Group 1 - The core issue of housing difficulties in Hong Kong has persisted for a long time, with average living conditions being significantly lower than in mainland cities, as evidenced by a median living area of 172 square feet (approximately 16 square meters) compared to 46 square meters in mainland cities [4][24] - The "85,000 Housing Plan" proposed in 1997 aimed to supply at least 85,000 housing units annually to address the severe housing shortage in Hong Kong, but it ultimately failed due to structural issues and external shocks like the Asian financial crisis [5][25] - The plan's interruption was exacerbated by the influence of powerful real estate interests, which resisted policies that threatened their profits, leading to significant political and economic pressure on the government [6][26] Group 2 - The A-share market has faced challenges with new stock issuance, characterized by a pattern of rapid bull markets followed by prolonged bear markets, resulting in significant losses for retail investors while benefiting major shareholders [9][28] - The lack of a truly market-oriented system for stock issuance and delisting has hindered the development of a healthy investment environment, with regulatory practices that favor established companies over potentially high-growth firms [10][29] - The introduction of the IPO registration system has been slow and met with resistance, as the market's capacity to absorb new listings is insufficient, leading to a scarcity of new companies and inflated valuations for existing stocks [11][30] Group 3 - Both the "85,000 Housing Plan" and the A-share IPO registration system share a common theme of ambitious reform goals that are mismatched with the system's capacity to implement them effectively, leading to similar failures [12][31] - External shocks, such as the Asian financial crisis and recent global liquidity tightening, have reversed the progress of both housing and capital market reforms, causing significant setbacks [13][32] - The entrenched interests in both sectors have created structural resistance to reform, with real estate developers and financial institutions opposing policies that threaten their established profit models [14][33] Group 4 - Public pressure and political risks have forced both the housing plan and the IPO registration system to be scaled back, as negative market reactions and public protests have led to a prioritization of stability over reform [15][34] - Historical experiences suggest that temporary measures like halting IPOs do not address the underlying issues in the market, and a more sustainable approach is needed to foster long-term growth [16][35] - The need for a transparent and well-communicated reform strategy is critical to maintaining public trust and ensuring the successful implementation of policies in both housing and capital markets [19][38]