The govt organ has come out to debunk the various versions of
ministerial pay put up in the social media. In summary, what the social
media was saying is that they wanted to know what the ministers were
being paid. All the guessing and interpretations, some right, some
wrong, some partially right, some partially wrong, is unnecessary if the
govt would come out clean, be transparent as they used to shout about,
to dispel the half truths due not of intent but lack of official
statements.
Yes, there is a formula in the govt website site on the formula
recommended by the last ministerial salary review. But the formula did
not tell the whole story as the formula and practice did not seem to
tally or is perceived so. Why? Simply because the govt is not telling
the way it should be. Just come clean and settle this issue once for all
and stop the people from guessing and speculating the worse case
scenario. When everything is legal and official, there is nothing to
hide. When the govt is trying to hide by not telling, it only leads to
suspicion and mistrust.
Yes, this is the third time I am saying, parroting the govt, to be
transparent, to come clean on the ministerial salary. This means
telling the people what the ministers are being paid, not just basic
salary and performance bonuses, give the full pay of the ministers,
including other appointments like directorship, chairmanship and
whatever, as long as it is income to the ministers due to his
ministerial appointment. Is this too much to ask for?
Anyone being paid by taxpayers’ money must come clean, be transparent,
the fourth time I am saying this, to account and justify for his or her
income. This is basic in a democracy, in a country that prides itself
that there is no corruption, no abuse of power, everything is legal and
TRANSPARENT, nothing to hide, nothing to be ashamed of, nothing that is
illegal, nothing that is funny and unexplainable.
The govt owes it to the people to settle this matter once and for all to
kill all the fake news and half truths and mischievous speculations. It
is for the good of the govt to make this right once and for all.
What do you think? Would there be more bits and pieces here and there
and more half truths than the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
PS. The govt formula for minister’s pay is based on a fixed sum, eg PM’s
salary is $2.2m a year based on basic salary, 13th month, a variable
component up to 3 months, a performance bonus, up to 3 months and a
national bonus from 3 to 6 months.
The PM does not get the performance bonus but can get 6 months of
national bonus, ie basic salary +1 +3 +6. Other ministers would get
basic salary +1 +3 +3 +3, ie basic salary +10 months. The PM is also
supposed to get a basic salary +10 months to give $2.2m a year. A MR4
minister should get $1.1m a year. These are supposed to be max they
could get. True, not true?
This looks like it, with a max of $2.2m for the PM and $1.1m for an
entry level minister. But this is not the case when the performance
bonus can be 4.1 average or more than 3 months. If any of the variable
bonus can be more than 3 months, it means the max is not the max. So the
max of $2.2m and $1.1m is not the max as provided by the ministerial
review committee formula.
So, how many months did they get over the last 5 years. No need to talk about those earlier years before the salary revision.
_________________
China's J10CE, the Rafale killer. The only modern fighter aircraft with real battle experience and real kills. 4 Rafales, 1 SU30, 1 MiG29 and an unknown aircraft.
9/19/2018
9/18/2018
What the world would be like like without the USA or China?
Many people would have taken sides to praise or curse at the USA and China, being the two super powers on earth and influencing and affecting every country when they sneezed. Let's take a look at the world if one of these powers is not around.
What would the world be like without the USA?
Take the case of the world without the USA. The Red Indians or native Indians would still be the owners of North America and the buffaloes would roam the prairies. There would be no nuclear bombs, no air planes, no automobiles, no electricity, no apples or computers and mobile phones and many modern inventions and conveniences.
There would also be no wars of the scale the Americans are committing, no genocides of Red Indians and Arabs, no mass murders of the Koreans and Vietnamese, no Korea War or Vietnam war, no invasion of Iraq and Libya. Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi would still be alive. And no CIA to finance, train, finance and support terrorist movements. The Americans are desperately trying to save their terrorists holed up in Idlib, Syria, to avert them from being wiped out by the Russians. And likely no drug syndicates supported by the CIA to provide funds for the CIAs do commit more war crimes and crimes against humanity.
There will be no little USAs trying to punch above their weights, challenging and provoking China and Russia.
And there will be no democracy to talk about. The world would be a little more primitive, but more peaceful, without wars and all the sophisticated war machine for killing more people.
What would the world be like without China?
There would be no Belt and Road Initiative, no big infrastructure projects in Asia and Africa. There would be no rude Chinese tourists throwing their money everywhere and demanding attention. There would be no cheap consumer products for the poor and not so rich. Consumers would still be buying super expensive IBMs and Apple products, expensive computers and mobile phones, no cheap and good Xiaomis or Huaweis or Oppos and household appliances.
The third world countries would have no access to cheap financing to develop their countries. The raw material rich countries would not have big buyers like China to buy their raw materials, or according to the western narrative, to exploit their natural resources for cash or developments. The bulk of Australian natural resources in 480 bulk carriers now circulating outside Chinese ports is a good example of not just having the natural resources, you must have a willing buyer or else your natural resources would be as good as dirt if no one wants to buy them. Australia can try to sell to Europe, Japan and USA and see if there are takers. In this case, obviously no takers.
Without China, the Americans would continue to rule the world and bully everyone with regime change and military threats. I think there would be no wars as the Americans would over power every country and rule over them. There would be no resistance to the American fire power. There is another view to this. Wars would continue as the Americans need to create wars to sell their war machine or else their military war complexes and industries would close down, no buyers, no need for weapons and war machines.
Would the world be more blessed, a better place, without China or the USA?
PS. Without the Americans, there would be peace in the Middle East. Israel would be history. There would be several million Arabs still alive and populating the area instead of being war collateral, American's modern day version of genocide. If the Arabs are still fighting among themselves, they would be using knives and riding on camels.
What would the world be like without the USA?
Take the case of the world without the USA. The Red Indians or native Indians would still be the owners of North America and the buffaloes would roam the prairies. There would be no nuclear bombs, no air planes, no automobiles, no electricity, no apples or computers and mobile phones and many modern inventions and conveniences.
There would also be no wars of the scale the Americans are committing, no genocides of Red Indians and Arabs, no mass murders of the Koreans and Vietnamese, no Korea War or Vietnam war, no invasion of Iraq and Libya. Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi would still be alive. And no CIA to finance, train, finance and support terrorist movements. The Americans are desperately trying to save their terrorists holed up in Idlib, Syria, to avert them from being wiped out by the Russians. And likely no drug syndicates supported by the CIA to provide funds for the CIAs do commit more war crimes and crimes against humanity.
There will be no little USAs trying to punch above their weights, challenging and provoking China and Russia.
And there will be no democracy to talk about. The world would be a little more primitive, but more peaceful, without wars and all the sophisticated war machine for killing more people.
What would the world be like without China?
There would be no Belt and Road Initiative, no big infrastructure projects in Asia and Africa. There would be no rude Chinese tourists throwing their money everywhere and demanding attention. There would be no cheap consumer products for the poor and not so rich. Consumers would still be buying super expensive IBMs and Apple products, expensive computers and mobile phones, no cheap and good Xiaomis or Huaweis or Oppos and household appliances.
The third world countries would have no access to cheap financing to develop their countries. The raw material rich countries would not have big buyers like China to buy their raw materials, or according to the western narrative, to exploit their natural resources for cash or developments. The bulk of Australian natural resources in 480 bulk carriers now circulating outside Chinese ports is a good example of not just having the natural resources, you must have a willing buyer or else your natural resources would be as good as dirt if no one wants to buy them. Australia can try to sell to Europe, Japan and USA and see if there are takers. In this case, obviously no takers.
Without China, the Americans would continue to rule the world and bully everyone with regime change and military threats. I think there would be no wars as the Americans would over power every country and rule over them. There would be no resistance to the American fire power. There is another view to this. Wars would continue as the Americans need to create wars to sell their war machine or else their military war complexes and industries would close down, no buyers, no need for weapons and war machines.
Would the world be more blessed, a better place, without China or the USA?
PS. Without the Americans, there would be peace in the Middle East. Israel would be history. There would be several million Arabs still alive and populating the area instead of being war collateral, American's modern day version of genocide. If the Arabs are still fighting among themselves, they would be using knives and riding on camels.
9/17/2018
Chinese mega projects in Malaysia are dubious?
Below is Anwar Ibrahim's reply to questions on Mahathir's cancellation
of Chinese projects while he was in Hong Kong attending a forum.
'Mahathir has made waves pushing back on Chinese investment, warning Beijing against ‘new colonialism.’ Should buyers beware?
Clearly what he meant was any form of neo-colonialism and imperialism will not be tolerated. I think most of us share that view. [The concerns are] tied to some of the cancellations of massive development contracts. This is partly due to the stark realities we have to face. We can’t afford a mammoth, 55 billion Ringgit ($13 billion) project now. And secondly, there were issues raised about these dubious deals made with Chinese companies. I think we have every right to reevaluate and reassess these projects, not only with China, but with all countries.
Below is Anwar Ibrahim's reply to questions on Mahathir's cancellation of Chinese projects while he was in Hong Kong attending a forum. ' Time
What were so dubious about these projects? The projects themselves were dubious, useless? Or were they too costly? How many infrastructure projects are cheap and good and not built with cost recoverable over long term, like the North South Highway or the Crooked Bridge?
Or were the projects dubious because the people approving it were dubious? Or were the money flow dubious? I make a qualification here. The 'dubious' project thing is not from Anwar. He is just parroting it as it is the right thing to do at the moment. He cannot go against whoever started this nonsense.
What is so dubious about these projects that one day they are useless but another day they are useful, one day cancelled and another day ok to build? Or the projects were dubious because dubious people insisted to call them dubious for their personal dubious reasons?
The projects were approved by heads of govt and even the heads of states like the sultans. Are these people dubious? Are these people stupid, traitors to their own country to approve these so called 'dubious' mega projects? By branding these projects as dubious, it is as good as saying all those people that approved these projects are dubious, stupid and traitors to Malaysia, or corrupt leaders with their hands grabbing money from these projects. Is this the case? Is this the accusation?
Najib is in no position to make his case on why he approved all these projects. But there are other leaders and sultans involved. Were they given a chance to state their case or is it a case of power rules and the one in power decides to call anything dubious according to his fancy?
One word, 'dubious' has discredited and tarred the integrity and credibility of many Malaysian leaders, or at least saying that they are all fools, not knowing what they approved and were causing harm to Malaysia. Would Mahathir be prosecuting all those involved in negotiating, signing and approving these projects since they are 'dubious' for crimes against the state?
'Mahathir has made waves pushing back on Chinese investment, warning Beijing against ‘new colonialism.’ Should buyers beware?
Clearly what he meant was any form of neo-colonialism and imperialism will not be tolerated. I think most of us share that view. [The concerns are] tied to some of the cancellations of massive development contracts. This is partly due to the stark realities we have to face. We can’t afford a mammoth, 55 billion Ringgit ($13 billion) project now. And secondly, there were issues raised about these dubious deals made with Chinese companies. I think we have every right to reevaluate and reassess these projects, not only with China, but with all countries.
Below is Anwar Ibrahim's reply to questions on Mahathir's cancellation of Chinese projects while he was in Hong Kong attending a forum. ' Time
What were so dubious about these projects? The projects themselves were dubious, useless? Or were they too costly? How many infrastructure projects are cheap and good and not built with cost recoverable over long term, like the North South Highway or the Crooked Bridge?
Or were the projects dubious because the people approving it were dubious? Or were the money flow dubious? I make a qualification here. The 'dubious' project thing is not from Anwar. He is just parroting it as it is the right thing to do at the moment. He cannot go against whoever started this nonsense.
What is so dubious about these projects that one day they are useless but another day they are useful, one day cancelled and another day ok to build? Or the projects were dubious because dubious people insisted to call them dubious for their personal dubious reasons?
The projects were approved by heads of govt and even the heads of states like the sultans. Are these people dubious? Are these people stupid, traitors to their own country to approve these so called 'dubious' mega projects? By branding these projects as dubious, it is as good as saying all those people that approved these projects are dubious, stupid and traitors to Malaysia, or corrupt leaders with their hands grabbing money from these projects. Is this the case? Is this the accusation?
Najib is in no position to make his case on why he approved all these projects. But there are other leaders and sultans involved. Were they given a chance to state their case or is it a case of power rules and the one in power decides to call anything dubious according to his fancy?
One word, 'dubious' has discredited and tarred the integrity and credibility of many Malaysian leaders, or at least saying that they are all fools, not knowing what they approved and were causing harm to Malaysia. Would Mahathir be prosecuting all those involved in negotiating, signing and approving these projects since they are 'dubious' for crimes against the state?
9/16/2018
Anwar lecturing Singapore
Anwar was invited to give a lecture at the Singapore Summit on 15 Sep. It was reported that the who's who of Singapore were there. The live broadcast showed ex President Tony Tan, ex PM Goh Chok Tong, ex Foreign Minister George Yeo and ex MP Zainul Abidin among the VIPs presence. No serving minister or MP were present, other than MP Goh Chok Tong. I am wondering why like dat. Maybe it is protocol that serving ministers and MPs need not be present to listen to an ex PM of Malaysia who is now not even an MP. Maybe they will all be present when Anwar becomes the PM.
In his response to a touchy question raised by moderator Ho Kwon Ping, Anwar said if and when he becomes the next PM. Everyone is asking about if and when and whether he would be played out by Mahathir a second time. Maybe this is another important point why no serving minister or MP think it is necessary to attend to get to know Anwar better to prepare for his next role as PM.
Here are some of the key points of Anwar's lecture to a Singapore audience. Anwar stressed that the main goals of the new govt is to ensure there is judicial independence and a free media. Under Najib's govt, there was corruption and abuse of power. Too much power rested in the executive and this must be checked. The new govt has given independence to the judiciary and allowing the media to speak the truth. No more fake news or half truths as under the previous regime. Even the anti corruption agency, MACC, is now answerable not to the PM but direct to Parliament To protect judiciary independence, the auditor general will not report to the PM.
What Mahathir's govt has done is to curb the arrogance of power, mismanagement of the country and crimes against the country and people and rooting out corruption. The other points raised was to stop govt intervention and political patronage in the economy. And also the parliament would not become just a rubber stamp for the govt.
Are there any relevance in what Anwar was saying about Malaysia and Singapore?
In his response to a touchy question raised by moderator Ho Kwon Ping, Anwar said if and when he becomes the next PM. Everyone is asking about if and when and whether he would be played out by Mahathir a second time. Maybe this is another important point why no serving minister or MP think it is necessary to attend to get to know Anwar better to prepare for his next role as PM.
Here are some of the key points of Anwar's lecture to a Singapore audience. Anwar stressed that the main goals of the new govt is to ensure there is judicial independence and a free media. Under Najib's govt, there was corruption and abuse of power. Too much power rested in the executive and this must be checked. The new govt has given independence to the judiciary and allowing the media to speak the truth. No more fake news or half truths as under the previous regime. Even the anti corruption agency, MACC, is now answerable not to the PM but direct to Parliament To protect judiciary independence, the auditor general will not report to the PM.
What Mahathir's govt has done is to curb the arrogance of power, mismanagement of the country and crimes against the country and people and rooting out corruption. The other points raised was to stop govt intervention and political patronage in the economy. And also the parliament would not become just a rubber stamp for the govt.
Are there any relevance in what Anwar was saying about Malaysia and Singapore?
Fandi is finally easing into the national coach position
There
seems to be an awakening that finally, after going around the world in circus
for the last few decades, that we finally realised that we need to have trust
and faith in our own talent. Or is it that after wasting so much public fund on
foreign talents, the standard of our football did not improve but gone into the
gutters to jolt some senses into our stupidity has no cure mind? We are now not
even able to compete with our Asean
football teams and always kena whacked when they met. The delusion of being in
the finals of the World Cup is becoming a reality. No amount of money thrown
away could get us anywhere near that goal. It is not just money. Yes it is
stupidity, the lack of pride and confidence in our people, shown everywhere,
that angmoh or foreigner tua kee is the way to go.
The
recent Asian Games in Jakarta is an eye opener, seeing
so many of the Asian teams doing so well with their own local, oops, I mean
citizens as their national coaches. They do not need to be coached by
foreigners to do well. They don’t have the angmoh tua kee mentality, that only
angmohs can help and do wonders. So finally they have come back to Fandi to
save the day.
Other
than this craziness for angmoh tua kee, what else have they found out that is
wrong in our football? It is not so simple as not hiring angmoh coaches as
there are more problems than meet the eyes.
Fandi
and other Singaporean coaches have been exposed to foreign coaching, their
strategies, techniques and trade secrets for many years. Unless they are so
daft, which is not the case, they must have learnt and knew enough to coach the
national team like the other Asean coaches of their respective national teams
to success.
Leaving
Fandi alone to carry the can is unfair to him. The whole football culture and
organization have to change and Fandi needs all the support to turn a bad case
around. He must fire all the prima donnas who thought they have arrived just
because they are in the national team. He also needs time to do his job, not
another few months or maybe a few years to do wonders. Remember, so many angmoh
tua kee coaches, so many years and so much money wasted and we are not getting
anywhere but from bad to worse. Maybe we
need to drain the swamp before there is light at the end of the tunnel. Do not
expect Fandi to turn the average players into international soccer stars and
the national team into a champion over night.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)