Surplus

While I was considering the manpower problem within the medical circle, a certain Mr. Tsang announced the budget proposal of the next financial year.

I was so impressed that I lost my nerve.

But, I shall save all my four-letter words and three-word phrases. There are thousands of excellent suggestions on how to make the best use of that 70 billions of surplus, or what the best way is to give everyone HK$6000. The basic idea appears simple: our government should be working on the principle of deciding the expenditure according to the income (量入為出), and, with an astronomical surplus, more money should be spent to help the underprivileged.

I beg to disagree.

In fact, it is a fundamental misconception that a government should decide its expenditure according to the income – the policy is meant for a government that always overspend and raise lots of debts (like the Americans). Otherwise, it should actually be the opposite (量出為入).

Yes, I mean a government should make the decision what the necessary (and only necessary) things to do are (for example, to provide a basic social welfare, medical service, and education), and then work out the income accordingly. (The inevitable conclusion is, with a large financial surplus, to cut down the tax rate.) If the planning begins from the income, the inevitable result is it would maximize the amount of tax and create a big surplus (like what are now). The end result is an ever-expanding government which tries to take care of each citizen and everything.

Or, in short, a genuine (not nominal) country of communism.

PS. The above discussion obviously comes from my neocortex. My amygdala and other parts of archicortex, however, continued to have seizure activities. To quote one example, I was almost mad on the morning after the budget proposal was announced when I saw a patient in the clinic and had to ask her to pay for a self-financed medication which costs three dollars each day.