the economy is going down, is it still necessary to compulsory set a higher min hour rate? It should be determined by market.
作者: Rubber    時間: 2008-10-12 11:09

Some reports about the effect of minimum wage ordinance :
In UK and USA, the findings have been
1/  There has " no measurable adverse effect on employment or inflation."
2/  No obvious incentive for young people to leave full time education and start working.

http://www.lowpay.gov.uk/lowpay/report/pdf/2006_Min_Wage.pdf

http://www.risep-fiu.org/reports/Florida_Minimum_Wage_Report.pdf
作者: 至尊豪庭9    時間: 2008-10-12 16:26

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: peninsula    時間: 2008-10-12 16:43

引用:
原帖由 public59 於 2008-10-12 01:10 發表
It makes sense to have a higher min hour rate if things are so expensive.
But if the economy is going down, is it still necessary to compulsory set a higher min hour rate? It should be determined ...
At least, something that is reasonable and acceptable to all.
作者: oneout    時間: 2008-10-12 16:56

唔明香港的大業主咁無良心,市道一好就加租,完全唔理d經營者能否負擔.
作者: 至尊豪庭9    時間: 2008-10-12 18:48

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: public59    時間: 2008-10-12 20:44

引用:
原帖由 oneout 於 2008-10-12 16:56 發表
唔明香港的大業主咁無良心,市道一好就加租,完全唔理d經營者能否負擔.
所以過去幾十年, 經濟成果/利潤大部份去了大業主及地產商- very unhealthy.
經營者便向打工仔開刀.
作者: Rainybreeze    時間: 2008-10-13 01:05

引用:
原帖由 Rubber 於 2008-10-12 11:09 發表
Some reports about the effect of minimum wage ordinance :
In UK and USA, the findings have been
1/  There has " no measurable adverse effect on employment or inflation."
2/  No obvious incentive fo ...
From a fundamental scientifical stand point, if the above reports' conclusions are to be applied to Hong Kong, the reports' premises and pre-conditions should be in agreement with Hong Kong's conditions for the conclusion to be valid.

I presume you have read the reports.  In UK's case, in drawing the conclusion, what were they doing to the minimium wages?

In Florida's case, do you think the construction industry blooming (Thanks for CDS and CDO) has anything to do with the economy status at 2005?

Here's a link from the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta
http://www.frbatlanta.org/invoke.cfm?objectid=98D5072C-5056-9F06-99352E51FC7900C1&method=display
作者: 理魯竇    時間: 2008-10-13 01:41

我以前做個一間公司，
由清潔公司承包清潔工作，
有兩個亞嬸長駐清潔，
工作量不多，
佢地樂於每月收三千幾，
如果落實最少每月6864，
肯定兩個只能活一個。

可能好心變左做壞事。
作者: Rubber    時間: 2008-10-13 11:26

引用:
原帖由 Rainybreeze 於 2008-10-13 01:05 發表


From a fundamental scientifical stand point, if the above reports' conclusions are to be applied to Hong Kong, the reports' premises and pre-conditions should be in agreement with Hong Kong's cond ...
In the UK, from the report, they have been increasing the min wage on a yearly rate higher than the average national income increase, that means the lowest income groups are increasing their income.

In the Florida case, there have been a yearly chat and showing that employment rate has increase with respect to nation (USA) wide figures.

I like to point out that the same argument about "job lost", "inflation" has been cited in these countries but that did not happened in reality.

Of course, you are right that the economic model, the culture, the spending (or saving) behaviour all have an impact and social science is not an "exact" science, we have to do what we believe is right and adjust if there is any shortcoming surfaced.

[ 本帖最後由 Rubber 於 2008-10-13 11:29 編輯 ]
作者: Rainybreeze    時間: 2008-10-13 15:53

引用:
原帖由 Rubber 於 2008-10-13 11:26 發表


In the UK, from the report, they have been increasing the min wage on a yearly rate higher than the average national income increase, that means the lowest income groups are increasing their incom ...
For UK, here is the link to the Low Pay Commission Report 2008

http://www.lowpay.gov.uk/lowpay/report/pdf/2008_Min_Wage.pdf

Do read the Chairman's Foreward

For Florida, on 2005, with the cheap mortgage readily available, they were selling Florida like paradise at an arm's length.  With no real production output increase, yet the property market was blooming.  Jobs were everywhere at that stage of economy.

Behavioral science is not exact science.  I give you that.  But we believe in science, I think we should never doubt the emprical methodolgy of science.  

Newton is wrong. NO! There is just something beyond Newton, we call that Quantum Physics.
作者: kcpw0n    時間: 2008-10-13 16:54

有d人知d唔知d就大大聲要求學外國最低工資,
人家最低工資是和社福失業金掛勾保障嘅,
未攪好社福失業保障就強行最低工資,
咁將會是中年和低文化水平想就業一個惡夢,
工棍以最低工資借口為商家來一次大清洗行動,
就如舊電話公司轉電盈之一次翻版.

工棍真好0野,手段又成功啦!!!!
作者: Rubber    時間: 2008-10-13 17:51

引用:
原帖由 kcpw0n 於 2008-10-13 16:54 發表
有d人知d唔知d就大大聲要求學外國最低工資,
人家最低工資是和社福失業金掛勾保障嘅,
未攪好社福失業保障就強行最低工資,
咁將會是中年和低文化水平想就業一個惡夢,
工棍以最低工資借口為商家來一次大清洗行 ...
I have to inform you that your beloved commies in PRC also practice min wage policy...
作者: moxfactor    時間: 2008-10-13 18:18

引用:
原帖由 Rubber 於 2008-10-12 11:09 發表
Some reports about the effect of minimum wage ordinance :
In UK and USA, the findings have been
1/  There has " no measurable adverse effect on employment or inflation."
2/  No obvious incentive fo ...
in that case, is there equal "positive" effect on employment or inflation?  i see this as merely a play on words, propaganda if you will.  pay raise for minimum wagers will only promote the deterioration of incentive to work harder, and not the other way around.  as someone else have mentioned, minimum wage should be related to the amount of social benefits and welfare of the community we live in(aka HK), however, HK workers and business owners' ethics are vastly different than North America or even the UK, and we cannot use the same standards as they do.  It's difficult to determine what should or should not be done in Hong Kong to improve living standards for minimum wagers, but some people here blindly expecting minimum wages to raise because other countries do is merely selfish thinking, and no different than the bosses they work for.  If someone spends as much time whining here as they do working, perhaps they won't be a part of the minimum wager's group.  It's too bad there are so many biased viewpoints from the likes of Ho Ting, who can't accept any other's viewpoints but his own.
作者: Rubber    時間: 2008-10-13 19:17

引用:
原帖由 moxfactor 於 2008-10-13 18:18 發表


in that case, is there equal "positive" effect on employment or inflation?  i see this as merely a play on words, propaganda if you will.  pay raise for minimum wagers will only promote the deteri ...
That is not mutually exclusive, increases in wages does not necessarily means lowering the profit.
The report findings included that there are more revenue generated in the premises by the more loyal and happy workers.
A more positive approach is one seeking for reduction in rent and other costs to offset the increase in wages.
作者: peninsula    時間: 2008-10-13 21:14

引用:
原帖由 Rubber 於 2008-10-13 17:51 發表
I have to inform you that your beloved commies in PRC also practice min wage policy...
So now people are better off!
作者: peninsula    時間: 2008-10-13 21:15

引用:
原帖由 moxfactor 於 2008-10-13 18:18 發表
in that case, is there equal "positive" effect on employment or inflation?  i see this as merely a play on words, propaganda if you will.  pay raise for minimum wagers will only promote the deteri ...
Yes, happy and more productive.
作者: public59    時間: 2008-10-14 21:08

引用:
原帖由 devilsadvocate 於 2008-10-12 21:49 發表
有最低工資，清潔工每個月收$6864。
咁「科文」要收幾錢？經理又要收幾錢？
如果茶餐廳冼碗每個月收$6864。
咁「伙計」要收幾錢？老闆又有無錢賺？
一個辦公室助理每個月收$6864。
一個無經驗嘅中學畢業生做文員 ...
It means wages system are forced to reform.
作者: public59    時間: 2008-10-14 21:18

引用:
原帖由 peninsula 於 2008-10-13 21:15 發表

Yes, happy and more productive.
But loyalty and happiness are not easy to measure.
It seems they are luxury to many owners of SME
作者: peninsula    時間: 2008-10-14 21:20

引用:
原帖由 public59 於 2008-10-14 21:18 發表
But loyalty and happiness are not easy to measure.
It seems they are luxury to many owners of SME
Yes, very subjective indeed.
作者: Rainybreeze    時間: 2008-10-14 23:01

引用:
原帖由 moxfactor 於 2008-10-13 18:18 發表


in that case, is there equal "positive" effect on employment or inflation?  i see this as merely a play on words, propaganda if you will.  pay raise for minimum wagers will only promote the deteri ...
Mox, I am sure you're well aware of the fact that almost all nations across the globe place economy as their top priorities.  

Economic used to be simpler, how we compete for limited resources, supply, demand, markets. It's an competition game.  The thing with this game is that the winner will do pretty well, but the weak, unwanted, will get eliminated.  They have a system for this game; it's called "Free Market". Do you still carry a cassette walker around? Well, it's pretty close to be eliminated.  Likewise for the cassette industry, and the work force that specialize in it.

We are never borne equal; some are always faster, smarter, work harder, mouth with a silver spoon.  Again, they will do well.  But for the folks at the other end, this competition game, this system of free market, how this economy works just doesn't add up.  It's beyond right or wrong, it's about the nations' stability and viability.  Governments have the power to redistribute wealth, to balance out the equation of this game.  And there will be trade off, consequences.  Thus, how are we going to do this?

Mandatory minimum wages is neither entirely good nor bad.  It's a mean, a tool, a measure.  And there is time we would need to use this tool.  We all build our nations based on competition, and we will be distorting the system to a different model as the government step in.  That's why, hopefully, someone who knows what he/she is talking about could answer for Hong Kong.
作者: 無神論狂徒    時間: 2008-10-16 11:44

e個問題真係好難講，從純理性角度睇，定下最低工資，實會谷高一ｄ邊緣企業的成本，迫使佢地結業，再使一班人失業，最後可能好心做壞事。
再講，呢個市場係會自行調節的，有讀經濟都知，從整個經濟睇，你有幾多能力，可以為僱主帶來多少利益，僱主自然會出到足夠的人工比你，如果個僱主出唔足你能力上應得的錢，你好自然會走，因為出面仲有大把僱主會出得起錢。你的人工會好自然反影你的能力。（呢個係整個經濟宏觀咁睇，從微觀睇當然會有不少個別事例，你唔好攞呢ｄ特例挑戰我）
個人管理經驗我真係睇到，有啲人的質素真係唔值幾多錢，我做零售管理，請人做前線，有ｄ人怕羞，有ｄ唔識講說話，有ｄ懶到出汁，返工目光呆滯，做唔到數，唔炒佢唔得。有啲人又真係只適合做吓快餐服務員、清潔，只要求手腳移動做嘢，完全沒有技術可言（除非你話換汽水糖漿都叫技術）。

我個人認為最低工資唔係好事，但係另一方面睇，呢一班低技術人士都要食飯，睇見有ｄ人為兩餐，一日打兩份工，命都可以唔要，一日開十幾個鐘（雖然我開工時間都唔嘢少），你冇最低工資保障，佢哋確係幾大煲。
作者: Rainybreeze    時間: 2008-10-16 16:28

引用:
原帖由 peninsula 於 2008-10-13 21:14 發表

So now people are better off!
七萬廠家倒閉2000萬人被炒

在國際金融海嘯的巨浪衝擊下，有「世界工廠」之稱的中國亦遭重創。美聯社、美國有線新聞網絡（CNN ）報道，金融海嘯令歐美等國對玩具、日常用品的需求量勁減，外國廠商紛「撻訂」，中國各廠房損失慘重，國內進出口受衝擊，中國將引發工廠倒閉潮。國家發改委早前已透露，今年上半年內地已有近七萬家中小企業倒閉，逾二千萬人被解僱，中小企業面臨前所未有的困難。
在全球經濟持續低迷的形勢下，中國的出口出現疲弱。中國海關的數據顯示，中國今年第一季的出口增長下降，為三年來首次。而中國家用電器協會的數據顯示，中國電風扇七月的外銷量較去年同期下降百分之廿一。每年出口六百萬把風扇往外地的順德雄風電器表示，擔心外國客戶會因資金短缺而倒閉。
首七月逾半玩具企業關門
海關數字亦指，今年一至七月，中國具有玩具出口的企業為三千五百多家，較去年同期減少達五成二，也就是說逾半中國玩具出口企業今年已倒閉。
國家發改委中小企業司八月已透露，今年相當部分中小企業面臨資金鏈斷裂等困難。據初步統計，全國今年上半年有六萬七千家中小企業倒閉，導致逾二千萬工人被解聘，當中逾一萬家為紡織業中小企。
中國最大服裝商之一的浙江江龍紡織印染上周被迫倒閉。擁有一百名員工的天津紡織進出口公司，其經理楊先生表示，預計今年的銷售額會較去年大跌一半，若果情況持續惡化，不排除會裁員。
在金融海嘯下，作為中國外貿出口「晴雨表」的中國廣州進出口商品交易會昨首日開幕亦遇冷。不少企業均表示，由於聖誕節後歐美市場都會減少需求，預計本屆廣交會，製造業的成交額最少減少三成。
廣交會揭幕成交料減30 ％
在廣州生產擴音器的美國商人理查森（Richardson ）表示，過去兩星期，美國的定單已減少逾半，其十二名客戶中，有九人取消來穗與其洽談生意。中國商務部發言人姚申洪亦承認，中國加工貿易出口形勢嚴峻，全球經濟下行風險對中國對外貿易影響正不斷顯現。
另外，第一百零四屆廣交會昨日開幕，發改委對外經濟研究所所長張燕生說，全球金融動盪尚未結束，很可能對中國出口造成影響。一名來自杜拜的進口商表示，自己參加了近十次廣交會，以往每次均會簽下至少數百萬美元長期出口定單。由於明年初消費市場不明朗，這次參會將主要以短期定單為主。

Orinetal News, A35

其實睇下d數據, 跟本響金融爆褒前, d中小企業已經出咗事.

一般物料升幅為30%, "執行"基本最低工資, (深圳二線為例), 由往年12月$600, 加到1月750. 今年七月去到$900, 跟據勞動局, 以後每年仲要定年加15%.  叫d中小企業點頂?

d公司出事, 對工人, 對社會係咪好事?  工人也好, 老細也好, 無左競爭力, 就要比市場搞掂.  現實就係咁既一回事, 做野要睇大時大勢, 然後諗清諗楚.  先出手.  

希望 now people are better off.
作者: peninsula    時間: 2008-10-16 21:11

引用:
原帖由 Rainybreeze 於 2008-10-16 16:28 發表


七萬廠家倒閉2000萬人被炒  ...
That's not to do with wage policies.
作者: 毛球    時間: 2008-10-16 22:10

引用:
原帖由 Rainybreeze 於 2008-10-16 04:28 PM 發表


七萬廠家倒閉2000萬人被炒

在國際金融海嘯的巨浪衝擊下，有「世界工廠」之稱的中國亦遭重創。美聯社、美國有線新聞網絡（CNN ）報道，金融海嘯令歐美等國對玩具、日常用品的需求量勁減，外國廠商紛「撻訂」 ...
仲有好多工廠依家唔加得班, 週日, 假期全部放足有多冇少, 產量下降, 交貨期廷長, 成本難以負擔, 最終企業又是捱不住.
作者: DIY555    時間: 2008-10-17 01:44

都好既  香港有d老闆好喜歡刻薄員工
好處:保障員工是好事
壞處:失業率上升

[ 本帖最後由 DIY555 於 2008-10-17 01:45 編輯 ]
作者: moxfactor    時間: 2008-10-17 18:04

引用:
原帖由 Rainybreeze 於 2008-10-14 23:01 發表
Mandatory minimum wages is neither entirely good nor bad.  It's a mean,a tool, a measure.  And there is time we would need to use thistool.  We all build our nations based on competition, and we will bedistorting the system to a different model as the government stepin.  That's why, hopefully, someone who knows what he/she is talkingabout could answer for Hong Kong.
i disagree.  mandatory minimum wages in HK i don't believe will be a good thing.  it might work elsewhere, but unless with other steps involved, including social benefits and more income tax.  so many others on this post only see higher income = better productivity leading to better general economy.  sorry, but that's not so simple, and especially not in Hong Kong where everything is as you say, competitive.  minimum wage will only force companies to cut down employees with less future on a guess.  it will make other employees less efficient because there is less incentive to work harder, because mandatory minimum wage is only for the bottom of the barrel.  it will also force many older and handicapped people into early retirement because companies will refuse to hire them because hiring someone younger will be the same price.  we're talking older as in 45 being replaced by a 25 yr old.  not even getting to the 60+.  unless the social groundwork is rebuilt to fit more western civilization work ethics, including social education, there is no way this will work for the better in Hong Kong.  if this passes, it will cause chaos in the overall workforce in Hong Kong.  i don't believe it will never work in Hong Kong, just that now is too early because there's no foundation for this.  so unless the ulterior motive is to drive away all the mainlander immigrants and force older people to live off social welfare, there is no justification to the overall economics of Hong Kong to establish a mandatory minimum wage.
作者: 飛毛腿    時間: 2008-10-17 18:38     標題: 回復 67# 的帖子

最低工資問題喺香港根本就唔再係經濟問題
變成純粹 " 政治問題 "
以一個反智又民粹社會
無論煲呔定邊個做特首都頂唔住/ 無謂去頂班九流 政客
港燦鼠目寸光又智商低
餐餐水浸眼尾都未識死
自作孽, 不可活   
作者: kcpw0n    時間: 2008-10-17 19:10

金融海嘯狂潮未去,世界不景氣將臨,
政客仍不斷要攪最低工資立法,
簡直就係本末倒置,
現正是時候僱主和僱員準備共渡時艱,
市面巳經有大型連鎖零售店倒閉啦!!!!!
重要攪最低工資,
準備食西北風啦!!!!
作者: public59    時間: 2008-10-17 22:06

引用:
原帖由 peninsula 於 2008-10-16 21:11 發表

That's not to do with wage policies.
But it is not the right time to set the min wage policies.
It is the time how to tackle the downturn economy for both employer and employee.
作者: kcpw0n    時間: 2008-10-18 00:25

經濟環境好嘅時候政棍無得玩0野,
世界經濟大環境轉差,佢地就把握時間做騷,
睇住0黎會愈攪愈出屎.
泛民大聲嗌~~~
信者得救,實行打救你
作者: bobbystar2100    時間: 2008-10-18 02:03

宜家個問題係出於勞工界果班人只係一味從勞工、基層既角度去睇，根本忽略左社會整體既利益，等如「生果金」打算加一千蚊要兩次資產審查一樣，使社會更加分化。請記住，身為立法會議員唔係只顧短視，更加需要既，就係要顧及香港整體既利益呀！

請「職工盟」、「街工」同「工聯會」聽下啦好嗎？
作者: 毛球    時間: 2008-10-18 02:15

引用:
原帖由 kcpw0n 於 2008-10-17 07:10 PM 發表
金融海嘯狂潮未去,世界不景氣將臨,
政客仍不斷要攪最低工資立法,
簡直就係本末倒置,
現正是時候僱主和僱員準備共渡時艱,
市面巳經有大型連鎖零售店倒閉啦!!!!!
重要攪最低工資,
準備食西北風啦!!!!
泰林清盤13店全結業
(明報)10月17日 星期五 23:25

繼連鎖集團U-Right上周被清盤後，有62年歷史的泰林無線電行在金融海嘯下今日全線結業，影響260名員工。
泰林在各區的13間分店下午開始拉下大閘關門，門外貼了進行盤點的告示，有臨時清盤人到場。泰林約有260多名全職及兼職員工。
有供應商表示，他們在中午收到消息，泰林將清盤，所以到來收回貨物及貨款。
高院已委出安永企業財務為臨時清盤人，清盤人表示，泰林淨欠債約1億元，泰林已向員工發放九月的薪金，正了解有沒有流動資金支付十月薪金，他們亦會設法與潛在買家商討出售事宜。
在上周，U-Right突然被申請清盤，400名員工的薪金被拖欠，涉及約100萬元。清盤人承諾11月3日前繳付10月份工資及代通知金，亦會交代遣散費安排。
工聯會立法會議員黃國健說，對事件表示震驚，失業率可能會上升，金融海嘯已影響了零售業，相信在農曆年過後，會有更多店舖結業，特別是食肆。
泰林成立於1946年，公司在開業初期，以修理及買賣收音機為主要業務，其後業務範圍不斷擴大，售賣不同的電器產品。
作者: 毛球    時間: 2008-10-18 04:04

引用:
原帖由 bobbystar2100 於 2008-10-18 02:03 AM 發表
宜家個問題係出於勞工界果班人只係一味從勞工、基層既角度去睇，根本忽略左社會整體既利益，等如「生果金」打算加一千蚊要兩次資產審查一樣，使社會更加分化。請記住，身為立法會議員唔係只顧短視，更加需要既，就係 ...
直選議員為選票出賣香港社會整體利益, 一面倒只為基層發聲, 中產變成社會上只有貢獻卻是最無助的一群, 所謂"民主"社會的選舉制度存在如此漏洞及矛盾, 不禁懷念港英政府時代, 政府決策之果斷, 不如今日每天受政棍們別有居心的指控變得軟弱無力舉步維艱. 民選議員原意之一是代市民起監察政府之效, 但如果監察偏向某階層利益而忽略整體發展及長遠考慮, 以至以反政府(為反而反)為主流, 只會損害香港潛在的前景, 到頭來一起捱窮.
作者: kcpw0n    時間: 2008-10-18 12:54

誰才是今次金融海嘯之苦主呢,
是貪高息之雷曼投資者嗎?
還是香港中小企營運者
其實是香港中小企營運者吧!!!
他們誠誠懇懇為香港創造經濟環境!!!
但因金融海嘯銀行收緊信貸而面臨倒閉!!!
可惜香港之政棍們還落井下石,
揮動他們手上之攪屎棍,攪什麼勞工福利主義,加重中小企之負擔,唯恐香港不死!!!
僱員和僱主們,清醒吧!!!
共渡時艱才是自救嘅大方向!!!!!

[ 本帖最後由 kcpw0n 於 2008-10-18 16:36 編輯 ]
作者: kcpw0n    時間: 2008-10-19 19:29

【明報專訊】現行的中小企援助計劃貸款保證分為兩種﹕為廠商購買機器、設備的貸款保證上限為500萬元，有機器作為抵押；而無抵押的營運貸款保證則只有100萬元。
有業界人士指出，中小企購買設備的需求其實極低，若需貸款，一般為應急，100萬元作用有限。今次政府將貸款保證二合為一，能夠回應中小企面對的問題，不過，亦變相增加政府的無抵押貸款保證，一旦更多企業未能還款，政府面對的包底風險將會更高。
根據商務及經濟發展局呈交立法會的文件，而去年計劃的壞帳率，就只有約2.7%。

綜合一些數據,政府在於協助中小企方面亦有一定幫助,或許在金融海嘯下動力不夠,但總比一些泛民政棍只懂大聲9up而毫無建議解決,甚至有些掟蕉做騷或另類攪倒米要求最低工資立法令中小企百上加斤制造更多倒閉和工人失業.
作者: kcpw0n    時間: 2008-10-20 11:35

工業界立法會議員兼負責培訓年輕人的職業訓練局主席梁君彥憂慮最低工資推高失業率,
他佐舉法國的經驗，指該國在推行最低工資後，年輕人失業率便一直高企。
何況香港有遣散費這負擔,如果最低工資薪酬訂得高,對僱主是形成壓力,
會打擊他們繼續經營的信心.


【明報專訊】最低工資條例草案將於本立法年度提交立法會，工業界立法會議員梁君彥擔心，部分僱主為免日後支付高昂的遣散費，或會先將工人工資調低至最低工資水平，然後解僱他們，以支付較少的遣散費，此舉或會推高失業率。他明言，反對將最低工資時薪定為工會提倡的33元。勞工界立法會議員葉偉明對梁君彥的言論感不幸，反指梁氏倒不如倡議取消所有勞工福利。

法國經驗 青年失業高企

在昨日的《城市論壇》上，負責培訓年輕人的職業訓練局主席梁君彥指出，最低工資一旦推行，擔心職訓局的學員難找到工作，因為年輕人技術與經驗不足，他擔心僱主會以最低工資聘請年輕人。他更佐舉法國的經驗，指該國在推行最低工資後，年輕人失業率便一直高企。

他指出，「最不幸是香港有遣散費！」他指這只會令部分僱主為避開承擔高昂的遣散費（遣散費以最後一個月工資作計算基礎），或會先調低員工的工資至最低工資的水平，然後解僱他們，這或會推高失業率。他認為日後最低工資的水平不可定得太高，反對時薪定為33元。

[ 本帖最後由 kcpw0n 於 2008-10-20 11:37 編輯 ]
作者: Rubber    時間: 2008-10-20 12:07

引用:
原帖由 毛球 於 2008-10-18 02:15 發表

泰林清盤13店全結業
(明報)10月17日 星期五 23:25

繼連鎖集團U-Right上周被清盤後，有62年歷史的泰林無線電行在金融海嘯下今日全線結業，影響260名員工 ...
I seriously doubt if anyone employed by Tai Lum was being paid the minimum wage.
Min wage is a two blade sword, if there are less employment or less establishment, rent will eventually trickles downwards ( painful process ) to a point where new business can start again.
If competitiveness is build solely by suppressing one side ( wages of the less fortunate )  and not the broader side ( land use, rent ), sooner or later, something bad will happen.
Intervene is sometimes a necessary evil.

[ 本帖最後由 Rubber 於 2008-10-20 13:37 編輯 ]
作者: 毛球    時間: 2008-10-20 19:12

引用:
原帖由 Rubber 於 2008-10-20 12:07 PM 發表


I seriously doubt if anyone employed by Tai Lum was being paid the minimum wage.
Min wage is a two blade sword, if there are less employment or less establishment, rent will eventually trickles d ...
泰林同最低工資當然冇關係, 佢只係經濟不景氣加管理不善的頭一批犧牲者.

香港一向最成功同寶貴既係經濟自由, 租金及薪酬水平主要由市場調節, 市場定律是靠供求平衡, 經濟不景租金及薪酬自然下調, 百業興旺租金及薪酬自然上升. 單以社會民生作考慮, 爭取最低工資表面上可解低技術勞工收入問題, 不過最怕幫唔到仲拖慢整個經濟發展, 班僱主要保持競爭力就要控制成本效益, 失業率同通脹必首當其衝, 低廉消費業務難再生存, 汰弱留強之下, 租金未下跌, 行業壟斷已加劇, 競爭力被削弱, 民生依然冇改善. 依家d吉舖其實隨處可見, 只係一d旺點特別搶手, 有錢都未必有, 到底係業主不到價寧可丟空定係乏人問津? 要地產價下跌經濟代價不菲, 既要干預, 何不索性限制物業價格, 何苦要壓迫中小企業? 呢個提議當然又引申其他問題, 所以唔可以就一個片面問題要求立法以為就可以解決, 痛苦過後係點唔可以一廂情願.
作者: 無神論狂徒    時間: 2008-10-20 19:43

In my book, it might be not the right time to activate this ordinance because of recent financial tsunami.  I believe this act would make the enterprise in low margin going belly up.  As a result, this act would intensify the devastating of recent financial turmoil, unemployment rate would soar.
作者: 理魯竇    時間: 2008-10-20 20:48

引用:
原帖由 無神論狂徒 於 2008-10-20 19:43 發表
In my book, it might be not the right time to activate this ordinance because of recent financial tsunami.  I believe this act would make the enterprise in low margin going belly up.  As a result, thi ...
你估 d 政棍們肯唔肯 ？

話之你死人冧樓，
佢地最緊要搏掌聲，
學亞顛狗話齋，
唔「譁眾」點「取寵」呀。
作者: Rubber    時間: 2008-10-21 10:47

引用:
原帖由 毛球 於 2008-10-20 19:12 發表

泰林同最低工資當然冇關係, 佢只係經濟不景氣加管理不善的頭一批犧牲者.

香港一向最成功同寶貴既係經濟自由, 租金及薪酬水平主要由市場調節, 市場定律是靠供求平衡, 經濟不景租金及薪酬自然下調, 百業興旺租金及 ...
The high land price is a form of " pre-paid " TAX, in which every citizen have to paid it back eventually ( in rent which in turn as higher cost in dinner / goods ) to the land tycoons and govt.  No body can escape from this TAX.  I think HK Govt should try to lower the land cost.

There are always a significant amount of under-educated people in Hong Kong.
The govt should plan a way to absorb this work force and turn them into valuable assets.
Manufacturing is the way out to utilized this resources and create jobs.
It is very sad to see from 1997 onwards, the HKSAR govt did nothing to help small manufacturers in HONG KONG.
作者: 無神論狂徒    時間: 2008-10-21 11:03

Exactly right!  What we need right now is conscientious politician.  Noday, there is too many politicians aiming to make big bucks on their position, ripping apart  a big chunk from us - tax payer.  I dislike such politicians who treated the people's livelihood as a means to gain profit .
I understand applause is equal to survival in this "industry".  They cannot exist without public acknowledgement.  Nevetheless, some of them have lost the balance.
作者: 毛球    時間: 2008-10-21 12:32

引用:
原帖由 Rubber 於 2008-10-21 10:47 AM 發表


The high land price is a form of " pre-paid " TAX, in which every citizen have to paid it back eventually ( in rent which in turn as higher cost in dinner / goods ) to the land tycoons and govt.   ...
Apart from lowering the land cost, to avoid directly interfering the property market, Government can also introduce a kind of tax system which can draw the income from the property developer according to different rates to discourage the unhealthy market.  Tax collected then can be used for the benefits of the entire society, e.g. extra support to the SME and re-training of low-skill workers to upgrade their value.  It should not be solely the responsibility of the HKG Government if our Legco members have never given same kind of positive suggestion properly but just opposing the Government for everything.  Our Chief Executive Tung was blamed for the serious decline of the property market after he proposed the “85,000” scheme (which should be a way to help the poor), but in fact it’s just because of the coincidence of the financial crisis.  I think the Government was too weak to deal with these politicians after 1997 as whatever policy there will be the drawbacks and the politicians are just attacking with different arguments and it’s becoming the trend in HKG.
作者: 飛毛腿    時間: 2008-10-21 13:28

引用:
原帖由 Rubber 於 2008-10-21 10:47 發表


The high land price is a form of " pre-paid " TAX, in which every citizen have to paid it back eventually ( in rent which in turn as higher cost in dinner / goods ) to the land tycoons and govt.   ...
好心你啦, 又老調重彈
2000年老懵董同當時房屋局長黃昇華已經不遺餘力賤賣土地
地價樓價大瀉
週街吉舖拉閘冇人租
當時全港市民生活有幾幸福呀 ?
一星期以內隔日必有人跳樓, 燒炭
賤地價, 賤樓價就幸福 ?

全港有六七十萬戶家庭住公屋
地價樓價關佢地乜事呀 ?
點樣人人走唔甩要交變相 "" pre-paid  TAX" 法 ?
作者: Rubber    時間: 2008-10-21 15:11

引用:
原帖由 飛毛腿 於 2008-10-21 13:28 發表


好心你啦, 又老調重彈
2000年老懵董同當時房屋局長黃昇華已經不遺餘力賤賣土地
地價樓價大瀉
週街吉舖拉閘冇人租
當時全港市民生活有幾幸福呀 ?
一星期以內隔日必有人跳樓, 燒炭
賤地價, 賤樓價就幸福 ?  ...
You never understands.
The cost of rent is always the fixed cost.
The cost pay for the land will finally be absorbed by ALL citizens.
So in a sense it is a TAX collected by land tycoons for the GOVT from the citizen (pre-paid).
It is a mis-concept that Hong Kong TAX rate is low in this sense.
作者: 飛毛腿    時間: 2008-10-21 17:29

引用:
原帖由 Rubber 於 2008-10-21 15:11 發表


You never understands.
The cost of rent is always the fixed cost.
The cost pay for the land will finally be absorbed by ALL citizens.
...
舉例話九龍站上蓋擎天半島
有人買入一單位自住也好, 出租也好
我真唔知個地價關你乜事 ? 又關天水圍阿乜太何事 ?
點樣會無厘頭轉嫁落你地身上  ?  

南丫島, 長洲地平租平啦
裡面士多雜貨舖賣一斤米幾錢 ? 一罐可樂又幾錢 ?
唔通平過港島區, 油尖區一半 ?
作者: 至尊豪庭9    時間: 2008-10-21 19:45

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: Rubber    時間: 2008-10-21 19:56

引用:
原帖由 飛毛腿 於 2008-10-21 17:29 發表


舉例話九龍站上蓋擎天半島
有人買入一單位自住也好, 出租也好
我真唔知個地價關你乜事 ? 又關天水圍阿乜太何事 ?
點樣會無厘頭轉嫁落你地身上  ?  h:" />

南丫島, 長洲地平租平啦
裡面士多雜貨舖賣一斤米幾 ...
Of course I don't care about residential building.
I am focusing on land use that can create jobs.

In the TVB series about 1 year or half an year ago, documenting livelihood of elders in Hong Kong.
One episode is about people living in Kwun Tong.
There are shops in Kwun Tong that can manage to sell bread / buns at around $1 each, just because their rent is low.
作者: FXO    時間: 2008-10-22 10:07

原來的商家佬咁好人, 唔將的租金計落成本度,   唔向消費者開刀收回, 一本萬利
作者: 飛毛腿    時間: 2008-10-22 13:38

引用:
原帖由 FXO 於 2008-10-22 10:07 發表
原來的商家佬咁好人, 唔將的租金計落成本度,   唔向消費者開刀收回, 一本萬利
7-11 要交租
賣一份報紙六蚊
街邊報紙檔唔駛交租
賣一份報紙又係六蚊
預咗你實會死雞撐飯蓋架喇
再舉例 :
尖沙嘴甚麼瑞士錶行, 東方錶行...
果 d 舖租閒閒地廿萬卅萬一個月
大陸, 泰國, 馬來西亞...高級商業區舖租最多等如香港旺區五份一左右
去買一隻勞力士錶, 大陸, 泰國, 馬來西亞怕者平過香港三份一, 一半 ?　
預你再死拗....大陸賣一隻麥當勞漢堡包幾錢 ? 香港又幾錢 ?

將的租金計落成本度喎
你有錢去開舖, 一個月內唔摺就係奇蹟  
作者: 飛毛腿    時間: 2008-10-22 13:52

引用:
原帖由 Rubber 於 2008-10-21 19:56 發表


Of course I don't care about residential building.
I am focusing on land use that can create jobs.

In the TVB series about 1 year or half an year ago, documenting livelihood of elders in Hong  ...
特區政府每年賣地收入住宅用地佔總賣地收入幾多你知唔知 ?
你攞官塘嚟講
官塘中心地帶, 物華街, 裕民坊....等
除咗極少數新建商場中心如 APM 廣場之類
絕大部份係四五十年前舊樓地舖
就算你去彌敦道, 銅鑼灣怡和街一帶都係
最貴租商舖絕大部份都係幾十年前舊樓地舖
幾十年前舊樓有咩高地價 ? 政府有咩理由同能力去控制私人地舖租金水平 ?
你老兄對香港房產商舖一無所知, 對營商亦連皮毛都不曉
只識將問題賴在咩高地價上
以為賤地價就人人可以安居樂業 ?
作者: FXO    時間: 2008-10-22 15:53

引用:
原帖由 飛毛腿 於 2008-10-22 13:38 發表


7-11 要交租
賣一份報紙六蚊
街邊報紙檔唔駛交租
賣一份報紙又係六蚊
預咗你實會死雞撐飯蓋架喇
再舉例 :
尖沙嘴甚麼瑞士錶行, 東方錶行...
果 d 舖租閒閒地廿萬卅萬一個月
大陸, 泰國, 馬來西亞 ...
做生意的租金唔計落成本度, 我都係第一次聽.

原來7-11淨係賣報紙.   

又賣勞又MAC記, 原來你做生意咁單純, 淨係識睇一樣野

[ 本帖最後由 FXO 於 2008-10-22 15:57 編輯 ]
作者: kcpw0n    時間: 2008-10-22 16:11

倒閉,栽員潮剛起,
呢陣時要訂最低工資 時薪33至35元,
嘩!!!!有咁筍咩,
重想加薪,減工時,
僱主要搵你做,
僱員就返屋企.
唔駛你咁辛苦,
攤抖吓啦!!!!
作者: Rainybreeze    時間: 2008-10-22 17:27

引用:
原帖由 飛毛腿 於 2008-10-22 13:52 發表
... ...
最貴租商舖絕大部份都係幾十年前舊樓地舖
幾十年前舊樓有咩高地價 ? 政府有咩理由同能力去控制私人地舖租金水平 ?
... ...
...將問題賴在咩高地價上
以為賤地價就人人可以安居樂業 ?
首先, 價格釐定係供求. 但係大前提係個市. 政府要做既係點樣作出"財富資源分配政策以平衡競爭同社會協調". "控制市場"只可能係其中一個手段.

個市好, 大家搵到錢有能力既時候, 樓市需求價格升. 開心到不得了.
ok, 個市唔好又點, 對於一d失業, 低收入, 少積蓄, 剛踏出社會既人, 如果仲要比高樓價既租金, 係百上加斤.

政府有理由同能力 "作出財富資源分配政策" 去降低生活成本.  個政策叫 "公共屋邨", 而公屋商舖租金比較便宜, 所以商品價格有"下調空間", 但係價格始終同"市場"決定.

"公共屋邨"係香港社會既資產, 對於買賣公屋我係好有保留.

老董的政策係想短期內控制市場, 降低樓價以降低整體社會生活成本, 提高整體社會競爭力.  

問題係老董無睇清楚個大勢, 無諗清楚事件因由後果. 就去干預市場. 難聽一句, 佢唔知佢自己做緊咩.

個市唔好, 抄家離塲, 用家托市, 高供款已經辛苦, 一生積蓄化為烏有. 唔好話8萬5係為商家, 係咪好心我唔知, 不過結果就係壞事.

依家最低工資就係"控制市場".  要做唔係問題. 但係, 唔該, 尊貴既議員, 做野要睇大時大勢, 然後諗清諗楚.  先出手.
作者: 飛毛腿    時間: 2008-10-22 17:42     標題: 回復 95# 的帖子

timway 政版呢度第一個狂插老董八萬五, 賤賣土地政策, 不能知所謂....
正正係在下
不過有 d 共產大鑊飯主義者偏偏就相信老董九噏咩提高香港競爭力
我無數次反駁呢 d 腦殘低 b 論點 - 地平樓平會提高競爭力
照咁講, 老撾, 柬埔寨競爭力高過日本十倍 !

>>>尊貴既議員, 做野要睇大時大勢
有部份係腦殘兼鼠目寸光, 根本唔知咩叫大時大勢
有部份係詐傻扮懵, 借頭借路趁香港病就攞佢命
例如 2002年人心最虛弱, 最冇信心時
劉穢卿, 吳靄儀呢亭港奸就大鑼大鼓話要港幣脫聯繫匯率
而近兩年美元弱過藥煲時就提都唔提
作者: Rainybreeze    時間: 2008-10-22 18:02

咁樣講, 8萬5真係天真到不得了.

不過, 如果在所有其他狀況不變之下. (跟本無可能) 經濟學上, 降低樓價係會提高整體社會競爭力.  

有機會了解下老撾, 呢十年變化好大, 發展潛力好高.
作者: 至尊豪庭9    時間: 2008-10-23 22:07

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: 飛毛腿    時間: 2008-10-24 13:47

引用:
原帖由 至尊豪庭9 於 2008-10-23 22:07 發表

on9,用返你理論,埃塞俄比亞人工平英,美,日何止十倍,佢地應該競爭力高英,美,日十倍啦,更加唔會有你地所講有最低工資就會增加失業,失業率一定低過英,美,日,一個饅頭就請到人啦,應該一早取代英,美,日成為世界金融中心 ...
都唔知你吠乜
我由頭到尾都未講過最低工資同競爭力關係
你根本就唔知我講乜
死開啦  
作者: xocatII    時間: 2008-10-30 16:37

引用:
原帖由 至尊豪庭9 於 2008-10-23 22:07 發表

on9,用返你理論,埃塞俄比亞人工平英,美,日何止十倍,佢地應該競爭力高英,美,日十倍啦,更加唔會有你地所講有最低工資就會增加失業,失業率一定低過英,美,日,一個饅頭就請到人啦,應該一早取代英,美,日成為世界金融中心 ...
Please mind your words here.
作者: 一支柒    時間: 2008-10-30 17:21

引用:
原帖由 xocatII 於 2008-10-30 16:37 發表


Please mind your words here.
呢句你講左好多次啦!



歡迎光臨 香港 Xocat Forum 討論區 (http://p.xocat.com/p/) Powered by Discuz! 6.0.0