reduced and recycled

There have been quite a number of comments on the fuel price hike, and I don’t think I’d want to rehearse arguments or flog dead horses. I think advocates have pointed to the fact that weaning the public off subsidies is a good thing - and better if done sooner rather than later. I can accept that. What I can’t really accept are arguments that point to the fact that we have limited resources, and that the ‘money has to come from somewhere’ to drive development, improve infrastructure and so on, and so forth.

I must state, firstly, that the above is undoubtedly true. Now, to contradict myself (but not really): it’s only speciously true in Malaysia. We’ve had price increases not as far back as last year. Now what I don’t understand is this: if the government had every intention to “wean the public off subsidies”, then it must also be true that the prudent thing to be doing is making in-roads toward developing our public transport system - that is, if the argument at hand is our spendthrift habits toward petrol for our automobiles.

I have not seen a jot of improvement in Johor Bahru - heck, in the whole of Johor. I travel extensively for my work, from Air Hitam to Batu Pahat, to Kluang, to Segamat, to really “ulu” estates and such - and I’ve not seen a jot of improvement at all, not only in public transport but - and in the larger scheme of things - in the lives of people who live outside of major city centres like KL or JB.

Excuse me, but what improvement?

Conditions of these people haven’t changed, but what has changed are prices. Try ordering a plate of wan tan noodles in Kluang now, I guarantee you it was at least 50 cents cheaper before the price hikes. These changes are real and affect the “lowest” levels of society.

The stereotypical “kampung” folk ride bikes, yes, but try telling why about 5 years ago RM 3.00 dollars would be worth a full tank, and how RM 10.00 now does the trick - and then tell this same person how his life hasn’t changed because, heck, the price of everything else has gone up.

Just a quick point: I’ve read objections where detractors of the fuel price increase say the money would be swallowed up by failed projects like MAS - or lost for seedier reasons. A counter-objection is that this is merely supposition - a “might” rather than an “is”. This is undoubtedly true, and detractors should take the point. On the other hand, those who support the fuel price increases cannot categorically assert that the government will put the money to good use - if any use, at all. Neither side can confirm nor deny either way.

So it must boil down to some subjective measure of the government’s possible use of the money - since the future is not objectively certain. Let’s try to work this out empirically: what has the government done with public funds? How many banks - local banks - has the government bailed out either directly or through its proxies? How many large industrial concerns, the pet projects of Mahathir, has the government bailed out? And how many of these projects continue to bleed money?

Has BN been a good custodian of the public’s wealth?