Don’t compare Malaysia to other countries

Now they are comparing Malaysia’s FDI to the FDI of the other ASEAN countries. But then they are comparing apples to oranges and claim they are comparing apples to apples. The same with the Covid-19 pandemic crisis “comparative study”. Again, they are comparing apples to oranges and claim they are comparing apples to apples.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Those who have issues with Malaysia, Umno, the Malays, etc., love to do so-called “comparative studies” between the situation in Malaysia and the situation in other countries.

Malaysia was great when Tan Siew Sin was the Finance Minister, they argued. If we want Malaysia to be great again, we need to appoint a Chinese Finance Minister. Malay Finance Ministers are useless, especially Tun Daim Zainuddin, Anwar Ibrahim, Najib Tun Razak, and so on.

We tried pointing out that the race of the person is not what decides whether he is going to make a great Finance Minister or not. But they still insisted that Tan Siew Sin was great because he was Chinese, hence only a Chinese Finance Minister can save Malaysia.

Then Lim Guan Eng was appointed the Finance Minister and even the Chinese were upset. Guan Eng, alongside Tommy Thomas and Mat Sabu, were Malaysia’s version of “The Three Stooges”, idiots of the first degree. It proved, once and for all, that being Chinese is no guarantee it is going to make you a genius.

What most people overlooked is the fact that anyone could have become the Finance Minister during the Merdeka Era. Everything was so simple then. If you had personally known Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tan Siew Sin, Senu Abdul Rahman, Khir Johari, Temenggong Jugah Barieng, Othman Saat, Syed Nahar, Harun Idris, and many of the state and federal leaders at that time, you will know that they were okay for the 1950s and 1960s but would never have been able to fit in to today’s world.

If Siew Sin was the Finance Minister today, he would have been a major disaster. The same goes for many of the federal and state leaders of 50 years ago. Even Winston Churchill would be a disaster if he was the British Prime Minister today. He would have no clue how to handle Britain’s “coloured” population (if you know what I mean).

MAS and SIA are another two examples they use to show how better-run Singapore is compared to Malaysia. SIA is doing great while MAS is going bankrupt, they argue. Hence Chinese-run Singapore is better than Malay-run Malaysia.

First of all, SIA is an international-flights-only airline. It does not need to serve Sabah, Sarawak, Terengganu, Kelantan, Perlis, Kedah, etc. Hence there are no cheap domestic flights that SIA needs to subsidise.

In Australia, it is cheaper to fly to Indonesia than from Sydney to Perth. If the KL to East Malaysia or KL to East Coast flights are more expensive than from KL to Bangkok or Jakarta, then MAS will be making tons of money.

The other factor is Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. Mahathir used MAS to cover the RM31.5 billion Bank Negara Forex loss. That is why MAS is in a mess. So, the problem is not MAS. The problem is Dr Mahathir, Pakatan Harapan’s Prime Minister or PM7.

The other comparison they love to use is how well developed and successful Singapore is compared to Malaysia.

Singapore is a city. The Singapore government only needs to take care of one city. If the Malaysian government ignores Sabah, Sarawak, Kelantan, Terengganu, Pahang, Johor, Melaka, Negeri Sembilan, Selangor, Perak, Penang, Kedah and Perlis — and give all these states zero development funds — and pours 100% of the money into just Kuala Lumpur, then Kuala Lumpur would not only be ten times greater than Singapore, it would be the greatest city in the world.

But then Malaysia needs to “waste” so much money providing roads and bridges, schools and education, hospitals and healthcare, defence and security, and much more, to Malaysians living outside Kuala Lumpur. If 100% of the money is spent just in Kuala Lumpur, like what Singapore does, then Singapore would be a kampung compared to Kuala Lumpur.

These people compare one small city, Singapore, to an entire country, and then claim that Chinese-run Singapore is better than Malay-run Malaysia. London is greater than Kuala Lumpur by far. But compare Blackpool to Subang Jaya and see the difference. Do you have 60% unemployment in Subang Jaya?

What about unwed or single mothers on welfare — say, in Kuala Terengganu, compared to, say, in Liverpool? Which is worse?

Now they are comparing Malaysia’s FDI to the FDI of the other ASEAN countries. But then they are comparing apples to oranges and claim they are comparing apples to apples. The same with the Covid-19 pandemic crisis “comparative study”. Again, they are comparing apples to oranges and claim they are comparing apples to apples.

These “comparative studies” are nonsense and are being raised merely to make one party look bad and the other look good.

Singapore’s biggest problem is an aging population and old folks having to survive on their own. Hence, just like, say in the UK, care-homes for old folks are mushrooming. In Malaysia, children still care for their old folks. Compare that “good” and “bad” scenario.