Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Women can be verbal bastards, just like men

I don't know about this one...

Physical abuse, I concede that there are many more women victims than men - simply due to the inherent physical differences between men and women. Having said that, I've seen small-built men with some pretty big women sporting all sorts of bruises, scratches and pinch marks.

Verbal abuse...

I need a whole lot more convincing that verbal abuse is a predominantly male-perpetrated crime as this ad would have you believe.

If never ending nagging, put-downs, criticism, snide remarks and sarcasm can be classified as verbal abuse, I reckon the fist could just as likely be coming from the woman's mouth.

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Cabinet don't pay for their own damn holidays?!

I'm sure you all have read about how Najib says the "Government is sharing the burden". He is of course referring to the much publicised (and much lauded... by chronic ball-lickers NST) exercise to cut costs and expenses in the govt.

According to Star and Malaysiakini, the gist of the cuts are:

1. The entertainment allowances of ministers and deputy ministers will be slashed by 10%.
The Prime Minister currently enjoys a monthly entertainment allowance of RM18,865 while his deputy gets RM15,015. Other ministers and deputy ministers are given RM12,320 and RM6,000 respectively.

First question: Does a mere 10% reduction qualify as 'slashed'?

Aisehman has a hilarious hypothetical question on how a cabinet member like... say, Najib, would classify his entertainment expenses as public/govt if he entertains the DPM of Mongolia, or private if he entertains a beautiful young model from Mongolia.

End of the day, why would cabinet members need entertainment allowances? If the entertainment is for official purposes, the ministry would have already picked up the tab. If it's for his own private pleasure, why should the taxpayer pay for it?

2. The paid holidays of Cabinet members and their families holidays will now be limited to local and Asean destinations and will not be allowed to claim for more than a week’s holiday.
Wow! I didn't know that cabinet members AND their families get paid holidays to anywhere in the world, at the expense of taxpayers. With their salaries, entertainment allowances, travel allowances, housing allowances, MP's allowance and god knows what other allowances and perks - can't these bastards pay for their own farking holidays?

Can they really go anywhere in the world? US and Europe? Disneyland, Las Vegas?

For how long? (However long, it's definitely more than a week).

And how many people constitutes a family? Does it include the in-laws, brothers, sisters, parents etc? And is there a maximum number of family members? All 4 wives? All 20 kids?

Here's a hypothetical holiday bill (in US$) for a minister with 1 wife and 3 kids, to London for 2 weeks:

With 71 cabinet members (ref: wiki), this translates into an annual bill of RM8.7 million (71 x 123K).

And remember, the assumption is 1 holiday per cabinet member per year, 5 people in a family and a duration of 2 weeks.

Also, we're assuming that the cabinet member's family does not do a 'Rosmah'. ie. go shopping at Harrod's, and then walk out with armloads of stuff, leaving the foreign ministry to settle the bill.

Sunday, June 08, 2008

Fuel subsidies must go, but so must cronies, corruption and wastage

Thanks for all the comments encouraging me to continue blogging. I mentioned that I might blog again if the shit hit the fan. And hit the fan the shit did.., in the form of increased fuel prices in Malaysia.

I think there's something intrinsically wrong when a litre of petrol or diesel costs the same as lunch (outside KL lah). But I think it's more wrong if Malaysians are charged market prices for oil, when the govt forces us buy cars and houses at tax-inflated and bumiputra discount-inflated market prices (respectively). I think it's wrong if we are charged market prices for petrol when development funds meant to improve our educational and business infrastructure (which increases our income and hence, our ability to pay market prices) are squandered in favour of enriching BN cronies and faulty bumiputra & ketuanan melayu policies.

Here's a post I made in a local forum on this topic:

Personally, I think fuel prices in Malaysia need to be UNsubsidised. Subsidies are a downward spiral and is nothing less than switching of the burden of higher cost from consumers to taxpayers.

However, subsidies cannot be looked at in isolation. All national budgets are simple creatures. What is the cash inflow, and how is it matched by the cash outflow. Cash inflows are few, mainly taxes and returns from govt investments. Cash outflows are more complex, from govt spending, to govt investment, to these fuel subsidies.

I think the issue here is not the fuel subsidies. It is unrealistic for the public to expect the govt to 'PREVENT' the increase in fuel prices. Malaysia is insignificant to the overall crude oil dynamics as a producer, or a consumer. Trying to hang on to the subsidies in the face of current oil price trends is like trying to hold back a tidal wave with your bare hands. Everybody still gets drenched, and we'll also drown in the process - because we stubbornly stood on the beach staring down the incoming tsunami instead of running for higher ground.

In my mind, there are 3 connected issues:

1. Since Malaysia is a net oil exporter, the net profit from oil will always increase as oil prices increase. Because we produce more than we consume, the increased profit from selling oil that we produce, will always be more than the increased costs of paying for (including subsidies) the oil we consume.

The matter is whether the govt (via Petronas) should spend their oil production profits to 'subsidise' the consumption of oil. For me, that's a matter for the public to decide. BN and PR have made their intentions know (albeit after the elections) in that BN wants to eliminate the subsidies while PR (via Anwar's statements) promises to use Petronas profits to subsidise consumption. So vote wisely.

Me, I prefer that the govt spend the money on improved public transport, better schools and better infrastructure so that the public can increase their earning power in order to cope with the additional cost of living, rather than trying to subsidise living costs. There is no benefit in subsidies (other than delaying the inevitable doom). Additionally, subsidies are so easily and rapaciously abused as I'll show in point 2 below (only one example of many).

2. The consumption of oil itself is fraught with problems. Namely, which consumers do you subsidise? Right now, everyone is subsidised. From the kapcai riders earning RM800/mth to the biggest towkays and royalty driving Mercedes S-classes and Aston Martins. But my thinking is that individual consumption of fuel for private transportation is actually a small proportion of oil consumption.

It's the transportation industry, power generation industry and the smugglers to Thailand (by road) and Indonesia (by boat) who are the biggest users of these subsidies. Should they be entitled to it?

Smugglers... definitely not. But subsidies are like banning liquor and gambling. The more you do it, the more illicit and illegal activities will occur.

And take the power generation industry. Tenaga buys fuel feedstocks from Petronas at subsidised prices. That is justified as electricity prices to the public are also controlled. And electricity tariffs are staggered in that smaller consumers pay less, and larger, commercial & industrial consumers pay more - which is somewhat fair.

But the IPPs (independent power producers) like YTL and Tanjung also pay ridiculously subsidised prices for their fuel feedstocks. If they were selling the power back to Tenaga at Tenaga's cost of production (maybe with a small premium of for the IPP's smaller scale vs Tenaga), that would be okay. However, IPPs sell power to Tenaga at cost+ (ie. guaranteed profits), and the most ridiculous thing is that Tenaga has to buy everything the IPPs produce, even if it is in excess of Tenaga's needs. This means that the IPPs will produce as much as they possibly can to maximise profits, and therefore they are consuming the maximum amount of oil as well... at subsidised prices.

And because IPPs are currently producing excess power that Tenaga doesn't need, the excess power is wasted because it can't be stored, translating into higher costs for Tenaga and higher tariffs for the public. That also means that billions in fuel subsidies are being spent to subsidise IPP production of wasted power. Everyone loses, much is wasted and the only party gaining from this arrangement are the IPPs... and of course, their politician sponsors from BN in the background.

3. Lastly, is govt spending itself. What's the alternative spending if public funds are not spent on subsidies?

How can the govt justify such drastic moves to reduce overspending on subsidies, when we don't seem to be doing anything to reduce overspending on guaranteeing profits for IPPs, highway toll operators, GLCs like Proton, Bernas, Class F contractors, AP permit holders, govt dept waste etc?

In fact, how do we know that the billions saved from these subsidy reductions will not be spent on guaranteeing more profits for cronies and wastage?

Sunday, May 11, 2008

Adios from sean-the-man

Since the watershed elections on 8th of March, I've been having endless problems thinking of what to blog about. Yes, the election is over. Yes, the issues and problems continue. And new ones are popping up all the time. But to me, these are not new issues. These issues have existed all along, they are inter-related and in the last couple of years, have been discussed and dissected to death.

My purpose in starting a blog in May 2006 was to help make sure people know all the shit that was going on in this country. It was to make sure that people know there are other sides to a story apart from the viewpoint of the govt, reflected in the mainstream media. I had just become politically aware then (from stumbling upon a few eye-opening blogs while looking for free Malaysian newspapers on the net). And that single experience of the power of blogs made me eager to share that newfound awareness with other folks. Especially those who, like me, were late political bloomers.

Since 8th of March though, I have to say that Malaysians are now much more aware of the issues and the truth. They are much more vested in their political destinies. They are much more willing to take the initiative to look for different viewpoints and different versions of the truth. And judging by the number of blogs that have popped up, they are also more willing to voice their opinion.

I fear I might have outlived my original usefulness. Take the current wave of Ketuanan Melayu for instance. In one form or other, I think I've flogged this dead horse in countless blog posts about Ketuanan Melayu specifically, and NEP or racial discrimination generally. I feel I have nothing new to offer, in terms of insight, nor opinion. How many ways can I say I oppose Ketuanan (Melayu or otherwise), the NEP, racial and religious discrimination? I'm beginning to feel that it's a waste of time to post a counter-arguement every time some bigot opens his big mouth in support of Ketuanan Melayu. Essentially, both the bigot and I are simply rehashing the same old arguments, facts and figures. And I'm tired of repeating myself, and even more tired of hearing bigots repeating themselves on my blog. I know where they stand, they know where I stand, and each of you are now politically and informationally mature enough to know where you stand. Opinion blogging (as opposed to informational blogging) as I see it, is becoming obsolete - especially when it's the same opinions on the same issues, over and over again.

So until I figure out where this blog is headed, I leave you with a list of interesting articles I've read recently. Articles that I really wanted to blog about, but then stopped short when I realised that they were nothing new. More of the same, just said by different people at different times, using different words, under different circumstances.

Until our destinies meet again, or when some new shit somehow hits the fan - this is sean-the-man signing out.

PS. The picture in this post is dedicated to all the supporters of Ketuanan Melayu. KISS MY NON-MALAY ASS!

Pro-ketuanan

Ketuanan Melayu - Redefined

Ketuanan Melayu

Against-ketuanan

Anwar hits out at moves to stir Malay sentiment

The fortress - by Malik Imtiaz Sawar

A roundup: No hard and fast rule on supremacy

And finally something good on May 13: May 13, 1969: Truth and reconciliation

Tuesday, May 06, 2008

M'sia still British Colony, says Malay Regiment

The Malay Regiment are very proud of the fact that Malaysia is the 4th country (after Australia, Canada and Jamaica) to be doormen and guard dogs to the Queen of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

However, they forget the fact that the Queen remains the current HEAD OF STATE for Australia, Canada and Jamaica. That's why the Australians, Canadians and Jamaicans were there. In taking up the same CEREMONIAL DUTIES, isn't the Malay Regiment saying the Queen is similarly the Head of State for Malaysia?

See here:

The following is quoted from the Monarch's website on the page entitled 'Commonwealth Realms':

"A Commonwealth realm is a country where The Queen is the Head of State. The Queen is Queen not only of Britain and its dependent territories, but also of the following realms: Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, St Christopher and Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu."
And the spin doctors at NST also failed to mention that this trans-continental act of obeisance to the Queen is costing us RM2 million dollars (see related post: From a whore to the queen. UMNO throws money at the British).

Religious authorities to ensure conversions remain farked up

I have only 2 questions today.

1. Should the freedom of religion (the right of an individual to convert to Islam without informing everyone else) be at the expense of the rights of everyone else?

It's all great to say that the individual's right to conversion is paramount, but it still doesn't resolve the issues that the convert's non-Muslim family will experience if the conversion is poorly executed.

2. How come the freedom of religion is one way only?

How come when it's conversion INTO Islam, the freedom of the individual to practise the religion of his/her choice (ie. convert) is paramount.

But then it comes to conversion OUT OF Islam, it's apostasy and no way Jose?

Double standards? Or is your god is better than my god?

Wednesday, April 30, 2008

CIMB CEO realises in 2008 what Lee Kuan Yew already knew in 1965

CIMB's CEO may be a little "Johnny Come Lately" with his realisation about the NEP. The rest of us already knew this from the start. Heck.., Lee Kuan Yew had even said so to the Malaysian Parliament in 1965.

NEP re-examination inevitable: CIMB CEO
2008/04/29

KUWAIT CITY, Tues: THE implementation of the New Economic Policy should be reviewed so it does not undermine economic development, a prominent banker said. Speaking on the sidelines of the fourth World Islamic Economic Forum, CIMB Group chief executive officer Datuk Nazir Razak, who is also WIEF Young Leaders Network chairman, said the time had come for a re-examination.

“My worry is that when the government is trying so hard to help the Bumiputeras, it may hamper and undermine their future and achievements. When you give them contracts and money easily, you are actually undermining the spirit of entrepreneurship.”

Nazir argued that the monies should be spent on education. “We should be spending more on education. And in terms of financing, access to it should be extended, not giving out free financing. This subsidy thing is just not right. You are actually encouraging a subsidy mentality.”

He said a review of NEP was inevitable. “What is good, what is not so good, what has failed or what has actually undermined Bumiputera development; we should be looking into all this. There are so many things we can learn from other countries.”

While there is no denying that the NEP had been successful, Nazir questioned its sustainability. “Is it not the time now to review the policy? Everybody accepts the need for some kinds of affirmative action but it must be implemented in a way that does not undermine economic progress. What is important is to apply the correct policies in this day and age. Nowadays, the world is open to just anybody.” he said.

Tuesday, April 29, 2008

Ketuanan Melayu, Kekuasaan Cina & Keagungan India

Apparently Malay supremacy is not about Malays being superior at all. It's about Malays not being coolies. According to our esteemed PM:

The definition of ketuanan Melayu (Malay supremacy) is not about the Malays being in a position to dominate, rule over and force their power upon other races, said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. He said Malay supremacy meant that the Malays, as the indigenous people in Malaysia, needed to strengthen themselves to ensure they were successful and developed.

“If they are not successful and developed, then they are not tuan (masters), therefore they will be coolies. I am sure we do not want to become coolies who do not play any role in development because we are weak and not able.

“So when we talk about that (Malay supremacy), we mean we must be successful in many fields. It is never about ruling over others, or forcing our power upon them,” he told reporters after chairing the Umno supreme council meeting last night. - The Star
Okaaaaaayyyyyyy... since I'm sure the Malays don't wish the Chinese and Indians to be coolies either, then I'm equally sure that nobody would mind if the Chinese and Indian communities also adopt similarly wholesome and constructive concepts. Right?!

Sean-the-man hereby proposes that in addition to Ketuanan Melayu, Malaysians also wholeheartedly embrace Kekuasaan Cina and Keagungan India... yes?

Monday, April 28, 2008

Songkok, Balkis & an Apology 'IF' your balls dislike being kicked

The Songkoks

RPK had dedicated several postings on his site to accuse DAP of being racist and chauvinist. He's not very happy that one DAP politician refused to wear a songkok to a palace function.

RPK reckons that refusing to don a songkok is:

(1) disrespectful of the royals and royal etiquette

The rulers cannot be the impartial rulers of Malaysians of all races & religions on one hand, and the uncompromising champions of Malays and Islam on the other hand. That proposition is as meaningless, contrarian and nonsensical as saying the NEP will ensure the economic special privileges of Malays while ensuring that non-Malays are not disadvantaged.

You can't be one whilst being the other. To possess one necessarily means to dispossess the other.

How do the rulers be relevant to Malaysians of all races, if they cannot get past the need for royal protocol to contort all Malaysians to look & act like Malays in their presence?

If the argument is that a baju Melayu, samping and songkok are the 'Malaysian dress', then shouldn't the mandarin collar, sari and cheongsam enjoy the same status and be acceptable at the palace? Are we not an inclusive society?

(2) disrespectful of the wishes of your host

RPK says here that the host of a house can impose a dress code on his guests. I'm not sure which code of courtesy that came from, but I have always been under the impression that a good host respects his guests' lifestyle and sensitivities - and would always go out of his way to accomodate them.

In addition, it also depends on who paid for the host's house. If all the guests chipped in and paid for the host's house, I'd take a rather dim view on the host who then imposes various terms and conditions on his guests before they can enter the house which they (the guests) paid for.

(3) not seeing the forest for the trees

Here I agree. Could the DAP assemblyman have compromised for the greater good? Sure. But make sure it's compromise, not submission. Mistaking compromise for submission is what got this country into trouble in the first place.

I would also add this point.

Refusing to wear a songkok is racist & chauvinist? How do you logically derive that? It may be unwise. It may be obstinate, uncooperative and unconstructive. It may be downright unfriendly. But racist & chauvinist?

How does one's brain have to work in order to conclude that refusing to don a songkok is racist? Is refusing to speak Malay chauvinist? Is refusing to eat halal food racist & chauvinist? It's unnecessarily unconvenient to all parties concerned for sure, but is it anything more than that?

Isn't it more racist and chauvinist to decree that everyone must wear songkoks, speak Malay and consume halal food only?

Which is more agressive, arrogant and seeking to impose your will on others?... Choosing not to do something (refuse to wear a songkok) or refuse someone a choice (to wear or not to wear a songkok)?

Balkis, Baiduri and Bakti

Apparently a bunch of BN politician wives felt that the RM9 million in a 'charity' are their personal piggy bank which they can move around as they please. They felt that they had worked hard to raise the money and since they weren't confident that the wives of the new govt would put the funds to 'similar' use as they did - they were entitled to endow it to another party of their choosing.

Firstly, I'm not sure if getting money from state owned companies owned or funded by a govt led by their husbands qualifies as hard work.

Secondly, think about this parallel situation.

What if... in the next election, the Pakatan Rakyat wins it to be the new govt... but the old BN govt moves the entire treasury to a Swiss bank account under UMNO - because they (BN) felt that they had worked hard to build the treasury reserves, and they felt that the new govt might not put the funds to 'similar' use?

Why the hell are unelected 'wives' getting their filthy hands on state funds anyway?

The Apology

Hishammuddin 'The Keris' Hussein made a steeply qualified apology to the non-Malays 'IF' they were offended by his antics with his phallic symbol.

Let's not be coy about it. The non-Malays have no problems with a keris, or how it signifies Malay dignity etc. What offended us is the fact that someone drew a keris during an UMNO general assembly AND that act was accompanied by threats of violence and bloodshed against the non-Malays. And is it not fact that the keris has been repeatedly drawn, with the same racial threats being made, during successive UMNO functions since then? It is not the mere drawing of the keris from its sheath, but the manner in which it was drawn and the circumstances and statements surrounding the act which offends the non-Malays.

And the Sham's apology is like apologising to people who were kicked in the balls only 'IF' they objected to being kicked in the balls. The connotation is that no apology is necessary if they don't object to being kicked in the balls. Therefore, the act of kicking someone in the balls is nothing to apologise for, especially if those being kicked don't (dare to?) object to it. Furthermore, he also apologised to those who, like him, enjoy kicking other people in the balls... because he wasn't able to transform kicking someone in the balls - into an act that people (who get their balls kicked) would not be in a position to object.

Sunday, April 13, 2008

Aryan race challenged. Nazis being dominated by lesser humans.

That's how I interpret Utusan Malaysia's headline on the Kelantan clown prince's statement yesterday.

Ketuanan Melayu tercabar - Kaum lain lebih dominan dari segi politik, ekonomi – Tengku Faris

- Utusan Malaysia.
There is a more subtle but infinitely more vicious intent to Utusan's headline. You know how the conventional wisdom has always been Malays dominate politics (power) while the Chinese can have the economy (as long as the UMNOputras become filthy rich without raising a finger, that is)... this headline implies that the Chinese now possess both, and the Malays are left with neither (or nothing).

This, in my mind, is Utusan instigating a Malay outburst against the Chinese, by yet again posing the latter as a bogeyman.

The Editor of Utusan and the writer of this article must be arrested for sedition!