Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

China Seeks to Buy Control of Hong Kong Companies

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 63 posts

Re: China Seeks to Buy Control of Hong Kong Companies

#41

Post by throwaway1997 »

coliveira wrote: post #22
jryle70 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, since when America practicing functional constituency [0]? It was invented long before 1997 when HK was still under British rule, nothing to do with China, so I think you can take easy with whataboutism. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_constituency_(Hong_...

The problems of Hong Kong started with colonization by the British. But of course only now the western journalists are worried.

Most HKers would not see that as a problem. The city thrived under British rule.

Re: China Seeks to Buy Control of Hong Kong Companies

#42

Post by throwaway1997 »

spuz wrote: post #34
paganel wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the OP, but I guess that most of those protesters work for said Hong Kong companies and when your new politically-appointed boss tells you that you either fall in line or you can go and look for another job I think most of those protesters will choose to fall in line.

I guess that makes sense but aren't the protestors already risking their jobs by continuing to protest? I've heard of people having "sick" days and "working from home" in order to plausibly skip work in order to protest. If the goal is to fire protestors from their jobs, I don't think China buying controlling shares in a few companies makes much sense. The other comment in this thread about buying votes in the govern…

You can't fire 2 million+ people in a city with a population of 7 million

Re: China Seeks to Buy Control of Hong Kong Companies

#43

Post by javagram »

spaceribs wrote: post #33
seibelj wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citizens United was the an extremely beneficial ruling IMO. Your opinion on it being a “disaster” is not a fact, it is an opinion. Citizens United allows everyone who wants to, whether its corporations or unions or groups of people, to make their case directly to citizens. This is a Good Thing. It also isn’t the case that spending hundreds of millions of dollars guarantees you a victory, as the recent example of bill…

The difference is that billions of dollars tends to make a "better case" than those ideas without billions of dollars. Why do you think that money accumulated by the greedy should be given an advantage in the marketplace of ideas?

Trump won both the primary and the general even though he spent significantly less than his opponents in both.

Money talks, but it isn’t everything and can’t buy elections in the USA right now.

Re: China Seeks to Buy Control of Hong Kong Companies

#44

Post by coliveira »

throwaway1997 wrote: post #41
coliveira wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problems of Hong Kong started with colonization by the British. But of course only now the western journalists are worried.

Most HKers would not see that as a problem. The city thrived under British rule.

HK continues to thrive under Chinese rule.

Re: China Seeks to Buy Control of Hong Kong Companies

#45

Post by marcosdumay »

paganel wrote: post #30
spuz wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obvious in what way? The protestors are not the same people who run these companies as far as I am aware so not sure what you're referring to.

Not the OP, but I guess that most of those protesters work for said Hong Kong companies and when your new politically-appointed boss tells you that you either fall in line or you can go and look for another job I think most of those protesters will choose to fall in line.

Those people are on the street facing a militarized police force. Do you think their boss will stop them?

Re: China Seeks to Buy Control of Hong Kong Companies

#46

Post by NicoJuicy »

coliveira wrote: post #44
throwaway1997 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most HKers would not see that as a problem. The city thrived under British rule.

HK continues to thrive under Chinese rule.

Because they were ( partially ) left alone, as was originally agreed till 2050.

How can you (already?) forgot the massive protests against Mainland China? A country is made of civilians, not corporations.

Re: China Seeks to Buy Control of Hong Kong Companies

#47

Post by [deleted] »

sangnoir wrote: post #39
cominatchu wrote: post #38

I see almost all comments on this article are sympathetic to China. I have not dug deeper but I wonder if the accounts making these comments are all real, or could they be part of China’s propaganda apparatus?

Kindly re-read the HN guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Please don't make insinuations about astroturfing. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried, email us and we'll look at the data.

[deleted]

Re: China Seeks to Buy Control of Hong Kong Companies

#48

Post by AstralStorm »

throwaway1997 wrote: post #42
spuz wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess that makes sense but aren't the protestors already risking their jobs by continuing to protest? I've heard of people having "sick" days and "working from home" in order to plausibly skip work in order to protest. If the goal is to fire protestors from their jobs, I don't think China buying controlling shares in a few companies makes much sense. The other comment in this thread about buying votes in the govern…

You can't fire 2 million+ people in a city with a population of 7 million

You could, and people would likely start springing up cooperatives and forcibly taking company property over like what happened in Italy during the crisis. Not sure how well those fare now.

Not to mention this would vastly fuel the protests.

Re: China Seeks to Buy Control of Hong Kong Companies

#49

Post by dirtyid »

arcticbull wrote: post #18
daddylonglegs wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rather like the City of London then [1] - not the only similarity between the two places. I think the system dates to British rule in Hong Kong, which became partly democratic rather late in the day. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London#Elections note: this is the City of London (~1 square mile) not the metropolis. Edit: ninja'd by louthy and djcapelis

Towards the end of British rule in Hong Kong the Brits sought to make HK more democratic but were rebuffed by Beijing, as in the 1960s [1]. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/28/world/asia/china-began-pu...

The original source of this narrative is VJMedia.hk [1], popularized by QZ in English web [2]. VJMedia is operated by RongLeQi who was a member of the League of Social Democrats at the time, aka pro-democrat party who participated in the LegCo oath-taking controversy. Unsurprisingly, it's a fairly biased and disingenuous interpretation of FCO40/327 and the Thatcher memo that border on propaganda. The primary sources quoted in the article has nothing to do with democratic reforms but UK seeking HK sovereignty as a self-governing dominion like Singapore (not just democratic reforms) as an alternative to handover because it would stabilize investor fears - the concerns were purely economic. Obviously China would reject this proposal which basically tried to circumvent handover by making HK dejure independent in 1997. The reason why UK/Patten introduced some democratic reforms near handover was a last minute effort to maintain some political and economic influence over the colony. There was never any effort in the 60s to grant HK democracy within the context of Extension of Hong Kong Territory lease - they asked for sovereignty which was never an option - and what little that was given was a last minute geopolitical power play.

[1] https://www.vjmedia.com.hk/articles/2014/01/11/60039

[2] https://qz.com/279013/the-secret-history-of-hong-kongs-still...

Re: China Seeks to Buy Control of Hong Kong Companies

#50

Post by coliveira »

NicoJuicy wrote: post #46
coliveira wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HK continues to thrive under Chinese rule.

Because they were ( partially ) left alone, as was originally agreed till 2050. How can you (already?) forgot the massive protests against Mainland China? A country is made of civilians, not corporations.

Under the rule of British, the people of HK could never protest like they're doing now.
Post reply on HN