The right of reply

Enough is enough. People who proclaim to fight for freedom of expression and free media but censors other's legitimate reply based on their whims and fancy, must realise that on the internet, they cannot suppress peoples' legitimate right to reply and express contrarian views. This blog welcomes all views. ~ Ellese

Our debt and deficit budget: Can we have a consistent stand?


My last debate showed we tend to mix up economic issues so much that we are not clear what we want. Just like the budget. Most dont know what stand to take and then have differing stand depending who does it. Thus if a party you dont like adopts a deficit budget incurring more debts you will say it will bankcrupt our nation. But if you like the party, a similar deficit budget is deemed very good. This is a funny logic. All must realise both BN and PR have proposed deficit budget for the past two years. In other words both have no issue in incurring debts. But I always find funny those PR supporters condemning the deficit budget of BN but support PR’s similar deficit budget and vice versa. Man, why cant we think for ourselves and not follow them politicians.

Now on the deficit budget and national debt, please make a stand. Its either youre fine with deficit budget, or believe in surplus budget all the time or believe in deficit budget only in times of negative growth. There can be other permutations. But just be consistent. Dont change because you like or hate the party. This doesn’t make sense.

Now perhaps to lay down the issue I would like to copy an article by Hisham H from his economics malaysia blog. I hope it will lay to rest the debate on this and make clear the many false premises that many argues.


A FAQ On Malaysian Government Debt

There’s a lot of misconceptions and misunderstandings regarding the level and sustainability of government debt, which has been seriously skewing the public discourse not just about Europe and the US but here as well. [For examples, hereherehere,here and here].

Rather than arguing the points one by one, I’m putting up this FAQ as a central reference point, with some faint hopes that we might move on to a better informed debate about the issue. It’ll be available as a permanent page (see the menu on the top right of every page on this blog), and I’ll update it from time to time. The focus will be on the Malaysian situation, but some of the general principles are applicable elsewhere as well.

First the raw data (RM millions; sample period 1970-2012, with 2011-2012 data based on estimates):

Up to 2Q 2011, government debt in total has reached RM437 billion, or approximately 53% of nominal GDP:

Based on Budget 2012 numbers, total government debt outstanding should reach just over RM495 billion by the end of 2012.

The average rate of increase for the last 40 odd years has been about 11% in log terms (log annual changes):

And on a per capita basis (RM):

Based on 2012 numbers, the per capita debt should reach a little over RM 17,000 per person by the end of that year.

Finally, the fiscal deficit (ratio to nominal GDP):

You’ll see from the above that it’s not unusual for Malaysia to run a fiscal deficit – in fact it’s been the norm, except for a short period in the mid-1990s.

Now on to the FAQ:

Q1. Government debt is like household debt – if we spend more than we earn, we’ll go bankrupt

A. That’s the common sense view, and its one that’s commonly held. The problem is that it’s also mostly wrong.

Here’s where the misconception lies – if you’re a household, you earn income based on your work and investments. For a company, income depends on selling the goods and services it produces. For both parties, that income represents the upper limit of what can be paid to service debt. It’s also – and this is the important point – determined by conditions mostly outside your control. You have to depend on someone else to determine your wages; the prevailing interest rate or investment rate governs returns; and market supply and demand (most of the time) limits what a company can sell.

But that’s not true of government generally. It’s “income” comes largely from direct and indirect taxation – the rates of which are determined by the government itself. So in a very real sense, governments don’t face the hard constraints that households and companies do. Instead its a soft constraint of what level of taxation citizens are willing to bear.

But even if governments come up against such a limit, there’s also the little fact that most governments also have a de facto monopoly on the issuance of money. As long as a government’s debt is denominated in its own currency and it retains control over issuance of that currency, government debt can always be paid off.
Third and more importantly, if government spending is directed towards investment which raises the productive capacity of the economy e.g. spending on education, that effectively raises the future tax yield, which indirectly allows a higher burden ofpresent debt.

In the end, the real limit to government borrowing (and spending) is neither taxation nor the printing press – its the ability of an economy to produce goods and services. Which leads to the next point.

Q2. Bigger and bigger amounts of government debt is inflationary

A. It depends – and the size of debt isn’t the factor here, it’s what the money raised from debt issuance is spent on.

Consider a closed economy (i.e. no external trade) with three separate sectors – households, companies and the government. All three sectors produce and consume goods and services. Inflation occurs when demand for goods and services from all three sectors exceeds production. The only way for government spending to be inflationary is when it causes total spending from all three sectors to exceed that limit.

Now consider a case where households and companies suddenly want to spend more while the government maintains its level of spending. We’ll now have a case of excess demand and inflationary pressures even though the government is not spending any more than it did before.

Suppose the opposite case where households and companies suddenly want to save more instead. Under those circumstances, an increase in government spending up to the limit of the productive capacity of the economy will not be inflationary since its only taking up the excess supply that households and companies don’t want.

But inflation actually represents another way for governments to reduce their debt burdens and is often termed “implicit taxation” – if governments spend to the point where inflation increases, that effectively reduces the real burden of debt, and not just for the government but for all debtors. That’s because debt is contractually determined at the point of borrowing (in the past), but payment is usually in current tax dollars (which with inflation has lower purchasing power). Inflation also raises nominal growth, which generally means more tax dollars for a given level of real output.

Historically, with the exception of actual defaults, government debt has often been paid off through two channels – inflation and economic growth.

Q3. The Malaysian government has been running a deficit for years – but it should only be running a deficit in bad times. In good times, it ought to be saving and paying down debt

A. There’s another implication from the discussion on Q2 – whenever there’s an imbalance in the savings/investment decisions of households and companies, the opposite situation must prevail in government spending and investment for an economy to be maintained at full output and income generation .
If households and companies are saving more, the government has to dissave. Otherwise, demand will be deficient, and household and company surplus falls, which makes their saving pointless. If on the other hand households and companies are overspending, then the government has to save. Otherwise you’ll get inflation.

So it’s not just a binary decision of good times (save)/bad times (spend) for government expenditure, which is the popular notion of Keynesian economics. It’s more than possible to have a situation of economic growth but with excess saving in the household and corporate sectors. Excess government spending then helps maintain that growth situation with full employment, but with the side effect that it requires government spending to exceed its revenue.

Let’s take it one step further by adding an external sector (i.e. trade) to our though experiment.
In aggregate, if a country is running a trade surplus, then production in the economy exceeds consumption – in short, the economy as a whole has excess savings. The opposite is also true, in that a trade deficit indicates an economy that is consuming more than it produces. So far so good.

Plug in the conclusions from the preceding discussion and you get the following – excess government spending is not a big problem with a trade surplus, but a government should cut back its spending with a trade deficit. In the former case, whether the government should run a deficit or not depends on whether external demand is sufficient to provide full domestic employment. In the case of a trade deficit however, the advice is unequivocal – you have to run a budget surplus unless you’re willing to tolerate higher inflation.

Hence the consistent concern over America’s “twin” deficits over the past decade.

Q4. All this increase in debt will be a burden on our children and our children’s children

A. This is based on the idea that debt has to be repaid eventually, and the main source of government income is taxation – basically a corollary of the idea that a government is similar to a household. Hence, in this view, the greater the debt build-up the greater the expected future level of taxation. The popular notion is thus that of the current generation borrowing from future generations.

There’s a problem with this conception. First, since governments are collective enterprises on behalf of the governed, there’s no natural lifespan involved. There’s no necessity for debt to be fully paid off and it can be effectively carried in perpetuity. Some governments have actually taken advantage of this fact to issue perpetual bonds that never mature, and at least one major government has issued a 999 year bond.

But the most important point is this – whether government debt accumulation will become a burden on future generations depends greatly on who the debt is owed to. If the debt is held by citizens or agencies acting on the citizens behalf (for example EPF), then the taxes raised to pay for maturing debt comes from citizens and the debt payment goes back to citizens. All that occurs is a change in financial obligations and possibly some redistribution of wealth, but not a net burden on taxpayers.

That’s how Japan has managed to raise public debt to over 200% of GDP, yet is barely penalised by bond investors – most of that debt is held by domestic institutions like postal savings banks and pension funds. The Japanese are in effect lending to their government so that the government can spend it on them.

In Malaysia’s case, the ratio of foreign holdings of federal government debt has been rising steadily since 2005, but its still at a fairly low level (Government debt, not including BNM bills):

For the rest, about a quarter is held by social security institutions like EPF and SOCSO, the financial sector (banks, insurance companies) hold another quarter. Holders of general investment issues aren’t specifically classified, but foreign holdings of GII are relatively minor according to RENTAS.

Q5. Government debt growth is being aided and abetted by our pension and investment funds, which are now at risk

A. Here’s an interesting question for you – which is the better credit risk, a household or company who faces hard budget constraints on income and expenditure, or a government with discretionary powers of taxation and a printing press?

Government debt typically forms the benchmark for all bond issues in an economy. Even the best rated companies pay more on their debt than the government of their country. It goes back to the safety factor. That’s why pension funds and insurance companies put most of their investible funds into government securities. Whatever the risk of investing in government securities, every alternative except cash is riskier.

Q6. Since most of government debt is owned by Malaysians and only some by foreigners, the foreigners will get paid first while we have to pick up the bill

A. Actually, the reason why there’s such elaborate care and concern over foreign bond investor perceptions and rights – not just here but globally – is because historically when countries do default, it’s almost always a default on external debt, not on the debt held by domestic institutions.

It’s not hard to figure out why – when we’re talking about citizens, no democratically elected government would dare default on its debt obligations as it risks being booted out otherwise. Same thing for institutions such as pension funds and insurance funds, which take care of the future financial needs of their investors (read: voters). For banks, a domestic default could mean the government needing to bail them out, which makes a default worthless.

So foreigners are always first in the firing line, which makes them understandably skittish.

Q7. The government went on a spending spree during the recession

A. In 2008, in response to the Lehman Brothers collapse and the resulting shutdown of the international financial system, Malaysia instituted a fiscal stimulus package worth RM7 billion. When that didn’t appear to be enough, a bigger spending package with a face value of RM60 billion was passed through Parliament in March 2009, which put the total up to RM67 billion. That sounds like a lot, especially since both were enacted under conditions where tax revenue was expected to drop.

But here’s what really happened: Of that RM67 billion, RM5 billion was for National Savings Bonds paying 5% interest intended to help retirees and pensioners to raise their income even as BNM cut banking interest rates (i.e. it was actually revenue, notexpenditure); RM7 billion was in Private Finance Initiatives, where the government didn’t pay a sen; RM20 billion was in credit guarantees for SMEs and small businesses, where again the government didn’t pay a sen; and only the remainder of RM35 billion was allocated for direct spending. That’s still a lot, and helps explain why debt ballooned in 2009/2010.

Or does it?

The truth is, Government expenditure in 2009 was only about RM1.4 billion higher than the original 2009 budget proposals sent to Parliament in 2008:

By my estimates, about RM14 billion of both stimulus packages were actually spent in 2009, yet the increase in total government spending was only a tenth of that. The implication is that most of the funding for the extra spending didn’t come from extra borrowing, but from cuts in other government programs. From my point of view that’s no spending spree, that’s being overly tight fisted – 90% of the stimulus effect was swallowed up by cutbacks in other areas..

So how come government debt rose sharply in 2009? Because government revenue came in at 10% below the budget estimates – in fact a little worse than the contraction in 2009 GDP of 9.9%:

Q8. We’re in trouble because debt has doubled in the past five years while income hasn’t

A. This is almost true: at the end of 2005, Federal Government debt stood at about RM229 billion and rose to RM407 billion by 2010. Nominal GDP on the other hand only rose from RM522 billion in 2005 to an estimated RM766 billion in 2010. But this little calculation is also wholly misleading as an indicator of debt sustainability.

The key point is that the recession seriously dented not just government income but the nation’s nominal income as a whole – the recovery in 2010 saw national income only just passing the level reached in 2008. In the meantime, the government had to deal with the drop in revenue in 2009, and thus had to borrow to cover the difference.

Looking at the growth rates, debt growth actually lagged income growth from 2005-2007:

It was only the recession that caused debt growth to jump, and it has now come down to more sustainable levels. As long as debt growth falls more or less in line with income growth, we should be fine.

Looking at the experience of the last recession (2000-2001) will give you an idea of why just taking a five year comparison won’t give you an accurate picture of the real situation.

Q9. Government debt isn’t sustainable because operational spending is greater than revenue

A. I think this came from a misunderstanding of what was said by Idris Jala at the recent ETP anniversary event. But it’s pretty easy to disprove:

The government’s operational balance has been negative in just three years out of the last 40, and it has not been in deficit since 1987. As required by law, the government only borrows to finance development expenditure, i.e. investment that will raise future capacity to produce.

Q10. Government debt is nearing the legal debt limit, and they won’t be able to borrow anymore so we’ll have to default

A. satD has covered this question in detail, so I won’t post more than a summary – the legal limit is a paper tiger and the government can change it anytime it wants. If at any point the government fails to gain legislative approval to raise the limit, in our system of parliamentary democracy that means an immediate dissolution of parliament and fresh general elections.

You’re not going to see a repeat of what happened in the US in August here. The US uses a presidential system, where the executive is elected separately from the legislative. Since this system is designed to promote checks and balances, that almost always means that a Democratic President has to deal with a Republican Congress and vice versa. The result is typically political gridlock.

Q11. The Treasury says the national debt is RM240 billion but the outstanding government debt is RM437, someone must be lying

A. It’s a funny thing but in Malaysia, we don’t use the term “national debt” in the way it’s commonly used elsewhere. Here the term refers exclusively to external debt only, of both the public and private sectors, and not to government debt.

So in Malaysia, government debt and national debt mean two very different things. The government’s external debt, by the way, is all of RM17 billion.

Q12. In ten years time, we’ll be like Greece

A. Greece has a 2000 year history of defaulting on its external debt. Malaysia has never defaulted on its debt.

Greece has had a debt to income ratio over 100% for the last twenty years, a ratio that is expected to climb to over 150% this year. Malaysia’s debt to GDP ratio peaked at 70% 25 years ago, and is at most 54% today.

Greece has something like three quarters of its debt owing to foreigners. Malaysia only owes about one fifth of its government debt to foreigners.

Greece is part of the Eurozone, and thus has no control over the issuance of its own money. Malaysia through Bank Negara controls the supply of Ringgit.

Worse, the European Central Bank is legally bared from becoming a lender of last resort for the Eurozone governments. Bank Negara has no such restrictions.

Greece is uncompetitive – it costs 40% more for a Greek worker to produce a unit of output compared to a German one. (Unfortunately the relevant statistics aren’t available for Malaysia).

Malaysia is not Greece, and we’re not exactly in danger of becoming one in the next ten years.






161 thoughts on “Our debt and deficit budget: Can we have a consistent stand?

  1. May I know what you means by “Greece has a 2000 year history of defaulting on its external debt”

  2. Ellese,

    You have already known that my economic thought is constantly and consistently gravitating towards Islam and the integration of moral values with economic action and economic development. Debt and interest is a taboo. Lord Keynes had said that the ancient view on debt and interest “deserves rehabilitation and honour”. In Islam taxation is not allowed and the creation, printing and issuance of money call for 100% reserve.

    The aforesaid Islamic view is concurred by almost all religions of the world. The Bible, the scripture of the Western nations, the Greek and Roman philosophers, Aristotle and Plato, etc also supported it… because debt can impoverishes the entire nation and can never result in worldly prosperity.

    In ‘The Greatness and Decline of Rome’ it illustrates how the “Italian society had become an inextricable labyrinth of debt and credit, through the agency of Syngraphac or Letters of Credit, which were renewed as soon as they fell due, they were negotiated in the same as securities and Bills of Exchange today, because of the scarcity of capital relative to the debt structure and frequent oscillation in prices should have made it ruinous for them to be removed frequently. The desperate competition for wealth in which all Italy was engaged……… (all which ended) as it seems that all such competition will always end, in a gigantic accumulation of vested interests which it needed nothing less than a cataclysm to break down”.

    A day will come when banks realize that they are having a liquidity problem, existing loans are recalled and further loans are withheld. When depositors have the omen, funds are withdrawn. Borrowers find it difficult to repay the loans, and industrial collapse and retrenchment become the order of the day. Ultimately, unemployment increases and perpetuates the depression.

    Adam Smith made a remark…… “these exertions of the natural liberty of a few individuals, which might endanger the security of the whole society, are, and ought to be, restrained by the laws of all governments of the most free as well as of the most despotical”.

    • We have fundamental difference in approach. Bit tight today. So I summarize:

      1) I’ve read the Islamic economic and philosophy treatises and subscribe to the vice

      2) under islamic econs debts are permissible. dalil is the provision of quran.

      3) under islamic finance and econ, its not interest but profit margin. Bnm doesn’t use interest as benchmark but uses Islamic market interbank rate. No shariah issue on this.

      4) notwithstanding the Islamic philosophy, if our country is facing contraction, what would you do?

      • As you have agreed, we are miles apart. I can still remember how you started and suddenly stop our Islamic debate when its course is not flowing your way. Permit me to borrow your words ‘enough is enough’ lah. Sorry Ellese, I will express myself my way and not in accordance to your format because the Western civilization has so captivated your mind to the extent that the expedient of the West have become your criteria of right and wrong. The soundness of your opinion is exclusively determined in the light of Western practices and precedents. To you this is the correct approach to knowledge and reasons.

        Nevertheless, for your comfort I would admit that the present material advancement of the world owes its existence to the delicately balanced capitalistic system which is capable of creating unlimited money, and placing unlimited resources into the hands of the modern society. However, this does not imply that an economy based on the principles from heaven will not be able to make a similar progress. There is one certain thing of happening in an economy of ‘A calculator in one hand and the Qur’an in the other’: It would not create a debt-ridden economy as at present.

        Who knows a day may dawn when you, Ellese, after paying for your faulty economic precepts and practices will shake off your past misconception and preach the gospel from heaven too.

        • Then to you all this discussion on economic policy is incorrect and irrelevant. Why then you add the false premise argument of the unrecorded guarantee? You should just condemn the whole system including bn and pr debt driven budget.

          Weved had our tiff. Your approach to Islamic discussion was unusual to be polite. Your approach in usul fiqh not referring to asbab bun nuzul was telling. When I question you, you became mad. You can advice people but you’re not willing to be adviced in Islamic discourse. That’s when we stopped. Probably its best to do this since you don’t even recognise debt in Islamic economics. It’s like heaven and earth our difference.

          • “You should just condemn the whole system including bn and pr debt driven budget”.

            Please, please, please… it is not politics. It is literary/economic critics. It is obvious that our economic/islamic theories are based on somewhat different criteria. Mine is religiously motivated. I do not know yours. I am defending my own belief. It has nothing to do with condemning ‘the whole system including bn and pr debt driven budget’.

          • OK lah…, hasan has the right to defend his own belief but so does everone else including Ellese. Agreeing to disagree is good sometimes.

  3. Ellese,

    A bit busy but glad your coffee shop open 24/7, so can drop by any time.

    No offence and just a small observation, from time to time you talk about dialectical discourse but at the same time, I notice you have the tendency to retort by way of absolutness ie ask to pick a position, but you should know well there is no absolute position in a dialectical approach, everything is fluid depend on variable, parameter and input, and the assume logic at the time of discussion.

    To answer your question, I have no clear and absolute position, I am against continuance surging debt and continuance deficit budget but not debt and deficit budget by itself, and this is not at all a difficult to understand concept and logic. Penang state government have no debt and will subsidise the deficit with own fund, how is that same with our federal budget? In most discussion, we do actually agree with each other, the different is perhaps priority.

    And also lets talk about company, Co A management decide to give bonus when achieve target back up by strong cash reserve, and Co B management decide to give bonus without achieve target and with growing debt, can we call both populist move? If you perceive both are same then perhaps I am conservative and you are forward looking.

    Good to know that you and P2BM move into the topic of growth, I think we are doing the right thing by looking at the revenue and asset, then move back to debt.

    • 😃😀😀😀. You’re very sharp and smart. I call it consistency and you term it as absolutism.

      In a dialectic discourse its important that one hold consistent stand. It need not be absolute and may carry qualification (like Husin), but never inconsistent. You cannot change goal posts as you like.

      Now perhaps a similar basis question can be posed. Why do you think its right for PR to adopt deficit budget for the national level and wrong for BN to do something similar.

      Now I believe the Econs parameter are the same however you argue. The billion dollars handout is the same. Now why is one bankcrupting the nation and the other does not?

      • Btw, notwithstanding the principle issue, on Penang, I don’t understand how you can come out with a budget without considering the so called “retained money” in the state consolidated funds . Can you elaborate? When you present the budget you must table the usage of money from the consolidated funds in the assembly together? Why was it not done? Any expenditure must be approved by Dewan in the budget
        and if you don’t budget and table it you can’t use it. Can you elaborate.

      • u juga pakar perli dan sindir la 🙂

        if both of us remain static at our base, that is call dualism, like bn n pr, r we the same?

        You actually don’t read anything from me that I agree with PR budget or their manifesto right? Meaning to say I might not agree with their stand, but somehow they are not the government yet, thus less historical baggage, I attended quite a number of PR ceramah and I try to grasp Rafizi point where the moneys come from, similarly he said the same thing as you, via reduction of subsidy……to cronies, but not specific enough because ceramah is to serve political purpose, not me and you so I don’t know how PR do it.

        I specifically mentioned Penang because you brought up the island deficit budget, and secondly we can make comparison as there is actual record and progress for all to see and read, not apple to apple though because we compare state and federal. Penang have surplus in the last few years and their proposed deficit budget do not increase debt while federal budget is not the case, hence I think it is imperative for the federal government to tackle the debt issue but not advocate and indulge in popular policies, however I didn’t say we should sacrifice growth. I seem to repeat myself quite a number of times, and I don’t see how I am not being consistent.

        Wrt your question on state consolidated fund, I am not clear what exactly your point is, LGE did mention, perhaps not during the table of budget, that the deficit will be funded by the state accumulated saving, if you have query pertaining to technicality of how the budget to be presented, I honestly don’t know, I have poor/zero knowledge on this subject.

        • Hehehe… I want to move on. I brought up Penang on the basis of principles. Your reasoning sounds reasonable but you know me I need it to be rechecked. Then I read its from state consol fund which makes it perplexing. Under the law, when you propose the state budget you need to get Dewan approval for the use of consol fund. If its there why didn’t LGE apply that? Something not right with the explanation.

          Anyway I let the dog lie.

  4. Finally Ellese,

    This what I want to read from you. It took your brain so long to understand what the commentators are looking for. I reminded you a few occasion in the past, but your keras kepala just cannot accept it. I just kept silence until you take a proactive step forward looking at yourself in the mirror and stop being a hypocrite yourself.

    Here are the summary:

    1. Hooray! All your previous post are RUBBISH (in your own words). It is all about personal attack. Taking the opportunity to redeem yourself at your own blog. Attacking the personality such as Din Merican, Haris Ibrahim, Dr. Rafick, Dr. Hsu etc. Your trademark, just cannot focus on the issue, instead attack personalities, as you have failed on addressing your opinion.

    2. This post is HISTORICAL, the one post which is able to change your blog to be readable “rubbish”. You will have more commentators now.

    3. Always disrupting other people’s blog by coming in on a different matter NOT related to the posted issue. Claiming people intolerant of contrarian views. Bloggers are always able to accept opinion on a issue but they do not take lightly on personal attack which has no benefits to the nation.

    4. It sure took a long long time, I was waiting eagerly for your blind mindset partisan views on the below matters in your blog, but instead you wanted to “crash”” other people blog on issue of your own personal interest, selfishly.
    Here are the topics which I have been waiting to read the kind of rubbish that you gonna publish here. Please expedite it.

    1. Anwar instill violence in Bersih 2.0
    2. Water crisis in Selangor
    3. Vernacular school
    4. Fair press
    5. How to be a saint in Malaysia.

    Ellese, you talk and talk and nag and nag and whine and whine but failed to bring up these matters in your blog. Why is it so? Suka cari pasal?

    Salam. May peace be with you. Looking forward for your next post.

    • Before I take a swipe on wave, let me introduce wave.

      He is an extreme blind supporter of pakatan. He justifies whatever wrong of pr and negate whatever right of bn. He had crossed swords against me for years and upset with/begrudge against (there may be better word) me.

      Now he tries to say to the world every possible time when I comment that I’ve been personal. He tried many arguments before this including lies like paid cyber trooper but failed.

      On this I usually don’t entertain him. He doesn’t believe in what he wrote. Pr blogs attack personally so many people without justification and he has absolutely no issue. Pr cybertroopers attack personally bn blogs like rocky he has abosultely no complain and comes up with big smiles. When I was attacked personally with rubbish as you read my previous posting its fine with him. But when I criticise someone from pr giving reasons and justifications its a no no and againsthos “personal attack” rule.

      I see this kind of people at the low end of moral chain but like to preach others. He knows my reply has been somewhat similar. I don’t intend to entertain him. But since I defend my honour ill cut and paste this posting over and over again like in the past. He can’t and will never get it as his mind is closed.

  5. Well, Ellese back to your old self again. Hard habit to break. Still want to attack me on my personality. I thought I saw light in you by your first HISTORICAL post on an issue. I think my compliment came too early, I have said earlier I see hope in you. But unfortunately you have to obey your paymaster, I can understand that.

    Nobody would want to waste time reading your reply on me, because I am nobody, I am insignificant (except for the one vote) but the welfare of our nation is much more important than your rant on me. Rakyat are more interested of Malaysia, a broken country moving forward and cleanse whatever that is needed to be cleaned. Ellese, you can help on it.

    Looking forward and please expedite the below topics which you have been gate “crashing” on other people’s blog. You have your blog to do it, I would participant on the issue. Unless you, as a hypocrite is intolerant of contrarian views.

    1. Anwar instill violence in Bersih 2.0
    2. Water crisis in Selangor
    3. Vernacular school
    4. Fair press
    5. How to be a saint in Malaysia.
    6. How to be a prosecutor, judge and jury in your blog.

    May peace be with you. Jangan fitnah lagi.

  6. Good of you Ellese to allow space for this Wave33 character who crticises personal attacks on blogs. This type of posting will not be allowed to appear in Din Merican’s for sure based on my past experience. The PR blogs will never accept contrarian views without vulgar, personal attacks from the Regulars and in most cases those views will be deleted.

    • Dear hussin,

      Some of my comments do not get publish in Din Merican’s blog too and also some other so called pro-PR blogs.

      I hope Ellese will allow contrarian view in hakbersuara. So far the most liberal blog, I have read is in Datuk Rocky blog, it is for 18SX. Even that is so, Rocky is still lack the courage to reply all those contrarian view. It is just too hot for him to handle or… perhaps unable to.

      I would say Dr.Rafick blog R2W, is the best so far, he allows healthy dialog and exchanges between commentators. Dr.Rafick has the military courage to reply to anyone, of course it causes some disappointment in Ellese. Again Ellese did a personal attack on Dr.Rafick in this blog, after being welcome in R2W for years. Hai… sudah nasib badan. Dendam begitu hangat.

      It began to turn sour when some bloggers in R2W started to use words like rubbish, idiots, bahalol, hypocrite, kepala otak etc etc. Using high level criticism on belittling other commentators, the same kind of character that you see in Sharifah Zohra Jabeen, she thinks she is a saint. Look at how Sharifah belittle Miss Bawani, there is just no respect for other people opinion.

      I hope Ellese will roll out all those topics, Ellese has been whining about for years. It is an opportunity to have a healthy debate for a better Malaysia.

      I am waiting and observing. It certainly helps me to conclude a lot of matters. Of course, it is not in a positive light.

      Ellese last post is historical! Finally some light, exit or train coming?

      • I told you not to lie. Go check previous posting on what happen. Dont be selective. I respond in kind. All this pr supporters are unhappy with how I counter argument and your friends and gangs started personal attack and name calling. Never once you condemn your gang and encourage it. So don’t be hypocritical. And don’t fabricate stories. Remember I defend my honour and will respond in kind.

    • These blogs are scum. I came up with this kind of economic argument pun kena censor.

  7. Dear Ellese,

    You did the correct steps moving forward (after long waiting infestation period) and publishing your first HISTORICAL issue in your blog, instead of demanding the so called pro-PR bloggers to abide to your summons.

    I congratulate you, coming to your senses. You have your freedom here.

    Now… where is the below topics going to roll out. Be quick lah…

    1. Anwar instill violence in Bersih 2.0
    2. Water crisis in Selangor
    3. Vernacular school
    4. Fair press
    5. How to be a saint in Malaysia.
    6. How to be a prosecutor, judge and jury in your blog.

    Salam. May peace be with you.

  8. Something to chew on for being gungho in deficit budgets for prolonged periods and printing money like in Japan.

    Even with our Govt printing more RM and injecting into the economy and servicing domestic debts, our cost of living is going up faster than you can call Ellese name. What happened?

    Our RM5 now buys far less than in 2008. It will be worse when GST and all subsidies removed when BN rules again. This is a given that BN must do that.

    So, Ellese, are you also in favor of this too? Making life harder for Malaysians?

    • “Our RM5 now buys far less than in 2008.”

      Semalam saya pergi makan di sebuah restoran tidak berhawa dingin di Masjid India. Saya makan nasi berani (dengan seketul kambing kecil, papadum dan aca timun) dan segelas nescafe-ice. Jumlah bil nya ialah RM19.80. Harga nasi beriani RM17-00 dan nescafe-ice RM2.80. Saya terperanjat beruk nak panjat pokok.

      • Patonah

        Semalam saya pergi makan di kedai kopi berdekatan dan tak berhawa angin. Saya order teh cina ais yang saya selalu bayar 50 sen segelas. Tapi semalam dia charge saya 70 sen untuk yang sama. Mee Goreng untuk 2 orang biasanya charge RM12 tapi semalam charge saya RM14. Semua makanan dah naik 20% dengan sunyi saja.

        Tapi Najib kata tak ada inflasi, tak ada masaalah. Macam mana nak hidup dengan gaji saya sekarang?

      • Kalau begitu… makan malam RM20, makan tengah hari RM20 dan makan sarapan pagi RM10, jumlah RM50.

        Satu bulan jumlah RM50 x 30 = RM1,500

        Sudah lebih dari gaji minima.
        Mamak Restoran ini pencetus inflasi.

      • tu restoran perombak yg buka kot, pilih lah satu yg bersih, adil dan sanggup turun harga kereta, jalan jauh sikit tak apa.

        • Pergi lah restaurant menu 1malaysia.. Pergi lah kedai 1malaysia. Harga barangan berpatutan. Banyak program yang membantu meringankan beban rakyat Malaysia.

          Jangan pergi kedai yang gah dengan iklan yang tidak menepati janji. Banyak hidden cost.

        • lol, tapi tak cuba maka tak tahu, yang tu sudah cuba dari atuk sampai cucu, complain mahal dan kotor tak ada orang nak layan, ini bukan sikap bisnes yg baguih, lagipun orang dalam dia bagi daging, kami orang luar tulang aja dapat. tukar! tukar! tukar!

          • Kahkahkah. Tapi kenapa nak pergi restoran baru yang dah tahu tak serupa bikin dan menyusahkan. Tak ada konsistensi. Tiap2 hari owner tukar. Citarasa pun tukar. Setengah Hari kena dipisahkan ikut jantina. Nak Bayar pun cam tu. setengah Hari ada alkohol setengah hari tak boleh pulak. Setengah Hari menu dalam bahasa melayu sahaja setengah lagi bahasa cina sahaja. Yang halal jadi haram dan yang haram jadi halal.
            Lebih baik Pergi kedai lama yang sudahpun ditransformasikan….. Jom Makan.

          • Ellese

            Looks like you subscribe to Najib’s inflation fighting strategy of giving out money, giving cheap meals, selling cheap foodstuff, giving discount cards, is that understanding correct?

            So if anyone worry that their normal everyday coffeeshop, mamak stall, etc raises prices, go to 1Malaysia meals.

            Did I misunderstand you?


          • Huh!! Don’t divert. Withdraw your unproven allegation.

            You don’t get it ke?. It’s the manner you argue. You make an assertion. I ask you to justify many times. After being pressed then you justify by falsely quoting an article that doesn’t support you. Then claim there’s no public info when there’s many. You refuse to google the truth. (Btw money supply info is publicly available. bnm publishes it every year lah) Then when pressed further to justify, you argued that its based on private information that you cannot disclose.

            This is the pits man. You think people are stupid ke? Admit your mistake. I’m going to hound you of this dishonesty. Don’t ever talk about others dishonesty when you are scums.

    • You still cannot get it. With pr its still the same. You must take a position and not just criticise. This is what I find troublesome. Ever changing goal posts. We can go deeper but you must come up with a position. If its too difficult to take a position then don’t criticise. Apply it regardless on bn or pr.

      • Ellese

        I have clearly stated my position but I also caveat that a lot depends on the environment and parameters at the time of implementation as things are not black and white and is not exact science. Stack up the odds and then somebody must bite the bullet and do it as best they can.

        For example, Nor Mohd Yakcop adviced Tun M to peg the currency. Tun M had the guts to go against every economic norm to do it. That’s biting the bullet. So for that, I take my hat off to him because Najib will debate till next term and nothing is done or get beautiful PowerPoint charts to tell why he won’t.

        The economic policies we are debating like deficit budget, handling income and debts, managing interest rates, all require real guts to implement and how to get the buy-in from the people and business communities.

        I criticize the BN Govt because of the implementation and execution. I never fault them much on policies because they are in the better position to know. And since their way is to decide, bulldoze and keep quiet thinking that Malaysians are stupid. That’s their fault.


        • I have a major problem with your argument. If you’re defending that its not perfect science, how can you freely condemn things within the realm of “imperfect science”. I’m beginning to think you’re rubbish. I put up the events where you change position from one to another. You own up to your wishy washy position. Have integrity. You lose your right to condemn others integrity if you don’t have one.

    • Huh! Problem with you is that you’re changing goal posts all the time and unashamedly think your inconsistent position is correct coz its not perfect science. Since its not perfect science how can you even condemn “the same imperfect science”. Please put a stand. If you don’t know how to decide don’t criticise.

  9. Well even the IMF recommends us to introduce a more broad-based tax system which means GST as one of the items. Sure it might increase the cost of living but the government has promised to implement more targeted subsidies to assist the poor and needy. General subsidies like that on petrol will only be wasted on the rich and foreigners. Believe it or not, Najib has also promised increased enforcement against corruptions. He has been delivering his promises so far.

    • Hussin

      I guess I too disagree with you that Najib has been delivering his promises to fight corruption.

      He is promising to do more if he gets the mandate in Ge13.

      For his GE12 term, corruption index is at all time high. Even he has not shaken off allegations of the Scorpene purchase, he interfered in the MRT station award to George Kent, he rushed to buy large ticket items called national security and awarded billion RM highway contracts sole sourced to Umno members, all pointing to questionable practice which he needs to clear himself of. Not forgetting the rush to list FGV, approval of Lynas, etc.

      I suppose if there was more transparency and people understood why and how it is procured, it would not be called corruption but he will be hard pressed to explain it all.

      But this may not be the forum to debate it.


      • This is typical of you. Do you think by changing people of same value solves the corruption? Tell us what to do.

        • “Do you think by changing people of same value solves the corruption?”

          That would be a worthy topic for debate/discussion as well as fuel for a reasoned analysis. But that could obviously not come from you, whose consistent angle of attack/reasoning is clearly formed by your notions that BN and PR are people of the same values.

          • I thought its from a reasoned argument that all politicians are the same.:-)

            You know my position on this since years ago though you may not agree with it.


          • All politicians may eventually be the same but I give the benefit of doubt to exceptions.

            But if you are fresh into power, then you have not had the chance to establish corruption just yet. Maybe eventually.


          • Rubbish. Anwar is the same. Apa cakap ni? Kit siang also the same playing Chinese sentiment all the time but condemn those playing Malay sentiment?

          • Ellese

            What Chinese sentiments is Kit Siang playing?

          • Don’t be naive lah. With you I’m going to respond differently with you. You pick select facts. You’re the sort of person who has different evidentiary rules depend whether you’re bn or pr.

            Now answer when did Najib say there’s no inflation?

          • So, ‘ipso facto’, we have no choice but to elect the same or new corrupt government every five years. Yes/No?

            Do you not think, we need to call upon perhaps religious ideas in order to validate radical reforms and changes? Let me make myself clear, I do not mean disintegration or revolution.

          • I thought I make myself clear many times before. We need to change incentives and disincentives of politicians. Reform political financing and internal election procedure. These are still Islamic.

          • in the long term, most politician are same, that is why the current democratic system is designed to ensure there is no one that reign for very long term. and the term ‘same’ might need further elaboration and definition, for instance, all politician would do anything to prolong their power, the one the eventually take over will not hesitate to demonize the past leader to make themself look better, in this aspect there is no difference.

            therefore we must be very caution to statement like every politician are the same in the context of pr politician when compare against bn politician, especially those that promoted by the mt host, only our naive wakaka still think positively of that spin king.

          • :-). My thinking its systemic.

          • how do we put all this one school n politician incentive into practice if nothing change? we need a spark, and a major one. and i also want to make myself clear, i do not mean disintegration or revolution, or riot 🙂

          • Too many assumptions.

            If and when PR is voted in and we get the same old, same old like BN, then this country is royally screwed.

            So far, looking at Selangor and Penang, there is still hope with PR.

            Rules for political financing is useless when no one enforces. Even with current rules, BN is flaunting them and EC keeps their eyes closed. Using the guise of charity and indirect donations and public funding, what gives?

            We need the rules and the enforcing.


        • Ellese

          I agree that we should not vote in anyone to Govt who has the same corrupt value and that will not solve corruption. It is not typical of me. If PR is shown to be just as bad, we should get Independents into the Govt.

          But how did you come to conclude that PR who has not been given a chance to rule to be as corrupt just like BN? I surmise that you agree that the present BN Govt is corrupt by your statement.

          In the 4 states that PR has governed, they came out tops in the Auditor General’s report which speaks volumes for their 1st term. However, I do not, for one moment, think that all are saints, but they have definitely shown a much better and professional performance thus far.

          Maybe they can do the same in their 1st term in Federal Govt?

          Anyway, I always believe that a fresh Govt will always try to do everything possible to look professional and good to the people. Maybe you are right that if they rule for 56 years they will also be the same as BN. Man is weak and easily tempted into corruption and few can withstand it, be it BN or PR.

          So, we don’t allow any party to govern for too long for them to feel comfortable to be corrupted.

          Any Govt who rules Malaysia must show accountability and transparency. Put into policy and practice to ensure zero corruption and give MACC the same powers and integrity of personnel as HK ICAC to report to Parliament, not PM, and start to stem out corruption. Give Accountant General the powers to prosecute so that financial integrity is not compromised and agencies act accountably just like Public Listed ones.

          In short, good governance is badly needed and to instill a culture of integrity and service in the hearts of all civil service and Malaysians.

          Idealistic? I think is very doable but with a new Govt only. And to listen to the people.


  10. “He has been delivering his promises so far.”

    yeah right.

  11. Ellese

    Given any economic circumstance, both BN and PR must assess and implement the right policies and strategies. That I agree. If it is blatantly a stupid policy, just know that all of us here must oppose vehemently.

    To be clear, I believe that BN and PR can have access to expert economic advisors. It is how these policies are implemented that will make a clear difference.

    Yes, even PR cannot avoid a deficit budget although they vowed to go surplus soonest possible (3 years in the Perak manifesto). Like I said many times, it is the balancing of the income and the execution of the expenditure based on borrowings that matters much more.

    If BN or PR presents a surplus or deficit budget, make sure it is clear why it is being done that way and how it can be executed to help the people and economy. That’s the job of the Govt.

    If capital control is required to be implemented once again, do it better with greater clarity and information, especially to creditors and analysts. It is not easy for any Govt to attempt this.

    Where is the argument?

    Raising interest rates? It’s a Govt instrument to curb spending. If it is deemed needed, do it and live with the consequences. Make sure the end result is what will happen, otherwise, all hell will break lose.

    To every policy, there is a consequence. If there is a viable Govt alternative, we can always vote the other in if we are not happy with the policies, right? For now, there isn’t any and we have to live with whatever is dished out to us.


    • But isn’t pr argument stupid to say bn budget deficit increases our debt and will bankcrupt the nation but PR can do the same? Then what about scare mongering on debts while they too always increase our debt? Mind you they claim they’ve factored in the savings for alleged corruption of BN. We’re not born yesterday P2B.

      • Ellese

        I think you have jumped the gun by comparing apples to oranges.

        Both will have a deficit budget for sure because of the populist manifestos.

        The difference is the magnitude.

        Anyway, arguing about the deficit at this point is meaningless because we are assuming the income. Neither BN or PR has been clear where this is coming from.

        We only know how everyone wants to spend, spend, spend. I haven’t done any computation as how much BR1M needs every year for RM1,200 handout. A lot, I reckon. Billions. So does PR but it is from the avoidance of taxes and restitution of some petrol subsidies perhaps. Nothing is clear, only speculations.

        Savings from alleged corruption is also a projection which may not happen at all. It is not easy to roll back on contracts, etc. but if it can be done, fantastic. Like they did in Penang and Selangor. Maybe this is possible, I don’t know.

        Still, knowing the income side of the equation is what I am very keen, whether BN or PR. BN will certainly borrow more, print more Ringgit. PR will have to find alternatives besides borrowing. We will see how they do it if they are voted in at all.

        As to scaremongering, nothing beats Najib and Tun M. Read what they have been saying. Vote PR and market will crash, racial riots, no peace, investors will run away.


        • Rubbish. You haven’t read pr budget ke?

          Now answer when did Najib say there’s no inflation?

          • Ellese

            I already answered and seems you can’t find my replies.

            All you like to say is rubbish to others who don’t accept your position.

            Don’t just rubbish here and there please. Focus on the issue.

            If you are talking about BR1M, I still disagree whether BN or PR. It is not the answer but a plaster to a major problem.


          • It’s the manner you argue. How can you argue its based on private info you cannot disclose and maintain you’re right. Gil’s bab punya argument. And you don’t even realise its or admit youre wrong. Have you no shame?

            Now why have you fail to publish my comments.

  12. Another thought along the topic of this thread.

    Under Najib’s reign, he doubled the national debt in 4 years. So the policy was public sector big spending, hold interest rate, print more Ringgit, remove subsidies, and what is the net effect so far?

    Are we better off now than before Najib took over from Pak Lah given such policies and implementation? There were no major crisis that struck Malaysia although the US and EU effects didn’t seem to affect Malaysia as much as analysts thought. So what happened to Malaysia with such big spending?


    • Rubbish. Wasn’t your stand that you’re ok with deficit budget provided that there’s income. And when want to debate on income brought by etp condemn its other people’s ideas. So what? And when youre corned for being inconsistent you argue that its not perfect science. Your values are screwed.

      • Ellese,

        The word “Rubbish” means you are intolerant of contrarian views

        The quote: “Your Values are screwed” because proud2bmalaysian is not the same political party with you.

        Hai… bila lah awak jadi consistent, Ellese.

      • Ellese

        My stand remains that I am OK with deficit budget with a balanced income.

        On ETP, I argued that it is not original but borrowed what others are doing and calling it Najib’s Economic Transformation Programme. What a bunch of bollocks!

        That means without calling it ETP, the activities are going to happen regardless. What did ETP do different to make it happen or make it better? Nothing I can tell. Can you?

        I am very consistent and economics is not exact science. There are many dependencies.

        And clearly I said the Govt of the Day has the better view and I am against wrong execution and abuse of implementation of public spending.

        Regardless if it is BN or PR doing it, wrong execution remains wrong no matter who does it.

        So where am I inconsistent. I merely pointed out the poor execution. Did I disagree with public spending?

        Maybe it’s your values that are screwed.


        • What a load of bull. Always making contradictory statement. You have no clue on pr deficit budget income. how is this better in terms of bn income? Bn has incomes in etp which you’re afraid to touch. Giving excuses.

          Too many inconsistent stand. Lalang betul. We could go on a bit more detail but you’re not one to have a stand. When ask to commit you said you can’t but funny thing on hindsight you can condemn bn right policies as wrong but Anwars wrong policy as not wrong coz its imperfect science.

          Now I think you’re lying. But i give you a chance to reply. When did Najib say that there’s no inflation?

          • Ellese

            You seem to take the ETP as the holy grail to Najib’s economic policy. Granted that’s the only thing he has got going, please show exactly how they contribute uniquely and directly to economic growth. I am not sure if that is even possible.

            I have categorically stated that PR has been vague on income and I want both BN and PR to state how income is generated. You seem to have somehow glossed over this.

            I suppose you will say that BN income is based on ETP. Well, the BN manifesto says there will be 1.5T worth of investment and 3M new jobs serving a new base for tax. How is this done given we are not even hitting a fraction the past 4 years?

            I was unwilling to condemn Anwar for his IMF stance because I do not know enough what transpired then behind the scenes. Who chaired the NEAC? I suppose when there was no alternative basis at that time was to accept and swallow what Anwar recommended. Until 1 Sept 1998 with the Capital Controls, then depose Anwar on 2 Sept 1998.

            I am not privy to what exactly transpired and there are different versions.

            I am not sure why you are so fixated on blaming Anwar and glorifying Mahathir?


          • You’re ridiculous. You cited an article the difference between Anwar and Mahathir approach. It’s moot and well establish fact that Anwar was pushing for contractionary policy during time of crisis. We already agreed that this is the wrong policy. So what’s difficult to conclude anwars policy is rubbish. You’re screwed big time man.

            And please you never categorically state from the beginning you’re okay with deficit budget. I did that from page 1. You jump here and there and only then concluded to my original position.

            Now answer what’s the evidence to show bn print money to pay off the deficit.

  13. Lets talk more about this same same thingy.

    RPK wrote “Whoever thought that my party, the Liberal Democratic Party (LibDem) of the UK, would go to bed with the Conservative Party after saying that in the event of a hung parliament they would go to bed with the Labour Party. “Why the ‘U-turn’?” as what Malaysia Today readers are fond of saying.”

    The Guardian Op-ed “That is not the only aspect of the Liberal brand whose shelf life has long since expired. In an attempt to make good his warning, Farron dredges up the party’s lukewarm opposition to the war in Iraq. But that was all a long time ago, under a different leadership, before the Orange Book coup and coalition with the Tories. The party’s opposition lasted only as long as it took for British troops to arrive in Baghdad. In reality, there seems to be little of principle today to distinguish the Liberals from their Conservative coalition partners.”

    RPK wrote about priciples in his 2 recent articles but clearly his party LebDem has no principles, what would he do? Start a MCLM …oppps… I meant a UKCLM as fourth force and fight against the so called third force? Or become a turncoat and give his full support to Conservative, or Labour? Or as implied by Hasan, move to Iran since Petra like to talk about Iran revolution so much?

    Democracy system was never perfect, UK and US took many years to attain what they are having today, slavery, woman right, gay rights is not an accepted norm in one day, why cant we allow ourselves to learn and progress at our own path, one step at a time, why here he act exactly like that US bully, talk as if Malaysian are all ignorant? Did Oxfort teach nothing about democracy 101? His lecture says nothing that people are fallable and make mistakes? And how democracy allows people to correct their mistakes, not immediately but in due course? Democracy is about people right to choose, and make decisions concerning how we ourselves will be governed, thus politicians are same or no same is not relevant as long as they know we are one that make the call, no?

    • HY,

      There is a fair amount of weight in this same same thingy. Power corrupts but absolute power corrupts absolutely. No? Just a ragbag of odd quotes, perhaps? You and P2bM are right, as people gain power, it becomes harder and harder for them to resist the temptations of enjoying an easier life for themselves. Macbeth shows how harsh a kingdom of corrupt people can be. Money, wine and sex are political inheritance. It completes the logic of the imperium. Most politicians would seek their fortunes within its economic and political structures, so to speak.

      Once you wrote that you will still be the same person [anti-establishment] even if PR wins the GE13. I like that statement. I am same same like you: just wanna help to draw a line where political abuses and corruptions will come to an end. However, I am not from PAS, or a left-wing postmodernist hizbullah in pursuit of the global political goals of Islam led by the Islamic State of Iran. Only that my heart and mind just wonder whether an Islamic alternative of politics of consensus (ijma) and politics of consultation (shura) with cardinal principles and framework of values in all political, economic (commercial), and social spheres, could be the answer.

      By the way I stop visiting rpk’s blog three years ago. I guess it was a right decision. Glorious Yong, how’s your Bilik Gerakan? Can I visit you and help you in your estate?

    • Hasan,

      Precisely, we rarely see leader that persist to uphold their earlier value and principle toward the end if stay too long, that is one reason I believe why USA could become such a great country, partly were due to their founding fathers visionary and insightful understanding of the humans’ flaw.

      Anti-establishment is fine and I am one, however I believe we have to strike a balance (moderation, middle path …wharever we name it) I recently finish reading the history of Ming Dynasty, one of reason that cause the fall of Ming is odd but convincing was when the Eunuch and Yanguan/Yushi (Imperior Censor that were assigned the duty to supervise, caution and remonstrant government policies, sort of check and balance role) become too powerful, The former is understandable because eunuchs are close to emperor and not every emperor are energetic and smart, what surprise me is that the Yanguan/Yushi could also do bad with their power to criticize, they could render every proposed policy and project to cease operation the moment they cast doubt toward the proposers honesty and result viability. There were more than 50 prime minister that resigned from their post during Chongzhen, Ming last emperor, reign because they can’t stand the non-stop bombardment and criticism from the Yanguan/Yushi. We see what happen when thing become too loose.


      • Like your write. But 1 thing I admire is their political financing rules and the party electoral process which I think many countries should copy.

      • ….continue….

        I am a pseudo-pkr member, the reason I join them is perhaps a weird one, I hope our political party can move toward multi-racial and inclusiveness, and compete on ideology and performance regardless of race and creed (your word), I want to see more Chinese in PKR and more Malay in DAP, therefore at the very least I should walk the talk. I think most of us from r2w, and some that migrate here share the common aspiration, we just want to be part of the cause to make good, with no intention to be rewarded, thus whatever party or not member of any political party is irrelevant.

        I know very little of Islamic political system, however I can draw a comparison with my understanding of Sino history, both our civilisation exist and survive for more than one thousand years, can we just write them off by simply saying they are archaic and behind times? I don’t think so. Just take a look at the Ming dynasty, we will be surprised that the emperor is not that authoritarian and sometimes powerless, and one that manage the country is actually the government officer, and most of them is promoted via a merit system of imperial examination, we can tell there are similarity of political system between the imperial China and our constitutional monarchy. Even today China is operated on a similar archaic system without the emperor, however every system need fine-tune by strengthening the rule of law and enhance the process of sharing and transition of power, and if possible, within a democratic framework. But Malaysians are lucky that we already have a pretty mature (depend on one pov) system at work, we don’t need to reinvent the wheel unnecessarily.


        • HY

          The scenario you refer to in China presents a very admirable and honorable way for civil servant and ministers to conduct themselves. Only the best gets the job. If he/she doesn’t work out, they resign.

          Here, we get people who have no idea what they are doing. They say the darnest things, make our country look like we are run by monkeys sometimes. They make their own rules and apply different ones to those opposing them.

          I certainly hope that the next batch of ministers better learn their job or get good advisors to surround themselves to make them do the job the right way.


          • P2bM

            The issue is the eunuchs and also the Yanguan/Yushi (the so called Confucius trained advisors) who are actually running the show. They are bad, very bad, they controlled the administration, economy, ministers, the court and the Emperor. Mind you… 50 good Prime Minsters resigned because of them.

          • Some of eunuchs and top civil servants and generals were Muslims. One of eunuch even went to Mekah for Haj.

          • “Just take a look at the Ming dynasty, we will be surprised that the emperor is not that authoritarian and sometimes powerless, and one that manage the country is actually the government officer, and most of them is promoted via a merit system of imperial examination, we can tell there are similarity of political system between the imperial China and our constitutional monarchy.”

            Zhu Yuanzhang, a poor peasant was born in 1328. He even begged for food. He was a believer and defender of Confucianism. But he also built mosques and wrote eulogies of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). In 1368 he became the first Emperor of the Ming Dynasty and adopted the title of “Hongwu” meaning “Vast Magnificent Military.” He staffed his bureaucracy with officials who passed the Neo-Confucian Imperial Examinations.

            He made it a capital offense to criticize him. There were massacres, and people feared to speak against him. His secret police killed tens of thousands of officials and their families. He tortured many people perhaps hundreds or thousands. He lived until old age. He reigned for thirty years. When he died, he had his physicians and concubines put to death.

          • Hasan

            China is not a perfect country. There were those times when the eunuchs were giving the marching orders and some Emperors who behaved like tyrants.

            Anyway, I guess there were the times when thousands vie for Govt posts by studying and passing tests to be the best of the best. I heard they still do it this way but I can’t confirm.

            This should bring the best Malaysians to do the job, not just the ones with the money or connection.

            I don’t have an answer so I shall sit it out of this one.


          • “Like your write. But 1 thing I admire is their political financing rules and the party electoral process which I think many countries should copy.” [ Ellese, April 18, 2013 at 8.00 pm ]

          • ….continue….

            I believe the eunuch as mention by Hasan that went to Mecca is Zhenghe. I rarely read Ming because we were made to believe Ming was a awful and dark era of China history that result in invasion and colonization, yes we all know Zhenghe was a great voyager but unknown to many he was also one of the most talented general that help Zhudi defeated his niece emperor Jianwen, Zhu Yuanzhang grandson. Hence one that made Ming great was a Muslim.

            Then what about the other ‘great voyager’ Raja Petra? Like I use to said many times, he were one of my idol, a educator, a teacher, a skillful and respected writer…..but all this are in the past, likewise that Helen Ang (I have a distinctive feeling toward the name Helen because I were once live next to a girl name Helen during a short stay in Penang when I was 4-5 years old, my father were in construction and that is why I move to quite a number of places). I am okay with partisan stance but not one that obsess with racial rhetoric and instigation, I don’t know what trigger Hasan to stop reading MT but I remain naive for the last 2 years to believe that they did what they do now for a particular unknown reason, it seem I am terribly wrong, people do change. There is nothing we could do, we have to move on.

            Now the final part, I honestly still don’t know where is the exact location of our bilik gerakan, we are patiently and impatiently waiting. Most probably everything will fix after nomination day, and of course everyone is welcome to support us though i am only taking a not that glorious armchair critic role. I am under Puchong constituency, most probably Gobind Singh again, this fella rarely show his face all this years but that is fine, the moment PR takeover Putrajaya, I promise myself to kick his ass kawkaw, literally, if he don’t turn up as he did in the past, like what Ellese always said wrt Khalid.


          • Glorious Yong,

            Yes it was Zheng He (1371-1433) who was a Muslim eunuch. Sadly, he reversed Hongwu’s policy of barring eunuchs from power. He shouldn’t. It was not Islamic. If he hadn’t done it the Ming Dynasty would last 500 years.

            The great voyager migrates from one city to another ‘seperti kapal tidak berkemudi’ and whose route is little more than a ploy with menacing complexity. It was about three years ago when I realized that there are two protagonists in one who knew exactly what the novel contained. I said bon voyage.

            Oh Rhan, you have got that soft feeling for the name Helen? But I thought you told me you like the name ‘Vivian’? It seems that I am terribly wrong. But I would still prefer Vivian than Helen though. 🙂

            I called Rafick the other day. I asked him whether HY is Hannah Yeoh? He laughed his heart out! Helen said HY is also the initials for Hannah Yeoh. I think Rafick is busy grinding is axe to ensure that AA would not win in BA. Anyway, I told Rafick I am not going to vote this GE13. I will tell you why over a cup of coffee at your Bilik Gerakan in Puchong.

            ” I promise myself to kick his ass kawkaw ” … Just take care bro… he might ask Din M to send Gulbuttock Singh to take care of you first.

          • Hasan, i don’t read anything on the part that Zhenghe reversed Hongwu policy on barring eunuch from power, the main cause is actually as you stated “Hongwu a believer and defender of Confucianism and staffed his bureaucracy with officials who passed the Neo-Confucian Imperial Examinations.”If you are truly interested to know, you may read the philosophy of Lixue, which result in a divergence of relationship between the emperor and his government officer, the Cheng-zhu thought place too many restriction on the emperor freedom, and naturally the emperor have no choice but turn to eunuch for support to combat the officer, that is where the eunuch derive their power.

            Tell you a secret, I feel like giving Helen a close hug during the Perak constitutional crisis, and frankly I can’t remember anything about Vivian, hmmm I do know one quite pretty Malaysian gal name Vivian Yeoh, miss Astro I guess and with TVB HK, but I now do share the same preference as yours.

            Ah Rafick the truly fair blogger, I thought pen is mightier than the axe, how to grind if he cease writing? Or he is one of the anon at the wakaka blog? If that is so, please ask him to get a handle like “I am a fair blogger”, you know I sometimes just whack no using brain 🙂

            Surprise to hear that you would abstain from voting, I recall you did make up your mind the last time I read you in r2w? Just curious since when you come to such decision? Are you and Rafick from the same place? I hope I could convince you to join us tukar tukar and tukar for bersih, adil dan saksama.

            Btw, Ellese finally found his match and no time to entertain us, we slowly and quietly turn his blog into a pro pr site wakaka.

          • When Hongwu died in 1398 his grandson Zhu Yunwen became the ruler. But he only ruled for four years because his uncle Zhu Di led an insurrection against him and made himself the emperor in 1402. He moved the capital from Nanjing to Beijing and Zheng He was the one who influenced Zhu Di to reverse many of Hongwu’s policies. The famous Forbidden City was built as the palace for Zhu Di.

            A debater at wakaka wrote that the tongue is mightier than the sword… lick.. lick…lick… and you said ‘touche’. Rafick has a lot of support from VICTIMS and PPHTM which is strong. My constituency is just next to Rafick, a constituency which is on loan to a lawyer. If the lawyer wins, the tenure of the loan will be until when the sun and the moon stop rising. I think Phua Kit Lai’s comment at Dr Hsu’s was well illustrated. And you really give Looes74 a good piece of your mind at wakaka eh!

            I will be going to Singapore on 4 May but can still come back for 505. I think you are right. Now, I have to support LKS, since he will be putting on his skull cap and loose white robe. I studied in the same school with LKS but though very much his junior.

            HY.. lets slowly but surely make over Ellese into a Vivian. Btw which flag would you want to use to wrap Ellese’s nude body up? I think P2bM has got the vitamins and mental stamina to sustain this ‘tabrakan’ of pov with Ellese. Thanks for recommending the philosophy of Lixue. I wish I could give Vivian a close hug… I think I should try the photo shop.

          • Kah kah kah. Whose this Vivien? But bro if you intend to turn me, this guy is not for turning. (Mcm thatcher cakap aje). If i sense this bro, i will be my usual self. So far with you guys we have a parameter. i can respect that unless you want to cross it lagi. We go to war lah. hehehe. anyway I intend to expose this P2b. But kena patient coz he is dense and still believe false premises as being right.

          • Kahkahkah.

            Can entertain lah. On p2b. I’ve concluded what he is and started to reveal his “questionable” position and comment on his blog already. He has refused to print my commentary thus far. But don’t find him in the same league as you guys or S18, rafick sb4s, morning dew and there’s one really interesting chap where i argued deep on Lynas. P2b just don’t have consistency to defend any position. Now more of irritation. Thought could learn from this guy based from his style of write.

            On your write, i like what you write about Chinese culture with hasan and I learn. So I will not comment. (Thought your Mahathir remark contentious but allowed it be).

            It’s a hectic time for me. I’ll try to chip in when I can. But many of your questions require deep thought and articulation and thus may need time to answer.

            I don’t mind many pro pr ke pro bn ke at this blog. But don’t think it’ll be pro pr site coz I will not drive it that way. Hehehe.

            Anyway where are you this morning? Which nomination poll you’re going to be at?

            Ps. You should use ubah. Tukar now means tukar PAS government. Wakaka…

        • …..continue…..

          Thank for sharing, Hasan, I add a little bit about Hongwu, he was one that believe harsh punishment (death penalty) is solution for everything, he doesn’t seem to accept the fact that the causability of poverty toward crime and corruption, he put to death few hundred thousand of government servent, mostly engage in corruption, however he was one of the most hardworking emperor in China history, otherwise Ming would not last for more than 200 years. He dismantled the prime minister system and replace it with a advisory role cabinet system (I cant think of a better word to illustrate leader (Shoufu) of cabinet system, thus I said 50 prime minister, in Ming cabinet, the number of leader can be from one to five or more, generally is four), all this work well when the emperor is relatively educated, hardworking, enjoy power, and care for his position, but imperial ruler, similar to monarch, is hereditary, thus the problem shown when you have a emperor that only interested in woman, sleeping and playing, all thing cant move without his endorsement, while in the past there is sharing of power/burden with the prime minister. Lesson learned is dictatorship work well only when we have a rather intelligent leader, at least for the first few years before he become senile, now you see the impact cause by our great Mahathir?


          ps/ ellese, perhaps the “recent comment” column help to trace, like you said, i sometimes even lost track my own comment..

  14. Regardless of BN or PR, we should all be vigilant to ensure that the people should be their focus and not themselves or cronies.


  15. Dear all,

    I’ve been having problems in reading previous commentaries and think the switch in format commentary allowing many more branches is difficult to read. Unless you guys prefer this, I thought of switching back.

    Hy, you have not finished your write yet but your write on Chinese culture and Hassan’s contribution on the same have always been enlightening. Thank you. Do keep up.

    I thought for the first time I could go deeper on income and etp. None from pr ever dared to go through this argument. i can understand that. even refsa and kian ming are touching superficially unable to go details. But have found p2b very dissappointing. After reading his blog and his commentaries above, he is one of those I have always been critical of: deeply partisan applying double standard arguments. I like his civil manner and the way he can elaborate, but after spending so much time, i find him, because of partisanship,taking diverse contradictory stands. For example during initial stand he condemned bn simply because bn was creating debt above 50% limit. [which is a false statement anyway]. then on the other hand he supports pr deficit budget incurring more debt and not worried on the limit or income pula. he can pusing2 take extreme stand trying not to put a position. And if unable to answer he gives excuses that its an imperfect science. gila bab punya argument. Perhaps he can con many but i have had enough with this kind of people.

    And You know what? In the end he agreed with the same principles I had initially which he had disagreed. He still didn’t realise I have enough to quote what he had said earlier. Unless he can be principled, I have to apologise to all that I’ve not gone deeper with P2B. I’m going to remind him of his double stands.

    I don’t mind one being partisan but do it for a cause. For example though I don’t agree many things with HY but I respect that he’s clearly consistent on what he wants and believe. I can live with it. On certain stands we can agree but on others we disagree.

  16. Ellese

    Again you seem to be reading something else other than what I write.

    Again allow me to state.

    1. I have no problem with deficit budgets and should be balanced with the income or borrowings. Both BN and PR have not clearly stated how this is done.

    2. The time the national debt is too much is when Rating Agencies downgrade us. It is not a statutory number.

    3. I also categorically stated that the Govt of the Day owns the policies and that I am more particular about the execution. Eg corruption, leakages, questionable practices, cronyism, sole sourcing uncompetitively, hiding behind national security excuses, imposing middlemen into deals, etc.

    4. I should add that though initially I had argued that BN pushing high debt ratios are dangerous to the country, I admit it is not the mere number that is worrying but it is how they push the debts and borrowings. Continuously printing money and borrowing from EPF without the corresponding results are extremely worrying. Eg Najib spent as much as the past 5 PMs in his 4 years term but didn’t do much to the economy. Where did the money go?

    5. Again, you like to debate theory and the past. I would like to know about the present and the future. More exciting, won’t you agree?

    6. I will be more than happy to deliberate the ETP with you and I have said that the ETP contains a lot of activities that are already happening by businesses. Many parts seem to be written backwards – taking what others are doing and calling it ETP. It would be more appealing if the ETP were innovative ways to Transform with ideas, policies, etc that are new, novel, out-of-the-box, such that without the ETP, there will be NO transformation.

    Hope this is more succinct for your appetite.


    p/s I am not partisan to any political party. I am not a member of any political party. I am of the opinion that if things are not moving in the right direction that many more Malaysians and more $ will leave the country. I write because I care.

    • Thank you. This is clearer.

      1. The question of past has bearing of current and future. We must be clear if a twin effect of 98 happen again we do not resort to the comedy policy of Anwar of further contracting the economy. We must first counter it by Keynes and adopt the now accepted IMF capital control. Then reformed the economy like Obama, brown and Mahathir did.

      2. We go on etp simply because we need to know the income generation. Most of the projects could not have proceeded at the current pace without jala’s effort. Belittling this and going into debate on who proposed this or that project is wholly unproductive. This implementation and execution effort you purposely ignored. The point of discussion is how does it benefit us. What project must be supported and how is this project financed. That’s why I find your manner of argument outlandish. If you want to make it partisan tell upfront. I respond differently then.

      And for the third time, please quote when did Najib say there’s no inflation? Answer this. I also have queries on your money supply and najibs increase debt argument? Don’t ramble. Provide me the justification n evidence. I need to establish some ground parameters if we want dialectic discourse. I cannot accept a lie. If mistaken you must own it.

  17. Ellese

    1. I guess you don’t like Anwar and you love Mahathir. Using personal words like “comedy policy” is not nice. I also don’t know how Obama and Mahathir reformed the economy. What changed? I accept that if we ever have a currency attack on our economy that we must first stabilize the currency. Question is do you invoke capital control immediately or after a period to establish the fact that there is a sustained attack? We must avoid whimsical implementation of capital controls because it has long term ramifications.

    2. Sorry I disagree with you. ETP is not solely about income generation else call it EIP, Economic Income Programme. ETP is supposed to transform the economy from what to what? There is no basis to start with, your favorite question. I accept that for some areas, Govt impetus was generated with seed funding and turned into a public sector project with no clear sight of how the entire project will be funded eventually. Yes, again I agree that this gives the project Govt focus so that it has public sector legitimacy. But many of such projects have been carried out in the past without the ETP label, not called Transformation, but as long as they are classified Govt Project, people expect $ to be on the table but there isn’t. Much of our $ was loaned out to contract holders of Highway projects. News reports referred.

    3. Najib has always stated there is no inflation in the press. He has never owned up to inflation hitting the people. He always uses his glorified stats. Check his press statements on inflation. I have been tracking this since Pak Lah’s days in 2008 after he was bold enough to cut subsidies and raise petrol prices to free some $ for his Govt use. During Najib’s time, he never once, as far as I can recall, ever said there is inflation. He keeps pacifying the public there is no cause for concern. So I guess the phrase “no inflation” used by Najib may infer inflation of concern. Also because he refers to our Inflation Rate based on a basket of consumer products that are subsidized.

    2003 – 1.07%
    2004 – 1.42%
    2005 – 2.94%
    2006 – 3.62%
    2007 – 2.03%
    2008 – 5.40%
    2009 – 0.60%
    2010 – 1.70%
    2011 – 3.20%
    2012 – 1.20%

    If you look at the published Inflation Rate, we are ranked 27 out of 224 countries. So why in the world are we complaining? Well, I complain because the disposable income is impacted by inflation. Also, wage increase is pacing inflation rate. Hence, little to no wage increase and smaller disposable income every year. Still no real inflation?

    Najib’s increased debt by 50% is now well documented.

    I stand corrected anyways. I am not an economist by profession but I venture into multiple disciplines to understand what is happening.


    • I ask again where did Najib say there’s no inflation. There’s many press report showing he recognized inflation (even in pro pr tmi). Please give me the citation.

      • Ellese

        My mistake. He said manageable and low inflation so the Govt is doing all they can like Kedai 1Malaysia, Kad 1Malaysia, BR1M, to help household combat increasing consumer prices.

        I interpreted Najib to say not to worry about inflation, hence, my bad. But he did not admit that inflation is really much higher than published although he admitted that people has been complaining about prices getting way too high to manage during his walkabouts.

        I forsee spike in inflation coming after BN wins the GE13. This I know for sure.


        • I knew you purposely misled. But it’s a good sign you admit mistake. And when one admits mistake one admits it unreservedly. You however still try to justify and this shows how screwed your values are. And can you imagine after 5 requests, evasion and unjustified diversion. You are not honest man. I need to establish some more ground rules.

          Now you accuse bn of printing money to pay off the deficit. Where is your evidence for this?

          • Ellese

            If you don’t know, I can’t help you. All you rely on is public info which is what the Govt wants you to know and what they don’t want you to know, we won’t know.

            Like I said before, there are lots of details we will never know, at least I won’t since I don’t have privilege.

            You should read the article you posted in Q1 and Q5 and what Hasan also wrote on this.


          • It’s you who is selective. When You relied on public info to condemn its not an issue. That had never stop you. For example your lie on inflation was based on public info. What’s wrong with you?

            Be credible.

          • Ellese

            All news report publicly available tells of Najib saying we are experiencing low inflation and quotes the published inflation rates. And they are really low. See the table I shared above with 2012 at 1.2% which is almost like no inflation.

            So what’s wrong with that inference. I admitted that Najib never used the words “no inflation” but reference to published info is close to that meaning.

            That is public info.


  18. Ellese

    By the way, may I know if you have ever participated or bid or lobbied or worked on in any form for any ETP projects?


    • P2bM

      I am following your debate closely. It is crystal to me. Like you I am not an economist but I did a thesis on Islamic finance. Does it explains my inclination towards Islam. I have participated in PEMANDU workshop. I have lobbied for ETP projects.

      Please go to ‘OutSyed The Box’, and go to ‘Popular Posts’ and click ‘The One & Only Problem in Malaysia’. Scroll down and you will read what Syed Akhbar Ali said: “And where is Pemandu & Pemudah? (Do you realize that pemandu & pemudah rhymes with hisap candu & hisap dadah?) [sic]

  19. Hasan

    I too have done that with some ETP projects and I know very well what is happening on the ground, hence, my skeptical view of Pemandu.

    I wonder if Ellese has the same experience.

    Cute joke, 😉


  20. Ellese

    I append here a very informative article regarding the topic of your passion, the 98 crisis, from a different perspective.



    • What’s your position? I told you so many things in there. And don’t forget crony capitalism is used against a person you don’t like but if you like them its not crony capitalism. You’re just “too big to fail.”

      Please note the many inconsistency of your position with this article.

      • Ellese

        I have been absolutely clear. If PR exercise cronyism, corruption, etc, I will also be as adamant against them. In your blind loyalty to BN, you accept all they have done, good and bad.

        If bad, we must call it bad and do something about it if we really can prove it. Else we are making baseless allegations.

        If I had done that and you can show me, I will retract my words.


        • Bull lah. It’s core party exercises fraud forgery cheating manipulation and many undemocratic practices. But you still support PR.

          Now where is this evidence of bn printing money?

  21. Ellese

    Please provide evidences that there is fraud, forgery, cheating, manipulation. I guess money politics being admitted by Umno and ex-Umno stalwarts doesn’t mean Umno is cheating, yeah?

    So what is bull?

    As to BN printing money, please read your article Q1 and Q5 and what Hasan has also written in his comments. Do a search on “print” and you can read them easily.

    I leave this to you. I guess BN will publicly tell us that they are printing money, I suppose. I won’t be able to find publicly available published information on the Govt printing more money for such purpose.


    • I thought so. You like to bull your way all the time.

      You accused bn of printing money time and again due to the debts. Show lah the evidence. The article has never mentioned bn has done so. It’s an option to print money but growth or inflation can also sort the debt interest payment.

      So stop bulling. There’s public and independent money supply info of Malaysia since donkey years. But I thought you have no clue about it.

      Go google it. Im patient still and want to see how you con your way out again to show how bn printed money to sort out the debt.

      Please always remember your main contention is that bn print print print money to sort the debt. I’m restating to help you to focus. My reckon is that you mislead again but I give you opportunity to defend yourself. Lets see your next excuse.

      • I would think that the Govt will never reveal the fact they are printing more money. Last year, BNM flooded the country with newly printed money which we don’t know of what quantity. It may not have diluted the value of the Ringgit significantly yet. Maybe it is a controlled released.

        US reports alluded to Malaysia having always used Quantitative Easing and not surprising Malaysia is still doing it quietly.

        My contention is that the Govt will never ever tell although BNM linked info may reveal such practices.

        It remains a potent instrument for the Govt. Nothing wrong with it either as long as not abused.


        • I thought so. You’re putting rubbish after rubbish. The government increases the money supply every year lah all the while. It’s publicly available info. I ask you to google. So google lah. I need to show you that you always conclude based on wrong premise again. Tell me why there’s increase every year our money supply.

          Remember, you put a statement bn print print print money to pay off debt. It’s apparent now you pluck from thin air and accuse without basis. I put on record you have no clue on country’s money supply. Since you pretend to be smart and knowing many things tell me why lah there’s an increase? I show you stats that money supply in all other countries also increases. You tell me why these countries increases like Malaysia?

          Now this is public available info and also by inde party. Don’t stupidly argue you cannot rely on this. You spread too much falsehood and thinking you’re right and smart. Using adding up irrelevant diversionary argument to put some semblance of a good argument. Rubbish. You can con many. Thats why I’m taking you one by one. You’ve written enough contradictory hypocritical statement.

          I thought you were sincere in the first place. Until now you don’t admit your wishy washy 98 argument just to support partisan view. It’s factual. I was Anwar supporter then. I totally disagree with his 98 policy and thus call it stupid. I agree with Mahathir. Jomo also think its a great idea albeit late. Now IMF think its a good idea. So for this we all glorify Mahathir ke? You’re really screwed. You can’t accept the fact that bn can do right. Now go back to the money supply. Prove your statement again that bn printing money to pay off debt.

          • Ellese

            When a Govt prints more money to inject into the stream, they can use it for multiple purpose which will never be revealed.

            Just like can you prove to me that tax money from haram sources like Genting are never used for non-haram purpose? You can’t because tax dollars all go into a single pot and re-distributed as source of funds. Where did the money for all the handouts come from?

            So i can respect your position. I just don’t agree with it. Why are you insisting that you are the only one right and those who holds a different position is wrong? Because you were with Anwar? So you know everything?

            Well, I don’t and that knowledge is not privy to me. Maybe if I knew what you know, I might change my position.

            As for now, to me Anwar is not a saint nor perfect, far from it. But I won’t condemn the man and he can’t be the only one responsible. He was DPM, Deputy Head of NEAC, etc. Deputy…remember? Can he do anything without PM approval, albeit reluctantly? I doubt so else he will be the PM instead but he is not.

            Did you not remember it was Idris Jala who said we will go bankrupt if we didn’t remove all the subsidies? Why was he even worried? Oh I must have misunderstood him, I guess.

            You have take a stance of trying to pick out what people say but when it comes to yours, you have no support either. You attack me with labels but you have not sorted out nor articulated piece by piece where you feel I went wrong. Perhaps if you did that, I can see my flaws?

            I never said I was always right and I don’t need to attack nor label you. But you seem to get emotional easily. Maybe I do too. But this is not going anywhere with labels and name calling.


          • Then stick to the point.

            You accuse bn to print print print money to pay off debt.

            I ask many times where’s the evidence.

            After a while, you say its in the article I posted. I said no. HISHAM didn’t say anything on this. You knew its a false argument and didn’t even acknowledge of your false argument.

            So now how did you derive to your conclusion.

          • I can’t reveal my sources as they were from conversations I had with people in the know.

            If you consider that not evidence, then OK, the Govt never prints money to pay off debt.

            Can I ask you if you have all the evidence to show how the Govt manages to find money to repay debt without the need to print money?

            I inferred from the article he implied the Govt use of printing money. He knows.


            “In the end, the real limit to government borrowing (and spending) is neither taxation nor the printing press – its the ability of an economy to produce goods and services. Which leads to the next point.”

            “A. Here’s an interesting question for you – which is the better credit risk, a household or company who faces hard budget constraints on income and expenditure, or a government with discretionary powers of taxation and a printing press?”

          • You’re sick. Then I can say many things based on hearsay juga. You’re full of bull man.

          • Nope. You have all the while say bn print print print money. It’s a serious allegation kan. It forms a fundamental basis of your argument as compared with pr. So where is it?

          • Don’t bull me. It’s you who allege bn print print print money. Where is your proof? How many bloody times do I have to ask? Don’t know say so lah but don’t give granny story please.

            If you had been sincere I’m fine but you’re giving me rubbish and dishonest answer. You don’t deserve nicety.

            So where is your evidence?

          • Ellese

            You don’t read English or you don’t read what I wrote. I said it’s from my sources and I back off. I asked you if you knew for sure the Govt never print money to repay debt then and asked if you had any public documentation the Govt never does this?

            I showed you a US report that alluded to a number of countries doing it and one of them is Malaysia.

            Can you show me that the Govt of Malaysia NEVER prints money to service the debt?


        • Another thing I tell you upfront. Your quote of Malaysian chronicle as a source shows your ignorance and blind partisan. Malaysian chronicle is just like utusan but on the other extreme. They lie lie lie and put this as if its a comment. Look at the piece you quote. it has no economic basis (save a few oft quoted facts) and pure spins. Just like you kan?

          You quote here economists ke, bnm annual report ke, Harvard review ke, raw statistics ke, independent house analyst ke, etc etc tak pa juga. But don’t quote rubbish which you can’t defend.

          • Ellese

            So it is clear your position is that the BN Govt NEVER printed money to defray debts or increase capital for public spending.

            Then you will tell me you never said that. Coz if you admit it, I will also ask you for documented evidence. You have quoted nada except for this article from EconMalaysia.


    • You obviously have lived on a different planet. Look at the chicanery of pr parties internal election. This is before even they get power. Don’t have to wait 20 years.

      I wonder what excuse you’re going to provide now.

      • Ellese

        The PR parties are open with any discrepancies and man enough to admit if there were mistakes and corrected and audited too. So what is the problem with this? It is not corruption, it was audited by a public auditor, and not swept under the carpet. Are you showing me evidence of corruption or any illegal activity here?

        Umno has practiced money politics for the longest time and hides the fact although a few old guard have openly admitted the fact. Yet life goes on and you condone this, I presume. And those in MCA knows how Chua SL managed to come back to gain enough votes to become President.

        What excuse are you providing?


        • You were the one making high ground claim that you don’t support leaders who are corrupt. It’s nothing about umno. I’ve not made that statement so I’m not defending it.

          You again use diversionary argument. So focus. We all know the values of some of pr leaders and what they did to ensure power within their parties. Corrupt to the core. Fraud, cheating, forgery, manipulation and unfair democratic practices.

          I wait until when you’re going to admit this and want to show the world your typical diversionary argument. The audit argument doesn’t work coz such there was cover up. Think lah with your great brain like the money supply argument. Kata you are multidisciplined.

  22. Ellese

    There you go accusing me when you can’t show specifically the items. You go on a rampage to attack the person rather than debate the message as you always claim you do.

    Since you can say we all know blah blah blah, I respect that and we all know that your knowledge is selective, judgmental, and bias.

    I think PR has been very open and not hide any discrepancies and have gone on to fix them. Better than hiding the wrongs and sweeping them under the carpet.

    Money supply info is not available but as reported in US articles, Malaysia has been doing it for a long time quietly but you deny that?

    You say you are not defending Umno but your words say otherwise when you argue against one and keep silent when it comes to Umno. The silence speaks very loudly indeed.



    Balancing austerity, printing money, debt management, economic recovery and captial controls. Global experiment so that leading economies do not hurt the rest of the world.

    • P2bM

      Please allow me to contribute just a bit.

      The Hongwu Emperor of the Ming Dynasty also issued paper currency. However, due to inflation, by 1425, the paper currency was worth only a few cents of the printed value. So silver and bronze coins replaced paper banknotes and became the main currency of the Ming Empire.

      Nonetheless, because of inflation the farmers had difficulty to pay their taxes, and this smashed up the government revenues and contributed to the empire’s monetary crisis. The financial crisis was compounded by epidemics, wars, bad government, and rebellions. The government didn’t have funds to either help the people or stop the rebellions. The government also didn’t have cohesion or the ability to develop good policies since the eunuchs took a lot of the power and terrorized the people by torturing them.

      In the early 1640s, many peasants were starving and unable to pay their taxes, and they were no longer afraid of the authorities and the Emperor. They began to form large rebel bands and sided with the Manchus who invaded China in 1644 and proclaimed Shunzhi Emperor as the ruler of the Qing Dynasty.

      End of story.

      • bloody incredible where the hell u learn all this? wow i have to reassess my judgment and impression toward u, i guess your real name is Zhu Ha San, right or not?

        • “i guess your real name is Zhu Ha San, right or not?”

          It is a world of ‘tamaduns: Cina, India, Melayu, Orang Putih, dll’. Certainly, there is a lot we can learn from the Chinese civilization. “Tuntulah ilmu walaupun ke negeri Cina”. Tetapi aku bukan Cina, aku bukan India dan aku bukan Melayu. Aku Malaysian: we all need to rediscover and renovate ourselves.

      • Hasan


        Quantitative Easing is a common practice and commonly believed that it can devalue the currency when too much floods the market. Guess I wasn’t aware that even the Ming Dynasty did just that.

        I actually think that if it was done with care balanced with increased trade balance and other instruments that it can be a very potent solution. I (but Ellese disagree) believe our Govt has been doing this for a long time but more so of late, albeit, quietly. But I have no published evidence.

        But I am very impressed you know all these. Fantastic.


    • So what? Where does it say bn print print print money to pay off debt.

    • Where is the evidence bn govt print print print money to pay off the debt ?

  24. Where is the evidence that the BN Govt NEVER prints money to pay off debt?

  25. Ellese

    I guess you don’t read the comments I replied to you above.

    I said my sources were private and I back off. I conclude that you are of the position that the BN Govt never prints money for debt management purpose and I asked your evidence of that position.

    You claim I am deceitful but I have been most open and I admit I do not have public admission of BN Govt printing money.

    I gather you have evidence to the contrary position. So where is it?


    • No such rubbish. If you can argue like that then I can also say pr is absolutely corrupt. You know why? My personal sources which I cannot mention reveal as such. Because of that everyone must believe LGE lks are corrupt. I’m beginning to think you are the worst commentator I come across. Pretending to be intelligent but full of deceit. You have no integrity. Changing position all the times. Writing lies. Rubbish betul.

      • You’re sick not knowing the limits. You don’t go around claiming people this and that and suddenly when asked to justify claim info is private. Kepala otak punya argument.

        You know when people rely on public information you condemn its not enough. But when asked to justify you say you cannot justify coz its private information. [Expletives]. You think people are stupid ke? You’re totally dishonest. Then pretend to take high ground you don’t believe in corrupt values. I’ve encountered many along these years man. I gave chance to be nice first. You should have stopped when I condemned your stupid inconsistent stand. Now I’m going to prove all your rubbish lies. Admit, apologise and withdraw your comment.

        Now why haven’t you publish my criticism of you at your blog. Afraid ke? Practice selective censorship ke? Applying MSM standard ke? Or just scared of me to reveal your rubbish character?

        • Ellese

          All you know to do is to antagonize, spew expletives, call names, give labels. They are not criticisms. They are, in your own words, rubbish.

          You have never really argued anything and chooses to ignore or stay silent. But you are a very good attack dog to latch on one thing but never read what was actually written. Maybe there are just too many replies all over.

          So, you only go for calling names and accuse others of their character? I guess you can’t stand positions different from yours. Do you know you can’t argue coherently? You let your emotions get in the way.

          What other names you want to call me?


      • Ellese

        I have no problem of you accusing the PR of being absolutely corrupt. I can respect your stand.

        I just happen to differ from you and I don’t believe for a moment that PR is holy and saintly either. In politics, I don’t expect that. I leave that to the religious movements.

        What happened to the Scorpene commission, the over priced defense vehicles, the planes that don’t fly, the list goes on, and I assure you is now known but you will say – RUBBISH – where is the published details of such accusations.

        So, I agree to disagree with you but I won’t call you names.


        • Actually I don’t care you’re pr. HY is pro pr. So is Hassan.

          But my problem is your manner of arguing. It’s bloody wrong. To put lies and unproven allegation and claim moral high ground.

          Now admit you’ve made the mistake. Own up.

          • There’s some rule of decency in arguing. Don’t put forth lies and misleading facts. Don’t put things you can’t justify. Be truthful. Be fair. And don’t argue below the belt to save your skin.

            The argument to say you’re right because someone private told you so is TOTALLy unacceptable. If you cannot quote, don’t make assertion at all. This is bloody wrong.

            It’s not about agreeing to disagree. It’s about putting honest true opinion. You put in lies, that’s pure and simple wrongful.

          • Ellese

            What can you not understand? You appear like a pitbull hanging on to a bone.

            I said my sources were private and I backdown from this. You seem to enjoy pounding as if that’s all you can do.

            Do I need to write in other languages?

          • What can you not understand from my write which is in simple English? No dialectic discourse until you agree to the parameters.

            Now when are you to publish my comments?

  26. Quote: There’s some rule of decency in arguing.
    >> I hope it doesn’t include on doing personal attack, calling people opinion such as rubbish hypocrite, partisan, kepala otak punya argument, stupid inconsistent stand etc etc.

    Quote: You put in lies, that’s pure and simple wrongful.
    >> If it does not support your political party beliefs. I can understand that, can you, Ellese?

    • Wave, once you forfeit that honesty you’re not entitled to decency. Like you who chase me around with hypocritical argument, I will not give that decency.

      On p2b, kindly note I was civil first because he was. I had replied in kind. But his changing goal posts pulled me back to treat him in a similar category as you, 🙂 sorry wave, I cannot resist that.

      You don’t realise or appreciate this. But P2b is a nice and civil guy. We can go deeper having good discourse. I’m willing to argue but there must be parameters of decency in such a discourse. You cannot change goal posts, make ridicule public info and then decide not to disclose private info. Then put in lies ,unjustified allegation and irrelevant information.

      Otherwise we can have non dialectic discourse which I have with most of the people including you my friend. We can throw crude language make wild baseless allegations or even argue based on private info which cannot be disclosed.

  27. Apalah nak ptui ptui orang nie? Fikir dan bincang sudahlah. Isunya adalah haruskah kerajaan (tak kiralah kera jaan apa dan Negara mana pun) cetak duit untuk menangani masalah ekonomi, itu aje. Yang saya nampak hanya ini:

    Maki & caci & menghina – Ellese 10 : Proud2bM’sian 0
    Isi – Ellese 5 : Proud2bM’sian 10
    Enriching & Englightening – Ellese 5 : Proud2bM’sian 10

    Jumlah Ellese 20 : Proud2bM’sian 20

    • Don’t start a fight with me. I was against his method of argument. He was dishonest in arguing.

      Why are you supporting a write which propagates lies and provide unjustified allegation? And when asked to prove dia kata public info not good but private info cannot be disclosed. So whats there to discuss? This is extremely dishonest.

      I don’t know you. But i will tell you im a person who reply in kind. Let me illustrate. I can easily write like this:

      Isi: patonah -10
      Ability to defend: -20
      Sindir/ ridiculing : 5
      Value of write: 0

      Total: still negative.

      You see I can reply like this but there’s no value. Just like your write. It’s a no brainer. Don’t do this again please.

      I’m writing harshly to P2B because he is densed. From the beginning I told you I need to establish parameters of argument. He doesn’t know when to stop and differentiate what constitute a decent argument. My harsh approach was necessary otherwise he goes around in circles like the 98 incidence. My patience of his convoluted deceiving manner too has worn thin.

      • Ellese

        You just don’t like other people’s opinions that differ from yours. That’s too bad.

        But I guess you like to accuse and call names but not put it up with your own points.

        I would love you to write something that states a position so we all can have a go at it again. I have picked up all your lines of questioning to apply to your arguments.

        In fact, for some of the articles you have written, I kinda liked the skewed view of argument to stimulate the mind further. It’s like putting the opinions to the fire to see what burns.

        But you appear to get emotional. Hope you won’t get high blood writing this stuff.

    • Patonah


  28. @Patonah – April 21,2013 at 8:15,

    Jumlah 20:20, kesudahannya serilah sama-sama. Good economic summing up, thanks.

  29. ini dah 148 comments satu rekod baru, smartphone i mahu load semua pun masalah, bila new posting coming up? aku ketagih baca api perang antara p2bm dan ellese, buat la topik baru memenuhi kedahagaan kami pembaca.

    Hasan writes on Hongwu wrt printing money is actually a comical episode, this enperor thought he find a magic to solve economy problem thus just continue to print nonstop not knowing anything about inflation, just like he think he can solve corruption by killing all those that engage in the evil deed. btw, i am not very sure what is the definition of ‘printing money’ in the above debate.

    Pertaining to Zhenghe influence to reverse Hongwu policy, i actually doubt Yongle can be easily influenced by anyone, Zhudi is an emperor with strong character, he personally lead his army to fight invaders five times and finally died during war, however i agree he trust Zhenghe 100%.

    • :-). Was writing one when your comments appeared. Think its too long also.

      • Ellese, hai… I thought you are posting a new issue to debate on. But again… doing your personal attack again. Tak habis habis. Tak boleh terima pendapat yang berlainan. Cakap saja lebih.

        • Asyik2 attack me personally…. Put up lah some national issues to debate. If its sensible though I don’t agree I can post it. Amacam? So stop this personal attack.

          • Ellese

            They were not attacking you. They were making an observation. There is no malice. Purely a candid and done with a tongue in cheek.

            Please don’t take things so personally and emotionally.

            Hmm somehow you might turnaround and accuse me of making a personal attack at you with this comment. I hope not.

          • I was making an observation laying down the ground parameters. So when are you going to publish my comments?

  30. Hey Ellese

    With GE13 round the corner, can I suggest you put up something related for us to chew on?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s