2016年6月15日 星期三

160615三:自由與權利

   午夜夢迴,回覆此前網友的兩則留言。
   奢侈品本質上最勢利,脅於13億人市場,不給佔中歌手開飯的我所謂「食得鹹魚抵得渴」,與內地人因六四、維權而被暴力打壓差天同地。
   就如有紐約人痛恨資本主義,但具金融才能,日頭番投行年入百萬US,收工後在門外「佔領華爾街」。CEO話,人各有志,無謂咁勉強,你專心做你想做既嘢啦。
   進步人士告投行迫害。但終止賓主關係似離婚,遣散費相當於贍養費,唯求合法,與老板打壓員工、丈夫虐待妻子不能混為一談。
   痛恨政權是你的自由,但借政權來生活不是你的權利。
   *至於學位氾濫、畢業生貶值,政策確來自政府。但任何政策必有人得有人失。知識為本、擴展學位的政策,直接得益的不是要僱員增值的商界,而是大專和學者。學額增則津貼多,大學勢力水漲船高。
   增學位對維持競爭力確
有需要,關鍵是開位怎樣與開職配合。大學只顧擴張,不管也管不到,職場是否有位俾學生。就像社會主義工廠,為做大自己而開工,懶理是否有人買貨。
   港人反政府入骨後,凡有問題就歸於政府,就如信教,凡事歸天主,懶理問題的根源。知識創意的信仰,說到底是商界逼僱員升力但不加薪,學界借勢擴張的合拍。
  一句話,商與學在這方面有同樣的利益/
道德風險」

2 則留言:

chau kwan Cheung 提到...

I am Anita Cheung.
Hope you remember me, Dr Tsui.
Europe linkage with UK will be in referendum for passage or turning down these weeks.
My housemate asked me if I agree UK people staying in or I say they should off going.
As a Hong Kong citizen, a former UK colony city dweller, I want to show my position for this question .
Since I only get limited two fronts informations, I just learnt that going off will have tremendous side-effects on UK this old democratic and constitutional royal state. I would rather show no position or abandon my say on it for the raised question.
Blank answer from me is not a joke because letting the hot two fronts fighters to show their standings and reasons is better than letting me a non UK citizen to show any position better. A place of their own matters greatly than on me a HK Chinese.

匿名 提到...

『學額增則津貼多,大學勢力水漲船高。』--次序錯了呢,冇人磅水又點增額?『津貼多則學額增,大學勢力水漲船高。』