Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Somalia, libertarian paradise

«1

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    some reading for you


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 837 ✭✭✭whiteonion


    Well at least the libertarians at the Ludvig von Mises institute seem to think that Somalia is a libertarian role model we should follow. http://mises.org/daily/2066


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,001 ✭✭✭p1akuw47h5r3it


    whiteonion wrote: »
    Somalia is truly a libertarian "paradise". There is basically no functioning central government. Everything in the country is free market, even law enforcement is being carried out by private groups. If you hate taxes, regulations and goverment and love guns you should move to Somalia. Somalia is the logic consequence of a free and totally unregulated market.
    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_BX2aSG8RqEU/SgIOObG0-EI/AAAAAAAAB-E/cPgIvKNFOrE/s1600-h/Hate+Taxes+Government+Regulations,+Love+Guns+-+It%27s+better+in+Somalia.jpg

    What Libertarian wants a "non functioning Government"?

    They want a Small Goverment, not a non-functioning one. Two completely different things.

    Hong Kong would be a better example of a libertarian paradise (from an economic viewpoint anyway)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 478 ✭✭CokaColumbo


    Statists consistently refer to Somalia as a sort of 'case-study' of libertarianism in action. How does a country which has been marked by 20 years of civil war; attempted military take-overs; government and warlord atrocities; genocide; general government oppression and an absence of free-elections; absolutely no law and order in many parts; and Islamic rule constitute anything related to libertarianism?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,164 ✭✭✭cavedave


    There is an interesting post here about how libertarian New Zealand is.
    By the general axiom of revealed preference, the increment of liberty isn't worth the loss of income (and inconvenience of moving and living abroad) for the vast majority of libertarians

    The point that by many measures New Zealand is more libertarian than most places that libertarians do live in (like California).

    I think the Somalia argument is a very poor strawman. But I do think its reasonable to ask libertarians why they don't live in the socially free Netherlands or low tax areas of the US or in New Zealand.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,001 ✭✭✭p1akuw47h5r3it


    cavedave wrote: »
    There is an interesting post here about how libertarian New Zealand is.



    The point that by many measures New Zealand is more libertarian than most places that libertarians do live in (like California).

    I think the Somalia argument is a very poor strawman. But I do think its reasonable to ask libertarians why they don't live in the socially free Netherlands or low tax areas of the US or in New Zealand.

    I don't understand what u mean by this. Do you mean why Libertarians in Ireland, for example, don't move there?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    cavedave wrote: »
    There is an interesting post here about how libertarian New Zealand is.



    The point that by many measures New Zealand is more libertarian than most places that libertarians do live in (like California).

    I think the Somalia argument is a very poor strawman. But I do think its reasonable to ask libertarians why they don't live in the socially free Netherlands or low tax areas of the US or in New Zealand.

    One can live in Ireland and keep the business and money abroad in "more liberal" countries such as Switzerland ....

    Well if it wasnt for the Irish economic "libertarianism" we would remain a pimple on the ass side of the atlantic


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 356 ✭✭hoorsmelt


    ei.sdraob wrote: »

    Well if it wasnt for the Irish economic "libertarianism" we would remain a pimple on the ass side of the atlantic

    Indeed we would have remained much less noticeable. Instead we're now in the position where the debts racked up in this country by reckless investment, a property market gone crazy and an unregulated financial system threaten to bring down the euro and have made Ireland (more precisely the threat of an Irish default on bank debt) a problem that could conceivably bring down the eurozone.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    hoorsmelt wrote: »
    Indeed we would have remained much less noticeable. Instead we're now in the position where the debts racked up in this country by reckless investment, a property market gone crazy and an unregulated financial system threaten to bring down the euro and have made Ireland (more precisely the threat of an Irish default on bank debt) a problem that could conceivably bring down the eurozone.

    Whose bright idea was it to "socialize" bank losses ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 356 ✭✭hoorsmelt


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    Whose bright idea was it to "socialize" bank losses ;)

    FF, the PD's and the Greens. Nothing inherently uncapitalistic about taking steps to prtect the ruling class's economic position and use the economic power of the capitalist state to rescue their system.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    hoorsmelt wrote: »
    FF, the PD's and the Greens. Nothing inherently uncapitalistic about taking steps to prtect the ruling class's economic position and use the economic power of the capitalist state to rescue their system.

    Thats not very libertarian now is it ;)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,164 ✭✭✭cavedave


    Raina Rapping Whiskey
    "But I do think its reasonable to ask libertarians why they don't live in the socially free Netherlands or low tax areas of the US or in New Zealand."

    I don't understand what u mean by this. Do you mean why Libertarians in Ireland, for example, don't move there?

    Yes that is what I mean. What about it was hard to understand?
    ei.sdraob

    One can live in Ireland and keep the business and money abroad in "more liberal" countries such as Switzerland ....

    Can you? I thought if you lived in Ireland you had to pay Irish income taxes (as well as VAT on goods you bought here).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    cavedave wrote: »
    Can you? I thought if you lived in Ireland you had to pay Irish income taxes (as well as VAT on goods you bought here).

    To some degree yes, of course we have plenty of indirect taxes...


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,637 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    But I do think its reasonable to ask libertarians why they don't live in the socially free Netherlands or low tax areas of the US or in New Zealand.

    Can't speak for libertarians per se, but the weather's better here.

    NTM


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 788 ✭✭✭SupaNova


    Yes that is what I mean. What about it was hard to understand?

    I guess he was a bit surprised at the stupidity of the question.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,001 ✭✭✭p1akuw47h5r3it


    SupaNova wrote: »
    I guess he was a bit surprised at the stupidity of the question.

    Ye pretty much.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,164 ✭✭✭cavedave


    SupaNova

    I guess he was a bit surprised at the stupidity of the question.

    Why is the question stupid? For example the marginal revolution blog of libertarian economics professor Tyler Cowen though it was a reasonable question here (cached as the site is down for search currently)
    Manic Moran

    Can't speak for libertarians per se, but the weather's better here.

    Libertarians like everyone else put a value on being around their family, friends certain weather etc.

    We also claim to put a high value on individual freedom. Being both social freedom to take drugs and go with prostitutes as long as that does not impinge on anyone else and financial freedom to earn money without excess intervention from government. If we did value these libertarian principles we should emigrate to countries that espouse them at greater rates


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,001 ✭✭✭p1akuw47h5r3it


    cavedave wrote: »
    Why is the question stupid? For example the marginal revolution blog of libertarian economics professor Tyler Cowen though it was a reasonable question here (cached as the site is down for search currently)



    Libertarians like everyone else put a value on being around their family, friends certain weather etc.

    We also claim to put a high value on individual freedom. Being both social freedom to take drugs and go with prostitutes as long as that does not impinge on anyone else and financial freedom to earn money without excess intervention from government. If we did value these libertarian principles we should emigrate to countries that espouse them at greater rates

    Because not every libertarian is in a position to simply leave for another country.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 788 ✭✭✭SupaNova


    Your question is stupid because the answers are obvious. I mean you realize the following:
    Libertarians like everyone else put a value on being around their family, friends certain weather etc.

    And then wonder why Libertarians don't move to the other side of the world.:rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,164 ✭✭✭cavedave


    Raina Rapping Whiskey

    Because not every libertarian is in a position to simply leave for another country.
    SupaNova

    And then wonder why Libertarians don't move to the other side of the world.

    Thats the reason the question is stupid? Because thats a pretty stupid reason. Of course not every libertarian would leave the country but "If we did value these libertarian principles we should emigrate to countries that espouse them at greater rates "


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 788 ✭✭✭SupaNova


    Your question is stupid because the answers are obvious.
    .


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 399 ✭✭RepublicanEagle


    libertarian paradise?

    Are you serious OP? You obviously have no idea what is really happening there.

    The word I believe you are looking for is total anarchy.

    Put it this way OP if there ever was a post-apocalyptic scenario the whole world would resemble Somalia's situation.




  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,001 ✭✭✭p1akuw47h5r3it


    cavedave wrote: »
    Thats the reason the question is stupid? Because thats a pretty stupid reason. Of course not every libertarian would leave the country but "If we did value these libertarian principles we should emigrate to countries that espouse them at greater rates "

    What are you talking about?

    Not everyone who considers themselves a Libertarian is in a position to simply up and leave to a considered more liberal country.

    How is this a stupid answer? It's just a factual answer.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 837 ✭✭✭whiteonion


    Somalia is the logical outcome of libertarianism. Cuba is the logical outcome of socialism.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭Valmont


    whiteonion wrote: »
    Somalia is the logical outcome of libertarianism
    Logical outcome of anarchy maybe, but not of small government libertarianism. Let me repeat that- Small Government libertarianism.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,164 ✭✭✭cavedave


    Raina Rapping Whiskey

    What are you talking about?

    Not everyone who considers themselves a Libertarian is in a position to simply up and leave to a considered more liberal country.

    How is this a stupid answer? It's just a factual answer.

    I am talking about placing a value on freedom and how the valuations libertarians claim to put on them mean they should be more likely to move to to countries with greater freedom.

    If the answer to this optimization is so obvious why did
    The Volokh Conspiracy discuss it here (with 70 comments)

    Marginal revolution already quoted

    Econlog here

    Catallaxy Files Eric Crampton makes a very good argument.

    All these well respected libertarian blogs think the question is worthy of a descent analysis yet Raina Rapping Whiskey and SupaNova you think the question is too stupid to make sense or to try rebut. Does that imply you may be setting your required standard of argument too high?

    eu2008.gif

    If new zealand is too far the Netherlands and Denmark are more libertarian than here according to political compass


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭Valmont


    cavedave wrote: »
    All these well respected libertarian blogs think the question is worthy of a descent analysis...
    For me, I guess the reasoning is that some libertarians are angry that they can't enjoy freedom in their own country with their families and friends and that moving away would be "giving in" or something. I'm slightly annoyed at having to leave Ireland to go to a healthier country but I'm not sure every libertarian would be in a position to just up and leave like I did. In fact, in Ireland, I'm sure even the communists are leaving...!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 778 ✭✭✭UsernameInUse


    What is so horrifically frightening to us that we can't follow a more socially and economically libertarian path to prosperity? Hong Kong is the most free economy on Earth and they're having very little problems thus far...it seems that Joe Higgins and Co have quite the opposite in mind - to bring Ireland back into the stone-age. These people should make use of our free healthcare and get their dementia symptoms sorted.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,729 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    whiteonion wrote: »
    Somalia is truly a libertarian "paradise". There is basically no functioning central government. Everything in the country is free market, even law enforcement is being carried out by private groups. If you hate taxes, regulations and goverment and love guns you should move to Somalia. Somalia is the logic consequence of a free and totally unregulated market.
    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_BX2aSG8RqEU/SgIOObG0-EI/AAAAAAAAB-E/cPgIvKNFOrE/s1600-h/Hate+Taxes+Government+Regulations,+Love+Guns+-+It%27s+better+in+Somalia.jpg
    I approve of this sattire

    In all seriousness though most functioning libertarians agree a governments narrow list of functions includes things like emergency services (like police forces) and defense. They aren't anarchists or nihilists. They still believe that you need to enforce laws that protect the rights of the individual.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    What is so horrifically frightening to us that we can't follow a more socially and economically libertarian path to prosperity? Hong Kong is the most free economy on Earth and they're having very little problems thus far...it seems that Joe Higgins and Co have quite the opposite in mind - to bring Ireland back into the stone-age. These people should make use of our free healthcare and get their dementia symptoms sorted.

    Yes, but Hong Kong tightened up real estate lending requirements after painful boom and bust cycles in the 80s and 90s. It is still a crazy market there, but having some regulations in place is considered good for business, since it keeps the wheels turning (rather than sending the cart off the track). The HK government (yes there is one) deserves some credit for learning from past policy mistakes, even if they don't necessarily listen to citizens while they are making them. The inability of the Irish government - and Irish voters - to learn from its own economic history is a huge part of the problem there.

    Also, t's not just the fact that Hong Kong Chinese have a liberal economy that explains their economic success. There is a deeply ingrained culture of business, entrepreneurship, and wheeling and dealing. Social prestige comes from making money and entrepreneurship is revered: when you open a business, people send huge flower arrangements and congratulatory messages. And when businesses fail, that's it: nobody comes to save you, you just close, dust yourself off, and start again. Ireland doesn't have that culture, and simply changing economic institutions to look more like Hong Kong's would not necessarily produce the same economic outcomes.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    What is so horrifically frightening to us that we can't follow a more socially and economically libertarian path to prosperity? Hong Kong is the most free economy on Earth and they're having very little problems thus far...it seems that Joe Higgins and Co have quite the opposite in mind - to bring Ireland back into the stone-age. These people should make use of our free healthcare and get their dementia symptoms sorted.

    This is a surreal post. You are arguing for communist ruled Hong Kong as a model while complaining that Higgins et all might 'bring Ireland back to the stone age' if they got to implement left wing reform.

    So there is now good communism and bad communism?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 788 ✭✭✭SupaNova


    This is a surreal post. You are arguing for communist ruled Hong Kong as a model while complaining that Higgins et all might 'bring Ireland back to the stone age' if they got to implement left wing reform.

    So there is now good communism and bad communism?

    China is communist in name only. They are a very very capitalistic country. Joe Higgins would be laughed at in China.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    SupaNova wrote: »
    China is communist in name only. They are a very very capitalistic country. Joe Higgins would be laughed at in China.

    This right here is why the libertarians on here are not taken seriously.

    China is a brutal suppressor of human rights. The entire economy is centrally planned. If you want to put it forward as a liberal model you aspire too while deriding the Irish left, you are fair game to be dismissed as downright confused.

    At least permabear can put together a coherent argument. This is just plain daft.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 788 ✭✭✭SupaNova


    I don't put China forward as a liberal model. I just pointed out they are not much more communist than we are. They have State Capitalism which has been a step forward for them. The political and economic system Joe Higgins would like to see would be a giant step backwards for them. That's why I said he would be laughed at.
    The entire economy is centrally planned.
    No its not. See the definition of a centrally planned economy.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 788 ✭✭✭SupaNova


    Also in this thread people have mentioned the success of Hong Kong which as far as i'm aware has its own government.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    SupaNova wrote: »
    Also in this thread people have mentioned the success of Hong Kong which as far as i'm aware has its own government.

    You aren't getting away that easily. Explain to the group how Ireland is as communist as China please.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 788 ✭✭✭SupaNova


    China is not much more communist than we are

    I should have added "in terms of their economy".


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,941 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Hong Kong sounds horrible:

    "100,000 people live in inadequate housing, a category that includes cubicle, cage, rooftop and partitioned dwellings."

    http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1917897,00.html

    They have "cage appartments" there!!





  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,164 ✭✭✭cavedave


    20Cent

    "100,000 people live in inadequate housing, a category that includes cubicle, cage, rooftop and partitioned dwellings."

    I think its worth pointing out that Hong Kong is the greatest economic experiment ever. I dont doubt some of the accomodation is terrible. But is it terrible according to the most probable alternative which is effectively North Korea?

    The Chinese say how rich Hong Kong was and how poor they were and decided to copy hong kong in special economic zones nearby. Last time I looked this lifted 200 million people out of awful subsistence level (or below that) poverty that China endured in Mao's time
    In 1974, the future Chinese premier Deng Xiaoping led a large delegation to the United Nations in New York. Chinese officials discovered, as they prepared for the expensive trip, that the could muster only $38,000 in foreign cash


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    I'm not disagreeing with you on the history of the place. But you cannot seriously suggest to me that a brutally politically policed place like HK is a model for Libertarians.

    What is interesting about the place is that it has shattered the right wing mantra that 'you cannont have economic freedom without policial freedom and policitical freedom without economic freedom'

    I suppose it all comes down to whats more important to you. The ability to turn a buck or the right to speak your mind without getting tortured.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    This is a surreal post. You are arguing for communist ruled Hong Kong as a model while complaining that Higgins et all might 'bring Ireland back to the stone age' if they got to implement left wing reform.

    So there is now good communism and bad communism?

    Hong Kong is not and was never communist ruled. They have a free and active press (the South China Morning Post is actually a great newspaper which regularly reports on industrial accidents and corruption in mainland China) and in the 1997 handover they kept all of their economic institutions intact. The "north" (as HK residents call the mainland) is slowly trying to assert itself there, mainly through pushing Mandarin and integrating HK into the national high speed rail network, but the Communist Party is not going to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs, especially as Singapore is increasingly taking business away from HK. HK is not a democracy, but neither is it communist - if Beijing every really tried to crack down, by the end of the day, 2/3 of HKs capital would be out of the country.
    cavedave wrote: »
    I think its worth pointing out that Hong Kong is the greatest economic experiment ever. I dont doubt some of the accomodation is terrible. But is it terrible according to the most probable alternative which is effectively North Korea?

    The Chinese say how rich Hong Kong was and how poor they were and decided to copy hong kong in special economic zones nearby. Last time I looked this lifted 200 million people out of awful subsistence level (or below that) poverty that China endured in Mao's time

    I'm confused by this. Why is the alternative North Korea?

    Everyone sucked it up for years as the province struggled up the economic ladder, and perhaps it is time to reassess social policy. In a city that is grotesquely wealthy, it does not seem right that living conditions are so poor for so many. But the cage apartments are also a symbol of HKs power to draw people in: migrants from all over China would rather try their luck starting at the bottom in HK than stay in their home villages, and the government works very hard to keep all the people who want to work there out. In some ways, HK is like the US in this regard: if you migrate there, nobody is going to help you, but nobody is really going to stand in your way either. Therefore these places attract the kind of people who are willing to forgo a lot in the present in the hopes of a better future.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 788 ✭✭✭SupaNova


    I think its worth pointing out that Hong Kong is the greatest economic experiment ever. I dont doubt some of the accomodation is terrible. But is it terrible according to the most probable alternative which is effectively North Korea?

    The Chinese say how rich Hong Kong was and how poor they were and decided to copy hong kong in special economic zones nearby. Last time I looked this lifted 200 million people out of awful subsistence level (or below that) poverty that China endured in Mao's time

    This what I am referring to. The economic policies and ideologies of Joe Higgins and the far left would have them in far worse shape. China, South Korea, India, Thailand and others that are embracing capitalism have come along way. True they have developed economically much quicker than socially.

    The general point of the thread seems to be to try and associate Libertarians with standing for terrible regimes, or being for abuse of human rights which is not true.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    I'm not disagreeing with you on the history of the place. But you cannot seriously suggest to me that a brutally politically policed place like HK is a model for Libertarians.

    What is interesting about the place is that it has shattered the right wing mantra that 'you cannont have economic freedom without policial freedom and policitical freedom without economic freedom'

    I suppose it all comes down to whats more important to you. The ability to turn a buck or the right to speak your mind without getting tortured.

    Have you been to Hong Kong? There is a free press, and people are allowed to protest. Hong Kong is nowhere near 'brutally politically policed'. It is not a Western-style democracy, but it's no gulag.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    SupaNova wrote: »
    This what I am referring to. The economic policies and ideologies of Joe Higgins and the far left would have them in far worse shape. China, South Korea, India, Thailand and others that are embracing capitalism have come along way. True they have developed economically much quicker than socially.


    So China = good communism, Joe Higgins = bad communism.

    What tripe.
    SupaNova wrote: »
    The general point of the thread seems to be to try and associate Libertarians with standing for terrible regimes, or being for abuse of human rights which is not true.

    Thats what I thought. Until I saw Libertarians argue for Hong Kong.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Have you been to Hong Kong? There is a free press, and people are allowed to protest. Hong Kong is nowhere near 'brutally politically policed'. It is not a Western-style democracy, but it's no gulag.

    Its no Gulag unless you are Falung Gong or a pro democracy activist.

    Yes, HK isn't as brutally supressed as inland China. But we aren't even close to acceptible human rights.

    But, hey, if you can make a buck there and pay no tax, some libertarians will do what they can do defend it


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 788 ✭✭✭SupaNova


    So China = good communism, Joe Higgins = bad communism.

    What tripe.

    I'm talking about economics. China is not communist when it comes to economics. Joe Higgins is.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    Its no Gulag unless you are Falung Gong or a pro democracy activist.

    Yes, HK isn't as brutally supressed as inland China. But we aren't even close to acceptible human rights.

    But, hey, if you can make a buck there and pay no tax, some libertarians will do what they can do defend it

    People do pay taxes in HK; they have a flat tax.

    Most HKers are actually pretty happy to be able to make a buck and otherwise be left alone. The most vociferous protests I have seen in my time there were over banking and pension issues. People can and do protest against the government and financial institutions if they think their capacity to make - or more importantly save money - is at risk.

    Perhaps things will be different in the future, but HKs wealth is relatively new, and most people are not that far removed from grinding poverty. The big trade-off that many Asian countries have made is giving up some political and social rights for economic rights, namely that their governments will carefully manage economic expansion, while maintaining a safe, orderly society. By and large, HK (and South Korea, and Singapore) have done this. Mainland China is a much messier process, which isn't surprising given the size and their starting point. But you simply cannot lump HK in with the rest of China, or treat it as some kind of crushing, authoritarian state. Personally I found the state to be much more heavy-handed and intrusive in everyday life in London than in Hong Kong, but perhaps that is just me.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement