This link caught my attention and prompted me to post an entry to respond to it. Basically, the article focuses on Badawi's statement that Malaysians should not compare their country with Singapore.
In his argument, he utilized the analogy that Singapore is akin to 'first-class grapes' while Malaysia is 'first-class apples', and implies that the circumstances of both countries were greatly different and, thus, would be incorrect to compare. Of the examples, he cited Malaysia's population and global ranking for competitiveness as the key differences.
In his argument, he utilized the analogy that Singapore is akin to 'first-class grapes' while Malaysia is 'first-class apples', and implies that the circumstances of both countries were greatly different and, thus, would be incorrect to compare. Of the examples, he cited Malaysia's population and global ranking for competitiveness as the key differences.
That said, I beg to differ on why we should not compare Malaysia and Singapore. The reason is that while both countries are different, they are also different in ways that gives Malaysia a competitive edge over Singapore.
One of Malaysia's key strengths is its population size; Singapore is merely a republic with a minute population of roughly 5 million, as opposed to Malaysia's 25 million. Even with a large workforce that allows Malaysia the capacity to produce a greater Gross Domestic Product (GDP) than Singapore, why is their economy excelling at a greater pace than ours? If anything, Singapore achieved the status of a developed nation long ago while Malaysia has yet to do so. It is noteworthy that Badawi has extended the deadline for achieving the developed nation status to 2057.
In relation to the point above, the statement by Badawi on Malaysia's competitive business edge and her 8th place ranking, as established by a foreign and independent institute, is highly specious. It is noteworthy that the study produced by the said institute encompassed only countries with a population of 20 million and above. Therefore, it has excluded other competitive countries like Singapore, which was ranked 2nd place overall (without the 20 million population requirement). It seems that Mr. Badawi is rather good at being economical with the truth. Let us hope that that is not the only thing he is good at.
Furthermore, I remain dumbfounded as to why Malaysia has not surpassed Singapore in terms of the economy. Again, Malaysia is different, in a beneficial sense, from Singapore since it possesses natural resources like oil. While Singapore has to import all its supply of oil from abroad, Malaysia has a comfortable supply for domestic consumption, as well as, for imports. Shouldn't this give us a relative competitive edge over Singapore? Why are we still behind Singapore then?
On top of that, why can Singapore achieve social, legal and political stability while Malaysia is corrupting by the second, notwithstanding our cultural and historical similarities. The stark dissimilarities in the governments of both countries is staggering. The lack of efficiency, transparency and accountability in Malaysia's civil service is a far cry from Singapore's administration. Besides that, corruption and crime rates are relatively minimal in the latter country; and here we have Mr. Badawi, who came to power some 4 years ago promising to curb crime and eradicate corruption, but failing to deliver his mandate to the rakyat. By the way, think Lingam, Nurin and Sharlinie.
One of Malaysia's key strengths is its population size; Singapore is merely a republic with a minute population of roughly 5 million, as opposed to Malaysia's 25 million. Even with a large workforce that allows Malaysia the capacity to produce a greater Gross Domestic Product (GDP) than Singapore, why is their economy excelling at a greater pace than ours? If anything, Singapore achieved the status of a developed nation long ago while Malaysia has yet to do so. It is noteworthy that Badawi has extended the deadline for achieving the developed nation status to 2057.
In relation to the point above, the statement by Badawi on Malaysia's competitive business edge and her 8th place ranking, as established by a foreign and independent institute, is highly specious. It is noteworthy that the study produced by the said institute encompassed only countries with a population of 20 million and above. Therefore, it has excluded other competitive countries like Singapore, which was ranked 2nd place overall (without the 20 million population requirement). It seems that Mr. Badawi is rather good at being economical with the truth. Let us hope that that is not the only thing he is good at.
Furthermore, I remain dumbfounded as to why Malaysia has not surpassed Singapore in terms of the economy. Again, Malaysia is different, in a beneficial sense, from Singapore since it possesses natural resources like oil. While Singapore has to import all its supply of oil from abroad, Malaysia has a comfortable supply for domestic consumption, as well as, for imports. Shouldn't this give us a relative competitive edge over Singapore? Why are we still behind Singapore then?
On top of that, why can Singapore achieve social, legal and political stability while Malaysia is corrupting by the second, notwithstanding our cultural and historical similarities. The stark dissimilarities in the governments of both countries is staggering. The lack of efficiency, transparency and accountability in Malaysia's civil service is a far cry from Singapore's administration. Besides that, corruption and crime rates are relatively minimal in the latter country; and here we have Mr. Badawi, who came to power some 4 years ago promising to curb crime and eradicate corruption, but failing to deliver his mandate to the rakyat. By the way, think Lingam, Nurin and Sharlinie.
Apart from that, Badawi's claim that the economy is doing well is rather inaccurate. A healthy economy, in my opinion, is one that is experiencing low inflation rates. However, this is not the status quo in Malaysia as this is evident in the sharp increase on prices of basic necessities like oil, gas, water and electricity over the past few years. Furthermore, while Badawi assures us that the government has no reason to lie to the rakyat, I find it extremely difficult to believe that especially since the government had earlier given a directive to all media houses NOT to disseminate issues on inflation, at least until the general elections are over. Is this not a form of dishonesty?
While increased prices of key commodities is a very simplistic way of analyzing the economy, it certainly does not require an economic expert to grasp the impact of rising inflation. Since Badawi has admitted that inflation is out of the government's control, perhaps it is time that a new government was given the chance to handle it? Furthermore, the rakyat is not entirely concerned about bringing prices down but more so on how to keep prices as stagnant as possible. On the issue of the government helping the rakyat cope with inflation, I find that talk is really cheap.
It is difficult to circumvent the issue of increased global oil prices and every country in the world may be faced with the same predicament, but does it mean it is acceptable for Malaysia to follow suit? We have a domestic supply of oil and gas, but why is the impact of rising oil prices affecting us? Instead of a conceding and helpless response from Badawi that 'we cannot do anything', our Finance and International Trade ministry should have countered these setbacks with preemptive measures. Of course, how can I put the blame on the said ministries when our Prime Minister Mr. Badawi is so terribly anaemic and shortsighted?
