HK is still suffering from other 'occupations'
Updated: 2014-12-31 09:50
By N. Balakrishnan(HK Edition)
|
|||||||
We are all sick of the "Occupy Central" campaign and relieved that their encampments have been dismantled. But let's examine some other remaining "occupations" in Hong Kong. These don't attract media scrutiny but they may have an even more negative effect on the public.
I often pass by the bridge connecting the International Financial Centre (IFC) with the Macau Pier and Four Seasons Hotel. The IFC houses the Hong Kong Monetary Authority and local offices leading global financial companies. And I presume visiting financial bigwigs still staying at the Four Seasons Hotel despite today's diminished budgets. Next door, of course, are jetfoils and choppers to whisk you to Macao for a flutter.
But this affluent junction frequented by Global High Finance is also the stomping ground of about 100 young wannabe property brokers toting hyped-up brochures of Hong Kong real estate. These are named after some romantic-sounding European castle but are actually a pigeon hole not far from a landfill. These people constantly badger affluent-looking people passing by and make a pitch.
Why are these street-walking real estate pests permitted to "occupy" this busy pedestrian thoroughfare? What relationship do they have with the security guards in this area? Perhaps they are not empowered to forcibly move these young people on for the crime of carrying a brochure and accosting an occasional passerby. On the other hand would they "look the other way" if street-walkers or their touts began soliciting in this area?
Presumably these real estate urgers work on a commission basis, getting paid only if they make a sale, unlike people who sit in the offices of real estate brokers and no doubt get a fixed salary. The odds of these urgers making a sale must indeed be small even in a place like Hong Kong. Although business decisions are made here in a flash, there can't be too many people prepared to buy a HK$5 million apartment by signing for it while scores of pedestrians rub shoulders with them as they hurry past.
What are the chances of these 100 urgers snaring a buyer? At best I would rate the chance of just one of the 100 selling an apartment at one a day. So, taking this figure as a yardstick, let's calculate the economic waste of this "occupation".
These youngsters seem to be well-educated types and could probably earn about HK$20,000 a month if they got a full-time job. So the economic cost of allowing them to "patrol" this area is about HK$20,000 x 100 = HK$2 million a month. In other words, every month the developer has the use of HK$2 million of human effort to sell, arguably, one HK$5 million apartment, from which that day's sole lucky guy may get a HK$20,000 commission. What an economic waste!
In reality, probably some of them have yet to sell one apartment. They'd be better off going to Macao to chance a few dollars in a slot machine. When you play the slots you play for fixed odds and though the house wins over the long run, you still have some chances of winning some money in the short term. But in the case of these people, the odds are close to zero.
To me this situation in the financial heart of our city symbolizes the pathos and frustrations faced by the young people of Hong Kong. They are forced to play a "business" game with impossible odds against them - unlike the kids who were camping out in Admiralty.
Now let's move on to another "occupation" that symbolizes the problems of Hong Kong which millions of us witness every day. This concerns old people using the MTR. Most carriages have just two reserved seats for the elderly, infirm and pregnant mothers. Not only is this absurdly insufficient, you will often see selfish healthy-looking adults occupying these seats.
Next time you're riding the MTR glance around and note of how many old or infirm people are standing up hanging on to straps and poles as the train sways along at speed. Sitting firmly on seats allocated for them are young and middle-aged people who almost without exception never offer their seats to the aged. What's happened to respect for elders? Furthermore, when somebody does give up his seat to a heavily pregnant woman, you will often find it was a kind-hearted senior citizen.
It's time the MTR took a reality check. Are its policy-makers aware of our demographics and the ever-increasing percentage of senior citizens in our population? Surely there is a strong case for more compassionate treatment of the aged, infirm and expectant mothers. Perhaps more seats should be designated for their use.
The author is a former foreign correspondent who has lived and worked in Hong Kong for the past 25 years.
(HK Edition 12/31/2014 page12)