[matthewrudy]

> Millions of people living in ... Hong Kong... who are well on their way towards western level of development

Hong Kong is a developed country.

It has a public housing system, a public healthcare system, and amazing transport.

It has massive issues with income equality, and particular poverty in old age.

However, it doesn't belong in a comparison beside cities in China.

[StreamBright]

> public housing system, a public healthcare system

These are the sign of a developed country?

[matthewrudy]

They're secondary points relating to quality of life and social security that distinguish Hong Kong from China.

[StreamBright]

Well in most Asian cultures taking care of your relatives and elderly is primarily done by the family. Offloading this duty to the state is not a sign of development but a sign of different culture. There are well regarded measures of human development, like the HDI.

"The Human Development Index (HDI) is a statistic composite index of life expectancy, education, and per capita income indicators, which are used to rank countries into four tiers of human development. A country scores a higher HDI when the lifespan is higher, the education level is higher, and the GNI (PPP) per capita is higher. It was developed by Pakistani economist Mahbub ul Haq, with help from Gustav Ranis of Yale University and Lord Meghnad Desai of the London School of Economics, and was further used to measure a country's development by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP)'s Human Development Report Office"

According to Wikipedia China has a HDI of 0.752 which is considered high, 86th position on the list of countries. Hong Kong also has high HDI, 0.933, very high, 7th position.

This comparison is much better than trying to come up with an arbitrary measure.

[matthewrudy]

My primary point was that Hong Kong is not directly comparable to cities in China.

I also readily say "Hong Kong is not China".

Although, as time goes on, the truth of that statement is eroded.