ESF 英基資助

Atticus

FattyDaddy, didn't you read what I wrote?  I wrote "local Cantonese-speaking parents".  If parents are of non-Cantonese speaking background, that's fine.  I just don't agree with those parents who clearly are local Hong Kongers but insist on solely speaking Cantonese-accented English and/or Mandarin with their kids.

Well, at least I never used one of those icons to smirk at anyone...

FattyDaddy

shadeslayer 發表於 12-11-10 13:47
Seriously FattyDaddy, you think kids in ESF do not know Cantonese?  Think again. Oh, you don't need to think again, you know, right? ...

Seriously, the majority of ESF students do not know Cantonese, especially in the kindergarten and early primary years. Yes there are some (a small number) from 100% Cantonese speaking families who might start to seriously learn Cantonese after they have gotten past primary school admission, some people do think of them as liars and cheaters, so is it this group of people who annoyed you?

But didn't you say you're against ESF receiving subvention because they discriminated against Cantonese speakers? In that case shouldn't you be happy that these Cantonese speakers have beaten ESF's so called "colonial" discriminatory rule?

So what if these Cantonese speakers in ESF are enjoying subsidy money (by crook according to some people), if they didn't manage to get into ESF and ended up in local schools, they would only enjoy more subsidy. The same goes for the voucher system, they would get subsidy money anyhow. So are we really talking about a money issue here? By the looks of it, it is some people's attitude issue masquerading as a money issue.

FattyDaddy

Atticus 發表於 12-11-10 13:50
FattyDaddy, didn't you read what I wrote?  I wrote "local Cantonese-speaking parents".  If parents a ...

You didn't read what I wrote either, regardless of their background, they are local permanent residents entitled to subsidy like any other local permanent resident.

So what if some of the ESF parents are clearly local Cantonese insisting on speaking accented English or Mandarin to their kids, I don't pass moral judgement on the personal choices they make, it is none of my business (and incidentally none of yours). You don't have to agree with them, you can even despise them, but that is not a reason to no longer think of them as permanent residents and so not entitled to subsidy.

Regarding icons, I have only ever used two, {:1_1:} and , if you have problems with these then I think you're more uptight than I initially imagined.

Atticus

FattyDaddy: It is simply impossible to form any kind of reasonable discussions with you when it comes to criticisms against ESF.  You would go to any lengths in defending ESF and try to make everyone accept your point of view and arguments. You are actually doing ESF a disservice by making all these absurd comments.

Anyway, no matter how wonderful a school you think ESF is or how brilliant their policies are or how they should be entitled to enjoy government subsidy to eternity, the fact remains that the government is going to cut ESF's subsidy whether you agree with it or not.

FattyDaddy

Atticus 發表於 12-11-10 22:40
FattyDaddy: It is simply impossible to form any kind of reasonable discussions with you when it come ...

Get this straight, I'm not defending ESF, I'm defending the 70% of ESF students who are local permanent residents and are entitled to subsidy as much as any other local permanent resident. Whatever policy ESF has does NOT change this fact.

If you believe these people should not be subsidized because they don't speak Cantonese, fine, just say it out loud with a straight face.

Atticus

You used the word "entitled". I think this is where the whole problem stems from. Why do you think ESF is "entitled" to receive government subsidy? You know very well that no other international schools in HK receives government subsidy, so why should ESF be "entitled" to continue to enjoy this privilege? Just because it was co-founded by the British HK government and has always enjoyed such privilege so you think it is now wrong for the government to take this benefit away? The fact is HK was handed over to China 15 years ago and the current government doesn't see things the same way any more.  This is the reality whether you like it or not.

Atticus

You used the word "entitled". I think this is where the whole problem stems from. Why do you think ESF is "entitled" to receive government subsidy? You know very well that no other international schools in HK receives government subsidy, so why should ESF be "entitled" to continue to enjoy this privilege? Just because it was co-founded by the British HK government and has always enjoyed such a privilege so you think it is now wrong for the government to take this benefit away? The fact is HK was handed over to China 15 years ago and the current government just doesn't see things the same way any more. This is the reality whether you like it or not.

FattyDaddy

Atticus 發表於 12-11-10 23:30
You used the word "entitled". I think this is where the whole problem stems from. Why do you think ESF is "entitled" to receive government subsidy? ...

Read my message again, I'm saying those 70% of ESF students who are local permanent residents are entitled to subsidy, not ESF is entitled to receive subsidy.

ESF should get subsidy because their student population are mostly HK permanent residents, if they are still the "colonial" schools serving British ex-pats exclusively I'll be the first to say "screw them", but ESF is NOT that group of colonial schools anymore, and some people seem to have a problem grasping that.

Regarding the other international schools, as I said before, they primarily serve their own citizens and not HK residents, they are like the old "colonial" ESF.

Atticus

FattyDaddy 發表於 12-11-10 23:45
Read my message again, I'm saying those 70% of ESF students who are local permanent residents are en ...

FattyDaddy: Do you really have to use that kind of tone?  It seems you are always picking a fight...

You are contradicting yourself here. I know you like to draw a distinction between "HK permament residents" and "local HK people" because you know if you didn't, you'd fall into the trap of admitting that ESF have an admission policy that discriminates against 95% of the local population in HK.  The whole non-Cantonese speaking category one concept is very colonial.  I believe the idea behind this admission policy was because Cantonese is the dialect used by the majority of the local people in HK.  ESF is not intended to be a school for the locals.  I think if you asked ESF, they would agree with this statement too.

Anyway, following your argument above, the government should be granting each kid with a permanent HK identity card a subsidy no matter which school he/she goes to then.  So it is the kids and not the schools that should be "entitled" to receive government subsidy.

shadeslayer

"Regarding the other international schools, as I said before, they primarily serve their own citizens and not HK residents, they are like the old "colonial" ESF."

shadeslayer:

You think all other international schools have tones of expats and have few HK locals?  You think ESF is the only one admitting more HK people since the handover 15 years ago?

You said everything matter-of-factly but you clearly haven't got a clue.   

FattyDaddy

Atticus 發表於 12-11-11 00:22
FattyDaddy: Do you really have to use that kind of tone?  It seems you are always picking a fight.. ...

Oh? You are telling ME about MY tone? Look at the first message you contributed to this discussion, saying I was dishing out insults and shame on me, and you're saying I am picking a fight?

I don't have much interest in finding out what exactly does "local Hongkong people" mean in people's minds, everyone would probably have a slightly different interpretation, so lets stick to some objective definitions. 70% of ESF students are permanent residents who are either born here or visitors with no limit or conditions on their stay, in most countries in the civilized world these people are entitled to receive state benefits, regardless of what language they speak or don't speak.

I support the voucher system too, but what is it going to fundamentally change for ESF students? These 70% of ESF students currently benefiting from subvention, under the voucher system they will benefit from vouchers, so who is going to loose out? The 30% ESF students who are not permanent residents, i.e. the foreigners, I'm not defending them but I'm merely asking, have we become so xenophobic and stingy that we can't tolerate this minority (30%) of foreigners benefiting from a small number of our subsidized schools?

FattyDaddy

shadeslayer 發表於 12-11-11 00:51
You think all other international schools have tones of expats and have few HK locals?  You think ESF is the only one admitting more HK people since the handover 15 years ago? ...

Haha, don't try to fool yourself and others here. These international schools admit "HK locals" not because they are HK locals, but because they are HK locals who also possess their country's citizenship. You try applying to say Australian International School without Australian citizenship and see how far you can get.

I haven't got a clue? Hahaha, I'll let others decide just who hasn't got a clue

FattyDaddy

Atticus 發表於 12-11-11 00:22
The whole non-Cantonese speaking category one concept is very colonial. ...

This is another interesting comment that warrants a separate reply.

Did you know Mandarin speakers are category one? Did you know ESF teach Mandarin even at the kindergarten level? Hey may be you're right, in a twisted kind of sense, it is STILL colonial, just that the colonial masters are now Mandarin speakers from the North.

Atticus

FattyDaddy 發表於 12-11-11 01:21
This is another interesting comment that warrants a separate reply.

Did you know Mandarin speakers  ...

FattyDaddy:  You are twisting all the facts to serve your own purpose.  You want to win every single argument.  You won't tolerate other people having different views about ESF.  You have to be the one who is right.  You always want to have the last word.

As I said, it doesn't matter how right you think you are, you cannot make other people agree with you and most certainly cannot make the government agree with you!

FattyDaddy

Atticus 發表於 12-11-11 01:30
FattyDaddy:  You are twisting all the facts to serve your own purpose.  You want to win every single argument.  You won't tolerate other people having different views ...

I don't tolerate other people's views? Well I never start off in the very first message blasting other people saying they are insulting and shame on them, in fact I never use that kind of language, I express my views, point out the fallacies (if there are any) in other's views, and that's about it, whether other people agree with me or not I leave it up to them.

It is so easy to be judgemental isn't it? Your words, quote unquote ...

"did it out of the mistaken belief that being Chinese but not knowing the Chinese language gives them superiority"

"those parents who clearly are local Hong Kongers but insist on solely speaking Cantonese-accented English and/or Mandarin"

Never mind the validity of these statements above, but clearly you view these people with contempt, even speaking English with an accent is something you find despicable.

Anyway, as far as being tolerant is concerned, I'll let other readers decide if you are the tolerant one.

Atticus

Hohoho!  You are still so upset about my comments that you insulted the blind and shame on you? Well, I won't take my words back because I think that's what you did.  Look at what you wrote: "... but you could poke your eyes out and open their doors. To YOU, not learning Cantonese may be as painful and as ludicrous as poking your eyes out...".  Come on, suggesting to fellow EK users that they could poke their eyes out??! and not learning Cantonese is as painful as poking your eyes out?? All these capitalised words "YOU", etc. are all very provocative. Why made such condescending statements simply because you want to defend your position? You made your point and others can express their views too.  You were the one who made this discussion personal.

Fine, if you really want to debate each point, then may be YOU (you like using capitalised words to emphasis your point, so it should be okay for me to do the same to you, right?) might have a different definition of what "local Hong Kong people" means but if you did a survey, I think the majority would define it as "Hong Kong permanent residents who can speak Cantonese".  Cantonese IS the local dialect spoken by the majority of the population in HK. This is a fact. You could verify this fact with the government statistics department. Would you call someone who lives in Italy but couldn't speak a word of Italian a "local Italian"???

Regarding the "non-Cantonese speaking" admission policy. You dodged the question. Why did ESF pick on CANTONESE? Why not Mandarin or simply the Chinese language? That's because Cantonese IS the local dialect spoken by the majority of the local people in HK. I wrote "ESF is not intended to be a school for the locals" but again you dodged this one and try to twist the facts to serve your purpose. You only picked those points that you think you could make a sound argument but the truth is you are exposing the weakness in your arguments.

Regarding being judgmental, it was you who started labelling others "xenophobic" just because they don't agree that ESF should be ENTITLED to continue to receive government subsidy.

Finally, you said you agree with the voucher system but then you suddenly jumped to the conclusion that since the voucher system is not yet in place, so ESF students should continue to enjoy government subsidy? Huh?  Am I missing something here?? So despite all the discussions, we are now back to square one! You are truly hilarious!

FattyDaddy

Atticus 發表於 12-11-11 11:26
Hohoho!  You are still so upset about my comments that you insulted the blind and shame on you? Well ...

Haha, I'm not upset at all, I quoted what you said because you commented on my tone and said I was picking a fight, I was just reminding you of your tone and how you joined in {:1_1:}

Poking eyes out to enter a school for the blind, that is to stress a point, the school is not meant for the seeing, i.e. ESF is not meant for Cantonese speakers.

As I said, I'm not interested in your definition of what is a "local Hongkonger" and what language such a person ought to speak or not speak, or what accent they should or should not have, lets stick to the point of receiving benefits, if you are adamant in thinking that only Cantonese speaking local permanent residents should benefit from subsidized schooling, fine, just say it out loud and let everyone here know what kind of a person you are.

"suddenly jumped to the conclusion that since the voucher system is not yet in place, so ESF students should continue to enjoy government subsidy?" <--- HAHAHAHA, that is a comment not made by me but by shadeslayer speculating on what I might say, don't make a fool of yourself in front of everyone

Oh sorry I used these little icons again, my apologies

Atticus

FattyDaddy 發表於 12-11-11 12:07
Haha, I'm not upset at all, I quoted what you said because you commented on my tone and said I was p ...

It is so funny reading your comments. Why have I suddenly become "adamant in thinking that only Cantonese speaking local permanent residents should benefit from subsidized schooling"? Since when did I say that??? Just for argument's sake, even if I did, "what kind of a person" would that make me??? It is precisely this kind of hostility that annoys me and that’s why I decided to join in the discussion in the first place.  You may see yourself as a very tolerant and non-judgmental person but your statements above suggest otherwise.

I don't have an issue with what groups of people can benefit from government subsidy but, as I said, I do have an issue with your unnecessarily aggressive, provocative and condescending remarks against all those who criticise ESF. I also have an issue with ESF's discriminatory admission policy. Why non-CANTONESE speaking?? Again, you dodged my question. You have avoided addressing this question multiple times.

May be my understanding of your comment is incorrect but again there really is no need to write: “make a fool of yourself in front ofeveryone".  I’ll also let the others decide what kind of a person you are.

So, here’s your actual comment: “I support the voucher system too, but what is it going to fundamentally change for ESF students? These 70% of ESF students currently benefiting from subvention, under the voucher system they will benefit from vouchers, so who is going to loose out? The 30% ESF students who are not permanent residents, i.e. the foreigners, I'm not defending them but I'm merely asking, have we become so xenophobic and stingy that we can't tolerate this minority (30%) of foreigners benefiting from a small number of our subsidized schools?”.  Please enlighten me as to the point you were trying to make here.  Were you not suggesting that since the voucher system would not make much of a difference to 70% of the current students of ESF anyway, so why bother cutting the subsidy? Is this so fundamentally different from what shadeslayer predicted you would say?

Regarding your comments on other international schools in HK, I haven’t done a comprehensive survey but my guess is 50%-60% of the students attending international schools in HK now are, to use your terminology, HK permanent residents. Following your argument that since 70% of the existing ESF students are HK permanent residents, they should therefore continue to be ENTITLED to benefit from government benefit, well, then the same goes to other international schools, they should all go and apply for some form of subsidy from the government then?  May be the amount they receive can be based on the percentage of HK permanent residents (gosh, what a mouthful, just because you want to dodge the issue of what constitutes “local people” in HK!) that they admit? lol

shadeslayer

As I said right in the beginning, I have nothing against ESF as I think they are good schools and I have friends whose kids are studying in ESF. But the way you pitch ESF having exactly the perfect conditions is doing ESF a disservice. Everybody knows ESF was set up to help expats many years back, hence the no Cantonese rule in admission. It has been many years since and 15 years after handover. The student mix changed from mostly expats to 70% HK residents (you claim). ESF keeps the funding and admission rules without other obligations DSS/private schools have for all these years, enjoying a special status.  And yet YOU think everything is perfect with ESF and there is no need for a review of long term role and funding.  

With 20% increase in school fees there will still be long waiting lists. i heard you say what happens to the parents who can afford ESF only because of the subvention?  To use your logic, ESF schools are not for parents who cannot pay for ESF school fees. People who can afford more "always" have more choices.

Luckily the government is doing the right thing, whether YOU like it or not. Get over it.

FattyDaddy

Atticus 發表於 12-11-11 13:41
Just for argument's sake,even if I did, "what kind of a person" would that make me??? It is precisely this kind of hostility that annoys me...

I'm not going to respond to your other points, there is nothing there that has not already been discussed so I would only be repeating myself if I do respond (and you would be repeating too), but lets see what this "hostility" is all about.

"Say it out loud and let everybody know what kind of a person you are" <-- was I judging what kind of a person you are? I was merely saying "go admit it loudly and let everyone know", heck, some might even think of you as a hero. So why did you feel a certain hostility? Was it because you assumed that if you said it out loud then most people would see you in a bad light?