ESF schools Futher $$$$

flashingcat

agree.  in fact I am paying tax in both countries.

FattyDaddy

Shootastar 發表於 12-10-16 15:27
回復 FattyDaddy 的帖子

Are you saying that the dropping of the discriminatory admission policy by ESF  ...

Simply put, their admission policy is NOT discriminatory to local Hongkongers, you don't loose any opportunity simply by being a local, and most ESF students are indeed locals, this is the undeniable fact.

You're saying "ah but local Hongkongers must know Cantonese so they are being discriminated against", but this is NOT the same thing. Many Hongkongers choose not to learn Cantonese and read/write Chinese, may be for reasons you don't agree to, but that is their choice and they have their very valid reasons. You may think they are then "not truly local", and that is where things get murky and dangerous.

md23

112200 發表於 12-10-16 14:33
回復 flashingcat 的帖子

No, Expat no ned to pay tax to HK Govt, becasue they suppose pay to their h ...

It's wrong.

Shootastar

回復 FattyDaddy 的帖子

"Simply put, their admission policy is NOT discriminatory to local Hongkongers, you don't loose any opportunity simply by being a local, and most ESF students are indeed locals, this is the undeniable fact."

My comments: I am good at writing and speaking English. My kids also do. However, they lost the opportunity to study at ESF because they speak Cantonese at home and they know how to write Chinese. That is why I feel its admission policy is discriminatory against 98% of local kids. Please forgive me quoting an inaccurate figure if it is less than 98% because the Chinese population here is 98% and seldom who do not speak Cantonese and/or know how to write simple Chinese characters.

That explains why they admit many Indians and Pakastans because they are local Hong Kong people but do not speak Cantonese and/or write Chinese character at home. Personally, I absolutely agree that ethnic minority should receive the same subsidy as local kids do so long as they are Hong Kong permanent residents.


"You're saying "ah but local Hongkongers must know Cantonese so they are discriminated", but this is NOT the same thing. Many Hongkongers choose not to learn Cantonese and read/write Chinese, may be for reasons you don't agree to, but that is their choice and they have their very valid reasons."

My comments: I agree that there are some local families who do not speak Cantonese at home or do not know how to write Chinese characters but the number should not be many. Why should such kids receive priority to other "normal" local kids?  If the kid is an Eurasian, I think most local parents would speak Cantonese with their kids and teach them Chinese while the foreign parents would speak English with the kids so as to make them bilingual. Everyone has the choice on what to speak at home and what language to learn. However, if ESF wants to public grant across the board in favour of their students, it should change its discrimintory admission policy (against those who speak Cantonese at home or choose to learn Chinese language).

FattyDaddy

Shootastar 發表於 12-10-16 16:43
回復 FattyDaddy 的帖子

I am good at writing and speaking English. My kids also do. However, they loose the opportunity to study at ESF because they speak Cantonese at home and they know how to write Chinese. That is why I feel its admission policy is discriminatory against 98% of local kids ...

Nope, this is not what discrimination is. Your kids chose (or rather you chose for them) to learn Cantonese and read/write Chinese, for good reasons too, but essentially you have lessened your kid's chances to study at ESF. You could have chosen not to let your kids learn so they have a better chance, don't ask me why you should do that, it may be a ludicrous choice to you but a sensible one to others. In any case, it is a conscious decision that YOU have made for your kids knowing what the consequences are.

Real discrimination is your kids are rejected simply because they do not have citizenship of a certain country or a certain skin colour, and this is NOT what is happening at ESF.

To cut a long story short, if you agree that the majority (I would say 70% or more) of ESF students are locals and should enjoy benefits like other locals, I don't see why you're so concerned about the remaining 30% non-locals. Now don't go back into the loop of saying those 70% locals are "not truly locals" because they don't speak Cantonese.and read/write Chinese.

Shootastar

回復 FattyDaddy 的帖子

"Nope, this is not what discrimination is. Your kids chose (or rather you chose for them) to learn Cantonese and read/write Chinese, for good reasons too, but essentially you have lessened your kid's chances to study at ESF. You could have chosen not to let your kids learn so they have a better chance, don't ask me why you should do that, it may be a ludicrous choice to you but a sensible one to others. In any case, it is a conscious decision that YOU have made for your kids knowing what the consequences are."

My comment: From Oxford dictionary, "discrimination" means "against / in favour of somebody" or treating a person or group differently. Why should I be treated differently if I speak mother tongue with my kids and teach them the language of my own root? Why should those foreigners or those who do not speak Cantonese or do not know how to write Chinese characters have more favor than my kids - if ESF receives the same government grant.

"Real discrimination is your kids are rejected simply because they do not have citizenship of a certain country or a certain skin colour, and this is NOT what is happening at ESF."

My comment: ESF does not discriminate one's citizenship or the skin color of the students, it is for sure. But it discriminates the majority of the local kids who speak Cantonese and know how to write Chinese characters.

To cut a long story short, if you agree that the majority (I would say 70% or more) of ESF students are locals and should enjoy benefits like any other locals, I don't see why you're so concerned about the remaining 30% non-locals. Now don't go back into the loop of saying those 70% locals are "not truly locals" because they don't speak Cantonese.

My comment:  The simple answer is the discriminatory admission policy adopted by ESF and it is not fair that not each Hong Kong kid has the same right and chance to be admitted in a school which uses government grants.

Maoku

原帖由 nintendo 於 12-10-16 發表
本帖最後由 nintendo 於 12-10-16 08:56 編輯

每個地方都有各樣唔同的政策，好難話邊度點做就要跟。

Cannot agree more. Voucher system helps restoring the right of family on making the choice for their kids. My kid go to PIS but receives no subsidy at all, but I am a taxpayer.

Shootastar

Manstap, I wish to reply your comments as follows:

"Maybe u need to expand yr circle of life. Many local kids studying in intl kind. dont speak or write Chinese.

My comment: I have two kids who had studied in an IS for over ten years. According to my observation, they do not speak Cantonese at school but they do at home. They do not do so because they respect the foreign students. They use a common language - English at school. More than 80% of the students choose to study Chinese as their second languages, those include the foreign students.

"u may need to observe the kids from international kind. Many of them cant speak or write Mand and Cantonese."

My comment: The aforesaid comments are based on my observation from my kids' international school. Contrary to your thinking, over 80% of the students choose to study Chinese as the second language at school.

"its just somebody here jealous and red eyes cos they didnt get offer in esf."

My comment: I am not jealous and have red eyes on the local kids who study at ESF. My kids have not applied for admission to ESF because of the fact that they speak Cantonese (their mother tongue) at home and know how to write the Chinese characters which is discriminated by the admission policy of ESF.

ESF is a very excellent school in terms of academic performance and certainly I would apply for admission if it drops its discriminatory admission policy. We are engaged in discussing whether government grant should be made across the board to every student at ESF.

Shootastar

Manstrap, my further comments on the following point raised by you:

"if u are thinking in this way then why Harrows charging so expensive tuition and debenture to students but Gov impose so cheap rental for  the use of the land?"

My comment: Government treats every international school in Hong Kong equally. Hong Kong government charges only a nominal sum of $1.00 on international schools so long as they are not set up for profit. Do I make any complain against Harrows on charging high school fee or debenture. The answer is no because they charge the same amount from each student (save those on scholarship) and they do not have any discriminatory admission policy. Further, they do not receive government grant to admit non-hong kong (local kids) favorably.

112200

回復 flashingcat 的帖子

There are many type of tax all all countries. For example Like in Canada, non canadian live there just need to pay GST/ PST, definietly not salary taa.  Really curious ... are you paying SALARY TAX  on both countries ?

FattyDaddy

Shootastar 發表於 12-10-16 17:44
回復 FattyDaddy 的帖子

The simple answer is the discriminatory admission policy adopted by ESF and it is not fair that not each Hong Kong kid has the same right and chance to be admitted in a school which uses government grants. ...

If your reasoning stands, then schools for disabled children would not get government grants. These schools only admit disabled children and by your reasoning are unfairly "discriminating" against able bodied children which are the majority.

This should be my last reply in this discussion, and my last comment is ... Be content with what you have and what you have chosen. Life is a series of choices, each gain brought by a certain choice is often accompanied by a corresponding loss, so don't just look at other people's gains and your own losses, because you'll feel you have been unfairly short-changed all the time.

WYmom

回復 112200 的帖子

In Canada, if you work there, you have to pay income tax... in HK, same thing.  Many people pay income tax in two countries. Please read some tax law.

bobbycheung

The funny thing about this admission policy is that it singles out "Cantonese". The policy says Category One is for children who speak English as a first or alternative language but do not speak Cantonese and/or read and write Chinese characters."   So teaching your HK kid to speak Putonghua is OK,  but not Cantonese.  

Anyway, I see at least 3 issues here.  (1) Is it against the law?  Did any parent who feel aggrieved ever report the case to 平等機會委員會?  I don't know if there is a case here, but I believe people who are strongly against this policy should consider doing so.  (2) Is the policy unfair to the HK kids at large?  Personally, I would say "yes".  One may argue that HK people have a choice.  They could always choose not to teach their kids Cantonese.  But let us not forget there are many families in Hong Kong where the parents are not proficient in English or where the kids are looked after during the daytime by their grandparents who speak only Cantonese.  So for them, if they want their kids to get into ESF, their so-called "choice" is not to talk to or communicate with their kids? (3) Is it fair to the HK taxpayers?  ESF is getting subsidies from HK Government and the money is coming out of the taxpayers' pockets.  The parents who are given a "choice" not to talk to or communicate to their kids in Cantonese are also taxpayers.  Is it fair to them?  

On the argument that HK parents do always have a choice, I guess as an analogy, ESF could have said Category One is for children who have blonde hair.  Even in such a case, one could still argue that HK parents could always choose to dye their kids' hair blonde.  They have a choice, don't they?  But wouldn't one think such a policy is silly and unfair?  By the way, singling out Cantonese (as opposed to Putonghua, Indian language and all other languages) is to me also rather silly.

I have no vested interest in this matter as my kids have never applied to ESF.  I respect ESF, but I do find this admission policy odd and outdated.

flashingcat

yes.  both hk and US.  we need to file income tax back in US.  of course have double tax avoidance agreement to protect, however, we need to pay for difference.

flashingcat

haha, taxation law.   this is the subject that u hate the most

Shootastar

回復 FattyDaddy 的帖子

"If your reasoning stands, then schools for disabled children would not get government grants. These schools only admit disabled children and by your reasoning are unfairly "discriminating" against able bodied children which are the majority."

My comment: I do not know what kind of disabled children's school you referred to. If you mean the school for the blind or deaf or Down's syndrome, they are the special schools for the special needs. The society should show compassion and support to these misfortunate group of students. We discuss here about whether the grant should be made to ESF across the board when it adopts a discriminatory admission policy against local kids who speak
their mother tongue (Cantonese) and know how to write Chinese characters (which is the root of their culture). Apparently, there is an obvious flaw on the example given by you.

This should be my last reply in this discussion, and my last comment is ... Be content with what you have and what you have chosen. Life is a series of choices, each gain brought by a certain choice is often accompanied by a corresponding loss, so don't just look at other people's gains and your own losses, because you'll feel you have been unfairly short-changed all the time.


My comment: If your kids study at ESF, I congratulate you because they receive a first class education by paying a substantially reduced school fees (when compared with those of other IS). From the right beginning, I advocate that each local students at ESF should receive the same grant from the Government as that given to local school. Our discussion is limited to whether Hong Kong public fund should be given to ESF across the board when it has its discriminatory admission policy against those who speak Cantonese and/or know how to write Chinese characters. Please do not think that I am jealous or have red eyes on those who could study at ESF. We are here to discuss a foundamental principle - whether the grant should be made to ESF for non-hong kong permanent resident who are favorably admitted through ESF's discriminatory admission policy. I stress again that I advocate and agree that similar grant should be given to the students who have the status of permanent resident of Hong Kong.

By the way, it is an endless topic to be debated in the open forum. I note that it is your last post. In any event, it is an enjoyable experience to share and debate with you on this hot topic.   

Shootastar

回復 bobbycheung 的帖子

You have echoed clearly the points I made here.

FattyDaddy

bobbycheung 發表於 12-10-16 18:43
By the way, singling out Cantonese (as opposed to Putonghua, Indian language and all other languages) is to me also rather silly. ...

Hahaha, I said I would stop but can't help in replying to this one, this is a real classic and I'm sure will be asked by many over and over again for years to come.

The purpose of singling out Cantonese was so that those entering ESF are the ones who CANNOT study in local schools, if your kid can speak Cantonese, then please send him/her to a local school and you'll get 9 years free education and all the various jetso.

The "silliness" arose when over the years the applicants have slowly changed from those who "CANNOT" to those who "DO NOT WANT TO". Most people don't have a big issue with these so-called "deserters", many want to be deserters themselves, but they may have an issue if some deserters could even be subsidized and do it cheap

bobbycheung

回復 FattyDaddy 的帖子

I see.  So what ESF really wants is to exclude everyone who is qualified to study in the local schools from Category One.  That's the real aim of the admission policy.  Why don't they say so expressly?  Is it because they feel it's not diplomatically correct to say so expressly especially when they are getting subsidies from the parents of these excluded kids.  So they say it in a discreet way by using Cantonese as a criteria.

Another question I have is this.  They are equating a kid who do not speak Cantonese with a kid who can't go to local schools.  Is it true that a non-Cantonese speaking kid can never study in a local school?  I am wondering what happens to all those immigrants coming from mainland China to HK everyday.  They know Putonghua but not a word of Cantonese.  Are they qualified to go to local schools?

People should have an issue with what's fair and what's not.  I don't mind when some people get subsidies and do it cheap.  But at least, the criteria should not be based on something as silly as Cantonese speaking or non-Cantonese speaking.  If ESF feels that priority should be given to expatriates who can't go to the local schools, they should say so expressly.  Category Two should then be open to everyone else.  

Lastly, may I ask you all a question?  Like many families in HK, if you and your wife both go to work during the daytime and your kid is looked after by his grandparents who speak only Chinese.  Your next door neighbour is exactly the same as you except that their kid is looked after by a maid from Philippines.  You find that your next door neighbour's kid is in Category One whilst yours is in Category Two.  Do you truly think it's fair?   Would you still agree to the assetion that you really have a choice by asking the grandparents not to talk to your kid?

bobbycheung

FattyDaddy,

Ex-pats?  Hmm, did you bother to read what I wrote?  All the time, I have been talking about the priority given to those go under Category One.  What has this to do with the majority of ESF students who are expats or not?  You said "the purpose of singling out Cantonese was so that those entering ESF are the ones who CANNOT study in local schools".  Who are they?  Local HK Chinese kids or expats?