用戶登入
用戶名稱：
密      碼：
登記帳號忘記密碼

討論區

教育王國
教育講場
使用意見
幼兒教育
幼校討論
幼教雜談
小學教育
小一選校
小學雜談
中學教育
升中派位
中學交流
初中教育
專上教育
備戰大學
選科選校
國際教育
國際學校
海外留學
知識增值
課外活動
教材閱讀
公開考試
深造進修
特殊教育
特殊教育
資優教育
自閉寶寶
智能評估
徵求專區
二手市場
誠徵老師
組班專區
徵保母車

   聯絡管理員
搜索
教育王國 › 討論區 › 國際學校 › Does EFS have the obligation to help the expats?
樓主: umom
go

Does EFS have the obligation to help the expats? [複製鏈接]

Maoku

Rank: 3Rank: 3


170
21#
發表於 13-1-24 10:57 |只看該作者

引用：+本帖最後由+Mom2One+於+13-1-24+10:43+編

原帖由 Mom2One 於 13-01-24 發表
本帖最後由 Mom2One 於 13-1-24 10:43 編輯

The ESF subsidy has always been a contentious issue and  ...
Cannot agree more on most of your viewpoints. As long as kids are legally admitted to HK, they should be entitled to subsidized education.  Expat are legally admitted to stay and they are taxpayers too. So I see no reason why the kids should not entitle to subsidized education. I think it is way better to invest a huge sum of money on those 雙非 where their parents are abusing our immigration system and resources.

About the language issue, I wish to add that parents who willfully make falsifying claim as Cat 1 should be disqualified to ensure only those who cannot learn in mainstream Chinese school can get in.   Otherwise it will be absurd to admit a lot of local kids who can otherwise learn in the local system while expelling those who can't.



返回頂部

shadeslayer

Rank: 11Rank: 11Rank: 11Rank: 11


32340
22#
發表於 13-1-24 13:14 |只看該作者

引用：Quote:原帖由+Mom2One+於+13-01-24+發表本

原帖由 Maoku 於 13-01-24 發表
Cannot agree more on most of your viewpoints. As long as kids are legally admitted to HK, they shoul ...
I think it is way better to invest a huge sum of money on those 雙非 where their parents are abusing our immigration system and resources

Xxxxxx

Why do we better spend tax money on Expats who come to HK up to a few years to work, than to the double-not "children" who has the legal right to be educated in HK?

Expats normally have expats package which includes a lot of benefits including schooling. A few thousands a month subsidy per person from HK government is peanuts to the package.



The more bizzare a thing is, the less mysterious it proves to be.

返回頂部

shadeslayer

Rank: 11Rank: 11Rank: 11Rank: 11


32340
23#
發表於 13-1-24 13:27 |只看該作者

引用：+本帖最後由+Mom2One+於+13-1-24+10:43+編

原帖由 Mom2One 於 13-01-24 發表
本帖最後由 Mom2One 於 13-1-24 10:43 編輯

The ESF subsidy has always been a contentious issue and  ...
majority of HKPR (whether foreign or Chinese) in their student body so the argument of subverting "non-PRs" does not seem to carry much weight.

Xxxxxx

Why is it ok to subsidize 30% expats?  Why don't we first subsidize all PIS who normall have 90%+ HK residents?



The more bizzare a thing is, the less mysterious it proves to be.

返回頂部

Maoku

Rank: 3Rank: 3


170
24#
發表於 13-1-24 13:47 |只看該作者

回覆：shadeslayer 的帖子

I can't understand why you guys are so hostile and envy to expatriate.  The package they have from their employers has nothing to do with whether kids are entitled to subsidized education or not.  A local rich can send their kids to subvented school. Can we say that these local rich can't do it because they are rich.

For the 雙非，their resident status are obtained through exploiting a legal loophole that makes it so unfair. From cost perspective, they would create a long term financial commitment on taxpayers while their parents in theory bear nothing, except the hospital charge for giving birth at the outset.  But comparing the benefits through the education, healthcare and social welfare, the cost they made is nothing. Also, there is no guarantee that these kids will make a contribution here by staying here forever, just as the expat kids do. So the long term benefits in terms of building our future workforce cannot be easily established. So, unless we have an immigration policy where we have control, they are more like guests not on the invitation list that coming for free lunch.

For expatriate, they come through a legitimate process. They share tax burden just as every other HK residents do during their stay, no matter whether their employers pay for them or not. So it is just a fairer deal from the utilitarian point of view.



返回頂部

Maoku

Rank: 3Rank: 3


170
25#
發表於 13-1-24 13:51 |只看該作者

引用：Quote:原帖由+Mom2One+於+13-01-24+發表本

原帖由 shadeslayer 於 13-01-24 發表
majority of HKPR (whether foreign or Chinese) in their student body so the argument of subverting "n ...
I am not saying that we should not subsidize kids studying in PIS. In my view, giving us voucher returns the power of choice to every parent.

Just declare interest, I am paying almost 10k each month for my kid studying in PIS.



返回頂部

FattyDaddy

Rank: 6Rank: 6


9569
26#
發表於 13-1-24 15:45 |只看該作者
JJsMama 發表於 13-1-24 10:14
HK taxpayers are paying children of well-to-do Hong Kong families a premier international education.  If so, shouldn't all be getting the same? ...
If you believe those who attend ESF schools are from well off families, then you are truly, as you said, barking up the wrong tree, but having said that, I agree that quality education from ESF or otherwise should be affordable to all Hongkongers, if someone like Jake van der Kamp resents ESF for receiving subvention and he would also like one (as he said in his article), then he should lobby the government for one instead of suggesting it to be taken away from ESF, this won't benefit anyone, and he won't be paying any less when ESF parents are paying more.

"seem to think that paying tax is an entitlement to certain privileges"  <-- Isn't this what Jake was doing? So was he making perfect sense or totally wrong?

"no emotional attachment to the whole issue" <-- This is funny, I see this sentence often, and without exception from people who are against ESF receiving subvention, obviously they believe anyone who thinks ESF should be subsidized must be an ESF parent having emotional attachments

返回頂部

FattyDaddy

Rank: 6Rank: 6


9569
27#
發表於 13-1-24 16:37 |只看該作者
shadeslayer 發表於 13-1-24 13:27
Why don't we first subsidize all PIS who normall have 90%+ HK residents? ...
Why not indeed, so lobby for that, or alternatively lobby for a voucher system where government money subsidize the person instead of directly subsidizing the school, few people would be against that, especially the voucher system.

Why waste effort arguing for a cut to a few schools just because they have a minority of ex-pats studying in them? Who will benefit from such a cut? No one. Will education be any better in Hongkong by making these schools more expensive? No.

返回頂部

Maoku

Rank: 3Rank: 3


170
28#
發表於 13-1-24 19:11 |只看該作者

引用：Quote:shadeslayer+發表於+13-1-24+13:27+W

原帖由 FattyDaddy 於 13-01-24 發表
Why not indeed, so lobby for that, or alternatively lobby for a voucher system where government mone ...
Agree 100%!



返回頂部

‹ 上一主題|下一主題 ›
12
返回列表
發新帖