Screenshots

Gosh, you're back finally! What took you so long?

Fuelly-recharged now but pocket's empty?

Welcome back Screenshots! Safe and sound and not touch by ISA? Yes everyone’s pocket would be sakit by this astronomical hike and it is about time people show their displeasure and anger at KLCC.

Great to see you back online!

I can understand the need to cut back on subsidies - revenue generation! My biggest beef is how we were all ambushed by the hike, only finding out about it at the 11th hour (almost literally).

What many people may not realize (I happen to be related to the Oil & Gas industry) is that what we consume locally almost all comes from imported crude, locally refined (at the Petronas Melaka, Shell PD, Esso PD and Petronas Terengganu refineries). Malaysian crude is of the 'sweet' variety, i.e. low in sulphur content, and therefore fetches a premium over 'sour' crude, which, I believe, is imported mainly from the Middle East.

So, in this case, a protest at KLCC makes sense because Petronas and the government are making a bundle from this round of subsidy reduction. That, and the fact that NGV has not been spared from the hike either. This is the part that doesn't quite make sense, since the price of natural gas has actually been on the downward trend (click here for link). Unless, of course, you happen to know that quite a fair bit of natural gas produced on the Peninsular actually comes from the Indonesian Natuna field, through an agreement with Conoco. Apart from the possibility of the hike being related to this contract, I can't figure out why hike the price of NGV as well.

Let's hope we can collectively "remind" Pak Lah to keep to his word on using the additional revenue to really improve public transportation - RM 3b sounds about what it would actually take, methinks...

Welcome back Jeff.

Oh, while you were away, just in case you haven't notice it yet, there's a daft sod opportunistic prick trying to be cheeky in the blogosphere. Wouldn't bother to post the link here; you have enough Lil' Birds to tell you that.

yeah, let the voices be heard.

At least:

1) Govt must tell how is the money saved from fuel subsidy, be used. YES, they mentioned public transport, but can they please give a plan? Else it could be an empty promise

2)from this link
http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/nst/Wednesday/Frontpage/20060301075156

Pak Lah said the 36 billion RM profit earned by in last year Petronas will be used for investment - WHAT KIND OF INVESTMENT, care to tell?

acutally all relate to one issue - transparency

After the protest I'll go and check how many people will makan in KLCC :D

Oh and not to mention the insane amount of parking fee KLCC will get... KLCC might actually encourage these people to ajak more people, heh.

I mean, Malaysians are so malas to walk, right?

BN will lose 2 votes (me and my wife) in next GE.

Does anyone in KL use LRT most of time? I use LRT to move around KL since I work from home. I can walk to Sri Petaling LRT station from my home in fewer than 10 minutes. I reckon LRT is more practical for those who work in areas accessible from LRT stations. In addition, the person must be willing to give up or use car less for various reasons, e.g. environmental consciousness, refusal to pay for an overpriced car. Besides complaining, I think I need to save more. May be a website concentrating on money saving tips and personal
finance for Malaysian is timely, e.g. MoneySavingExpert.com (http://www.moneysavingexpert.com), Simple Savings (http://www.simplesavings.com.au)

The government can't give subsidy forever. There are negatives about subsidy like smuggling, benefiting the rich, etc. The spirit of it is positive. I agree with so much but there must be an equilibrium somewhere to benefit the rakyat. Malaysia is never an open economy so there work to control prices.

Also look at the tax structure as a whole and reduce other tax like car tax, road tax, tol keep going up, etc. Improve things like government funded (or partly) national health insurance, public transport, etc.

Don't know how true is this, but I was told that Petronas actually sold our oil (at least, tons of it) in advance. So now, when the price hikes, we're still getting paid in old price. So, we're not getting much in profits no matter how high the price goes. Hope someone can confirm that.

Calls by the government for the public to use public transport is insincere. Have we seen any Ministers, or their deputies or even parliament secretaries, the so called wakil rakyat like the MPs and assemblyman using public transport to commute to work? Raising fuel prices and encouraging the public to use public transport when the government and its senior officials refrain from doing so is so insincere.

As I always maintained, Pak Lah's administration is useless, incompetent and there is no dynamism in Pak Lah's leadership. He is getting too comfortable in his job and underestimated the 30 sen increase in fuel has caused much hardship to the rakyat. The rakyat puts so much trust in him and yet he screw them up and hang them to dry.

C-Fu,

exactly. we should walk or take the Putra LRT to klcc for protest - the first step to sort of 'boycott' of using its pure money making product.

Governments advice to the public to cut spending in the wake of fuel price hike is incorrect. It will lead to a further downward spiral of the economy. The government should immediately cut car import tax on ASEAN assembled cars. The reason, reduce depreciation cost and less to pay for insurance. Consumers will have more money to spend and the banks will have more money to lend as to industries as car cost less to finance.Proton will not lose as they will now have access to thailand and indonesia car markets, presently closed to them as we have not honoured Afta car agreement.

When is Pak Lah, Najib and the rest of the govt people going to sell of the expensive, big cc govt cars and use Kancil/ Wira instead? Walk the talk, will ya!

Welcome back Jeff. Kudos to your volunteers.

eMalaysian,
You pointed out the negatives of subsidy like smuggling & benefiting the rich. Good points but these questions needs to be asked :

1) how does it justify to punish the middle and lower income malaysian earners simply because the subsidies benefits the rich?

2) would the hike really have an impact on the rich compared to those already living on basics?

3) if the gov cannot curb/cope smuggling done by a relatively smaller group(comparitively speaking), are we really expected to believe the gov can do anything about the many people nationwide raising their prices on everyday goods as a result of the fuel hike?

maybe from now police will no longer hv the privilege of driving their wira/waja cars and must ride cub-chai to help save fuel and govt coffers. u c, to the ministers, any increase in petrol, toll, tariffs, etc all govt sponsor. govt money = rakyat's. so do they care? gv rm10b also public transport wont improve bcos those that sit in the planning committee are just plain hopeless and brainless. dont think there will be any wawasan cos by that time the whole country would hv been screwed and squeezed dry!

Jeff, hope you are fine.It makes me sick in stomach when our Ministers tell us two things whenever there are price increases such as this.One ours is cheaper than Singapore.Please remember that our per capita is RM 10,000 and S'ore is RM 30,000/meaning that the a S'pore workers income is three times than ours.To compare and claim that we still cheaper, the per capita of both countries must be equal.To top it all, they are more efficient in every aspect in the public service deliveries.So for goodness sake stop unintelligent comparisons.Go and tell a normal wage earner with a family who is already stretches to the limit that our petrol prices are cheaper! This reminds me, after the call to adjust our lifestyles,of s conversation,meant as jole between Chairman Mao and Russia's Khrushev.When China was having a drought and short of wheat,the Chairman asked Khru. for wheat supplies. Kruh replied that they are themselves short, so tighten your belts.The Chairman angry and disappointed and he replied'SEND BELTS'!The second is the warning to businessmen not to inrease prices as severe action will be taken.All Malaysians know the effectivess of that call so much so it has bocome a joke among the people!

The price increase has already starting to affect majority of the fixed incomed citizens. When can we see the public transportation improved? We don't want to hear that the government is doing billion dollars project that will take years! By the time the project finished, most affected citizens already dropped dead!

Hi, can someone tell me does 10% increase in fuel = 10% increase on all?? Thanks

Afterall, it is ECONOMY that speaks. Even you can get 10,000 people protest on the street, if you can't achieve the real objective , it is useless. BTW, those are not people power, but LAME.

I propose 1st world citizen way of protest .

If 10,000 people stay at home/stop going shopping mall on first Saturday and Sunday every month, it will send a clear message to the government.

Even better, to extend the effect, teach the government controlled paper a lesson, stop buying paper on Saturday.

However, I doubt 10% of so called protester can carried these simple protest message.

I think Malaysian are pretty dumb compare to our predecessor that fight for independent : They know how to deliver the ECONOMY message to the colonise master.

Why spend more money travel to KL sending out the protest message when you can spend LESS money to get the BEST result?

I wish to commend Sha Houl for the graphic 'Fuel vs Wallet'.

It shows that our wallet is dipping dangerously to 'E'.

Sighhhhhhhhhhhh

I love it how the Govt will tell people to change their lifestyle and always point out that the price of petrol is still one of the lowest in the region.

As I have said earlier before in other posting, cut the very high and stupid taxes for cars, introduce cheaper road taxes for dual fuel vehicle like slashing it down by 50%-60% for a start. Increase the road tax for car at 3,000cc and above by 50%-60%. If the morons can afford to burn petrol, then they can afford to pay more.

Your yearly income tax return should be able to provide relief for those that needs it. Some countries allow tax deduction for work-related travel such as the journey between the home and place of work. So, we can take away the fuel subsidy to stop sumggling and the Malaysian people to provide subsidy for their neighbours and give it back to Malaysians.

Sorry for

"So, we can take away the fuel subsidy to stop sumggling and the Malaysian people to provide subsidy for their neighbours and give it back to Malaysians."

Should have been

"So, we can take away the fuel subsidy to stop sumggling and to prevent Malaysians providing fuel subsidy to their neighbours and give it back to Malaysians."

The increase is simply too much and too sudden for most people to stomach. The govt. under Pak Lah is viewing things too narrowly. Their concern is to reduce the subsidies without giving a thorough thought to its implications. How could possibly combat inflation by raising too high of oil prices suddenly?

Higher oil prices would result in the following possible problems for the country:

1. Higher inflation which all of us are aware of it.
2. Higher cost of production etc resulting in lower profits to be made. Hence, lower tax collection. Would the reduction of RM4.4b in subsidies able to make up for the loss?
3. With higher inflation, the threat of RM depreciating further is there.

The govt. is simply unrealistic to raise the oil price so high all of a sudden and expecting taxis, buses and other form of transport not to raise their fares.

Again, the govt will assure the members of the public that our petrol prices are probably the lowest in the region. However, the prices of cars in Malaysia are probably the highest in the world. Even Singapore, the prices of cars have fallen drastically over the last 4 years. I would not mind paying current fuel price if cars like Toyota Altis and etc are sold at about Rm70k which is the case in Thailand.

What is indeed upsetting is that the govt. would rather spent billions in constructing "scenic" or sickening bridges that serves no purpose whatsover .I suppose the savings of Rm4.4b to be channelled into this bridge is appropriate since it can also be classified as “ancillary to public transport”.

There goes our savings in subsidies!

Increasing fuel prices has a multiplier effect. The net result could well mean lower tax revenues across the board which would offset the RM 4.4 billion temporary gain for the government.

No one is saying petrol should be given away free. There's anger on the streets because the reason given, being for 'public transport', doesn't add up. Trains are privatised or semi-privatised, similarly with buses. And what about transportation in places outside the Klang Valley?

Break it down for us, show how much we can actually save, both money and sanity (from all that traffic congestions). Show us the *public* (not crony) transport masterplan that will put us on par with Singapore, Sydney, New York, people will be more than willing to give more than 30 cents.

On the one hand, the Adminstration appears to be clearly on the Right-side of the political spectrum by advocating the responsibility of the individual in managing their own finances and in minimising State-support.

However, at the same time, this Administration also demonstrates advocacy of a more Leftish persuasion especially in the form of Government Linked Companies (GLCs) and continued strong Government involvement in the economy (including the numerous state Government economic and investment vehicles).

This apparent compromise, driven by realpolitik and hard economics, is probably unsustainable.

The issue at hand, at its basic level, is one of scarcity of capital.

Capital drives economic activity. Government use of capital, via the GLCs and various other outlets, is justified by, amongst others, the alleged 'trickle down' effect. Economic activity, to be created by the Government and its agents, benefits a greater number of people especially those most deserving who are not able to have access to capital normally.

Unfortunately, I would posit that the use of capital by the Government and its agents are inefficient and minimally value-enhancing. I would further argue that Government utilisation of capital has not benefited as many people as much as it could have if a more equitable approach had been adopted. This is a point of contention but for sake of argument, let's assume this holds.

Thus, the Government is asking of the public to become increasingly more responsible for the costs of their well-being whilst at the same time denying them further access or control of capital for them to create wealth.

This I would posit is not equitable. If a citizen is to take on part of the Government's expenditure, some measure of capital must also be made available for the citizen to earn a return to defray the additional costs. Otherwise, said citizen will be in a worse-off position which breaks a fundamental tenet of public policy of maintaining Pareto optimality.

This is not a new concept but is the hallmark of Government practice in its privatisation schemes. Take on Government expenditure (build a dam, a power plant etc) and the Government will give capital to tide you over (soft loan, grant, off-take agreements).

I would argue that the Government should be bolder in its moves. It should truly roll back the State and emancipate the rakyat, economically. Cut back Government expenditure by transferring as much as possible direct to the public (no need to trouble the Government with managing too many Ministries and agencies). The quid pro quo would be for the Government to also minimise its direct involvement in the economy (no more GLCs and state investment vehicles).

In helping the less wealthy rakyat, more focused schemes via education and microcredit may be more effective.

Was this not the end-game of the DEB: the creation of an ecnomically independent Malaysian race.

Those ministers including najib who teaches all of the public to be prudent and how to live a comfortable life by taking the public transport and saving or buying only on our necessities, have they ever paid for petrol themselves or are they being subsidized by using government allocation petrols.

For all we know, they have never paid for their petrol before in their daliy lives while serving their chair.

There is no thunder, no storm and no rain but there are floods everywhere and taking all the people by surprise.

Next time, Mr. Government, sing to us your melody before taking drastic action in increasing the petrol prices.

Yea, you can do anything you want because you are the government but who is feeling the pain.

I agree that the complete removal of fuel subsidy is the right direction that the govt should take as the current susbdiy scheme is indiscriminate and target all users, including rich car owners with multiple cars and even foreingers (Thais and Singaporeans) who drove in to get cheap petrol and diesel.

However, the govt can do better by coming with a better scheme and communicate the rationales to the public in a better manner.

The complete removal of the current indiscrinate fuel subsidy scheme must come with programmes that help target at specific group with some basic principles and policies, ie. target at the low income group that use public transport, fishermen and individual local car owners (limited to one car per owner) to lessen the impact of increase of fuel price over the next 5-15 years.

This program will exclude those group of users who should not be entitled to such fuel subsidies, ie. foreign-registered car owners (Thais and Singaporean cars) and Malaysia-registered cars owners who have more than 1 car. The potential savings to the govt can amount to billions Ringgit if they are excluded from the govt fuel subsidy scheme.

To help the ordinary Malaysian car owners to cope with the fuel increase (arising from removal of govt fuel subsidy), govt should implement new programme that target these specific group of fuel users (to be identified by govt).

Eg. Govt can give annual fuel coupon rebate to these group of users (subject to 1 car per owner) amounting to the equivalent amount of fuel increase.

ie. If a car owner spend average RM2400 per annum on subsidised petrol and RM4800 if the govt fuel subsidy is removed (assuming that the market petrol price is increase to RM3.20/litre from current subsidised price of RM1.60/litre). Upon renewal of road tax, he should be given fuel coupon rebate worth RM2400 for the first year. This rebate should be reduced to zero amount over a period of 10 years if the car is renewed over the next 10 years (the assumption is that fuel price stayed at RM3.20/litre over the next 10 years and the rebate should be fine tuned to take into the average fuel price for that year).

Of course, the govt must finetuned this scheme to prevent cheating and loopholes. It should be subjected to annual audit by external auditors and those caught with cheating will get deterrent punishment.

In this way, the rakyat will better appreciate the changes done by govt to stop the leakages and unnecessary wastage in the current fuel subsidy scheme and replaced with a better scheme that targeted the fuel subsidy to the lower income group and individual car owners (subject to 1 car only).

Fuel Hike

My concern is simple. Whenever there is a hike, the Ministers and High level Government Official do not feel the pinch as much as us lame men. Their Proton Perdanas' are fueled by Government Expenditure slips or "FUEL CARDS".

The other point i would like to raise is if it is to improve public transport, then why cant they first at least increase the last train schedule for KTM Komunter from 10.30pm to 12 am.

My wife has night classes in Shah Alam till 10 pm. We live in Serdang, by the time she gets to Shah Alam KTM Station it is 10.20pm. The train for KL arrives at KL Central at 11.10pm. But there is no more train to Seremban...coz the last on leaves at 10.30pm. So i still have to leave the kids at home and pick her up at KL Central.

Improve these simple things first before implementing RM 4 billion upgrading.

Kindly note the DPM said this on national TV as reported by NST:-

On the rationale for raising fuel prices by 30 sen and not 10 sen or 12 sen as before, he said: "Last year, we raised the retail price of petrol, diesel and LPG three times."

Collectively, he noted, these three increases amounted to 45 sen.

"Which is better? Raising it three times or only once?"

- unquote.

It's sad that our DPM doesn't even know what is happening to fuel price movement of a cabinet committee that he heads.

Since when in '05 we had 3 increases amounting to 45sen ?

If what he said was true, that would mean in 2004, petrol was sold at RM1.17/litre.
That must be some joke!

joke?

if it's a joke then we must all laugh.

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA

Jeff: every time the fuel prices are raised, the ZGovernment only tells us HALF the story, and continues to PERPETUATYE some myths.

I beg fellow readers' indulgence this morning for my longish comments here, which I had in fact engaged in similar debate with Tiger Joe, my respected conversationist....

First, the Govt says it would save "RM4.4billion" by way of less subsidies. I contend that this tiny "savings" would not do any justice in its avowed objective of "improving transport system or facilitioes" to benefit the citrizenry.

I believe the Govt -- through GREATER REVENUE obtained from selling the nation's higher grades of oil, should be able to absorb any price rise of imports, as well as making PETRIONAS share its "rising profits" (RM35.5billion reported last financial year... in announcing the results end-June 2005, the CEO said for financial year ended March 31, 2005, Petronas’ net profit was 50.3 percent higher than the RM23.66billion in FYE March 31, 2004.”.) with the Rakyat, instead of asking Comon Citizen Joe/Jane to "change lifestyle" as wisely preached by DPM.

Just some recurring issues I'd highlights:

(1) The refining business is loss-making – this point is noted here. But it does not arise in the context of Petronas reporting consistently high profits the past years.

(2) The role of PETRONAS’ in serving truly serving as a trust company on behalf of the people -- I believe oil is a national resoyurce, and hence the citizens have a right to expect to taste the sweetness of the resource, yes?

(3) hy is Petronas not TRANSPARENT with its Income and Expenditures, but that many citizens are conecenred much of Petronas' rihes are "syphoned" off elsewhere. Bailing out fasiling businesses -- like MAS, Bank Bimiputera, Perwaj Steel, Bakun Dam(ned)???? My esteemed conversationists, you can easily add onto the LIST!

If Petronas had not/has not/is not bankrolling t(directyly or indirectly thru Govt intervention), we the Rakyat have a right to know The Truth?n Mayhaps, isit too much to ask that Petronas relaese an ANNUAL REPORT, to be tabled in Parliament?

(4) Pak Lah promised us "transparency and accountability" on assuming office as PM on Nov 1, 2003, yes? Digressing a li'l --But I feel many Malaysians are "masochistic" every time General Elections come aropund -- they complain loudest, yet put the Vote for Dacing! Without fail, time after time...

The DPM had advised Malaysians to tighten their belt and to practise “prudent” spending.Turning the table around, can we ask "Has the Govt and all the GLCs been practising prudent financial managemnt?"
Have the misdemeaning or non-performing corporates involved been asked to give a proper accounting to justify Petronas’ bankrolling?

(5) Job and wealth creation are accepted national services, but as a national trust company looking after the country’s main and depleting natural resource, isn’t that to be expected of Petronas? Yes, the ordinary workers employed by Petronas share in the good salaries, annual bonus and whatever benefits due, but here I’m more concerned with the benefits that accrue to the ordinary people – the hawkers, the farmers, the small-and-medium entrepreneurs, remember?

(6)I salute the achievemnets attained by our national oil corporation. Desi does not question it has performed creditably, even outstandingly in recent years, but as common folks, we go by the test of "the eating of the pudding..." Did we get any mouthfool?

Everytime there is an oil price rise in world market, the Govt says the locals must baer with a commensurate rise in pump prices. They continue to perpetaute the "fallacy" that subsidies would keep rising -- but they don't tell us the NETT jump in oil revenues!
Meanwhile, media reports have it on record MORE OIL FIELDS are being found off Sabah/Sarawak ... yet the Govt gives us "dire" warnings that the nation's oil reserves will "soon run out" to justify the pump price increases.

I had countered that Petronas should set up a Foundation to help out the less well-off or disadvantaged Rakyat in the country. The rationale is that THOSE IN NEED MOST MUST BE GIVEN THE MAXIMUM HELP, and PETRONAS can’t escape from the fact it holds the country’s resource on trust for the Rakyat, rite?

Is that what a corporation, holding the nation’s top natural resource on trust of the people, all about, they enjoying the perks and privileges off a nation's wealth, but foregetting the ordinary man-in-the-strreet? Do you think you earn goodwill by putting up feel-ggod messages over TV come every Malaysian festive season? I doubt it, I very much doubt it, I certainly doubt it!

I had suggested that that every citizen should have been given a dividend in the form of any annual “red packet” – maybe RM1,000 to RM2,000 for those in the income bracket of monthly salary of RM2,000 and below, with increasing quantum from the highest of RM2,000 on a declining trend so that the truly “needy” Malaysians get a taste of Malaysia’s sweet oil?
I think Singapore Govt implemented such a scheme to help its "poorer" citizens ... maybe I'd be accused of always comparing with our sourthern neighbour. My reply: And why not, Singapore does not have a single oil field!

Thanks Jeff, and Patient Readers all, for thy endurance -- I steal have some energy left, before the oil runs out!:)

I couldn't agree more with moo_t.

Yeah, those are the peaceful silent protest - which doesn't rely on the PETROL to achieve it (u know, we need PETROL to get to the place to protest, unless u walk or cycle)

And let's say yes to thomas - our rent seeking culture will have to change (that would include fuel subsidy), but while AP issue is still occuring, our car market is not opened to AFTA (here i mean, by using other tax to replace the import tax)

WE, THE END USER IS THE LAST WHO SUFFER FOR ALL THE CONSEQUENCES!

unless the AP issue is fully settled + car price is reasonable (imported car has better fuel efficiency, let's face the fact)

I don't see why we should suffer/bear the price hike - simply because CAR is a neccessity for us, NOT A LUXURY!

ops, i think it's too much to include all of the Malaysian - should say

ALL OF THE KLANG VALLEY and BIG CITY CITIZEN!

by that, i'm implicating weak public transport system

The Govt talks about enforcement of prices of this and that and "pleads" to the retailers not to raise prices. All this plead is going to fall of deaf ears as its a relatively free market generally out there.

To those markets that are not free and controlled, maybe its time to disband these markets that are the real creators of price increase. These ranges from taxis at KLIA, telco charges, bus monopoly, taxi licences, licence from trading of selected produce (e.g. rice), national cars/ bikes etc. Once we disband these "toll-collectors" then we'll see real forces.

I have just ranted 10 points we must not forget in my blog, kindly express your opinion :)

http://trevesco.blogspot.com/2006/03/30-fking-cents3-lets-remember-these.html

just found out...no more protest...the cops turun and all fled...ssigghh...cant confirm it though...looks like the gov gonna continue doing wat they think is best...and we will continue suffering.

i think most Joe Public are educated enough to understand the long term implications of fuel subsidy.However, the irony remians the so called benefits in which a lower fuel subsidy are not passed to the rakyat. The rakyat now has to pay more for their daily expenses. Its inevitable consumer goods will rise and Joe Public are no better off.

right now is the best time to implement radical changes in controlling the consumption of petrol.

if fleet cards are introduced to abolish the fuel surcharges on commercial vehicles then why not do the same to reward consumers for:

1. Car pooling
2. Using alternative fuels
3. Using hybrid cars

Benefits :
1. Reduced fuel expenses
2. Reduced amount of cars in the city - less traffic jam
3. Increased usage of public transportation
4. Spur more R&D on alternative fuel - reduce the amount of time for a successful research to be implemented / mass produced
5. Spur growth of hybrid cars in Malaysia. Proton and Produa would be tempted to produce hybrid cars

my 2 cents. what do you think?

Protestors changed route. Now they are along Jln Ampang.In front of the Twins Towers entrance.
Best avoid the area....

even hybrids are taxed heavily... the government only talk... tell us to chg lifestyle and jimat, but they themselves did not support ppl to do it, neither they themselves practise wat they preach... blah la!

i tot they got dispersed liao?

adzlan:

hybrid car is more expensive. Especially when you are thinking the extra cost on top of that heavy import duties

i think most of us will give up, cos of cost efficiency.

And from the billions they will "save" from not subsidizing our petrol whom will they give it to next in the name of "improving public transport"?

Will it also go to the future Metramacs?

How's the situation in KLCC area? I have an appointment there at 530pm.

More petrol $$ to spend if I have to be stucked in the jam.

I note that Singapore does not suusidise fuel prices.

In fact, this morning I saw that Premium 98 petrol is selling at S$1.58 per litre at a Shell station in Singapore. That's like RM3+ per litre.

Is the purchasing power in Spore better than that in Msia?

Of course, the Spore public transport system is light years ahead of that in any Msian city. To be fair, though, Spore is a city-state with only 1 urban centre, while Msia has a number of cities and corresponding urban areas.

So we may not be comparing like with like when looking at Spore.

Kudos to those who were at the demonstration exercising their rights and letting their displeasure known but quite frankly I have to say that unless it's as big turnout like the million man march there is absolutely no chance that the gov will change their decision. But it's a start..

Let's face it, most Malaysians just prefer to sit idly by, letting others do things. We just rant and rave our displeasure in sites such as these but when it's crunch time, prefer to sit back in our comfort zones. But I don't blame them though, when you have a family, they are your 1st priority.. would you risk losing them for doing futile action such as the demonstration? I know some have done this but generally speaking, most Malaysians just don't have what it takes(sadly myself included).

An earlier posting here suggested a new way of voicing out our displeasure and at the same time sending a clear message to the gov. The blogger suggests :

To protest the current state of suppressed press freedom
Action : residents stop buying ANY newspaper on 7th of the month for 3 days.

To protest the increase petrol hikes
Action : residents stay at home instead of going to shopping malls or any entertaiment center on first Saturday and Sunday of the month.

Now I believe this we all can do. And I think he has a point.

The gov may have power but we have strength in numbers. Think about it.

Folks,

I reckoned the pump price would be surely be hiked at least 10% since last few months after i noticed many huge advertisement boards around showing people how much the fuel price with and without subsidies. But frankly i never expected a 30 cents hike.
Our dear leaders keep on reminding the people that our pump price is still among the lowest in the region to cover their ass.This is a damn misleading statement as they always quote pump price of regional countries in MYR. It doesn't reflect the real situation as one knows little abt finance would know that how shit our MYR is undervalued.
let me show you a very simple calculation and you may realise it. For example, a young wage earner getting paid RM2000 here and SGD2000 in S'pore.
With his RM2K and the fuel price is RM1.95,this poor guy can only get 1025.64L. In contrast, S$2000 pay can buy 1265.82L of petrol that costs S$1.58 per litter after discount due to stiff competition.
I hope it is helpful to let you see the real picture and pls think again if you think S'pore is expensive to live.

For an update and pics of the protest march at KLCC today visit

http://asylum60.blogspot.com/2006/03/citizens-protest-march-near-klcc.html

other links are also given

Spock, go aside and eat your ice-cream.

Singapore has no natural resource. Duh!

"Spock, go aside and eat your ice-cream."
"Singapore has no natural resource. Duh!"

You should feel more ashamed that how come ppl doing far far better without blessed with any natural resource.

wadui... petrol increases 30 cent and my Lemon Teh Ice is now 1.90 compared to 1.50 before. My noodle Kon Lo mee is now RM4.50 compared to Rm 4.00

I called domestic and consumer affair and they told me, there is nothing they can do!!!

They can talk and advice the shop only.

Apa lah cakap they will lose their license but when people complain NOTHING CAN BE DONE!!!

Bikin tak serupa cakap lar in garmen :(

Then government to invest saving on public transport.

Mak oiii Sabah mana ada public transport!!! semua mini bas gila saja lah..

Jadi kita di Sabah mampui lah?????

Knights and Warriors,

Pls join me to condemn the previous gov for doing nothing when the economy was booming,it(subsidy cuts) shld have been done since many years ago as it would be less suffering. Not now when our ppl are losing their jobs to labor cheaper countries.
Let's embrace this,no gov in this world able to subsidise fuel cost endlessly and many countries like India is trying to cut fuel subsidy amid huge deficit.
Previous top gov leader should be the one that fully responsible coz he purposely left it to his successor to do it.
Come on guys, this is really UNFAIR and DO NOT let this irresponsible, selfish and greedy old man to escape and sleep peacefully.

Is this another transfer of public funds from the right to the left pocket?

Why dont badawi improve the public transport system first and cut the subsidy later? At least give the poor a chance to take the public transport system when they cannot affort to pump petrol or change their lifestyle?

Now... the public do not have any alternative transport system, do the government expect everyone of us to use that crapy public tranport system immediately?

Please do not give us the bull shit story of NO MONEY!! Raise some bonds, show us how u improve the public transport system first, then u cut the subsidy.

Is the Government stupid?

Why don't we all cycle when we can. It's exercise, it's healthy, it's efficient, it's not using fossil fuel!

It takes us 30mins to cycle from Taman Connaught Cheras to Petaling Jaya (EPF Bldg.) and only 300 calories are used!

Good to have you back Jeff.

We lost precious years when we have the previous leader and we are starting to lose more years unless we arrest the slide. What slide? We have the opportunity to do a good job for the mass public transportation like the LRT and bus system right way back years ago, but our transportation plans are short-sighted and for short individual gains. It’s already a challenge for KL city to survive the 21st century. That goes the same with major cities in Malaysia i.e. town planning is almost non existence and along with bad transportation. Have anyone tried using Google Earth and explored the streets in KL from the bird in the sky? Then try to compare with other major cities. Ours is a bowl of spaghetti smacked in the valley with roads and buildings at the most unlikely places. Other cities were properly planned and the roads were amazingly straight and well located buildings. If our winding roads take 20-30% more traveling time and distance, then our competitiveness has already been brought down. My colleague says it’s artistic i.e. no system but having a spaghetti is costing us! Then came the LRT that follows the winding method and it pricks me slightly every time I hear the loud friction sound when the LRT turns a corner. You can raise the 30sen this year but you don’t give the people any choice. I saw and hear the protest and their voices strike a similar chord in my heart. The previous leader has a part to play in the current mess but we don’t have to follow him. So, don’t keep pushing us into a corner Sir!

RoadCyclist,

In a sense, we "eat" fossil fuels all the time. The food on your table has been cooked with LPG. The raw food that you bought from the markets have been transported there by trucks using diesel. The fertilizer used for planting the food is made from urea (which is made from natural gas). The insecticides and herbicides used to control farm pests and diseases are made from oil. Farm equipments use diesel and petrol. Even your cooking utensils, bicycle parts and your clothing are made using energy input derived from coal, natural gas or diesel (all fossil fuels).

So, do you think the modern human can be classified as a two-legged, fossil fuel consuming machine?

Simple economics on oil:
*figures are fictional, hope u get the drift.

National Oil Company = NOC
Goverment = GOV
3rd Party Oil suppliers = POS
3rd Party Oil importers = POI
General Public = GEP

1. NOC gets good local oil & sells them for $ 100.00

2. GOV/NOC buys oil from POS at $40.00

3. GOV subsidies $10.00 & sells to GP at $30.00

GP is happy.

4. GOV removes $10.00 subsidary for investment & sells it at record wallet burning price at $40.00

GP not happy.

*note, this does not take account of petrol price fixtures with other vendors. Anyway, does anyone knows whats the real figures?

tjwork,

good point you made. And that's how's Petronas earned 9 billion USD last year alone.

however, govt's only transparency on Petronas spending is categorised as "investment"

the rest in unknown.

But as an F1 fan, i do know they sponsor the BMW Sauber team....

tjwork,

and you forgot to tell us, that $40 oil contains high sulphur, which leads to asthma, cancer, acid rain and not that engine friendly.

3rd Generation,

Petalling Jaya, Subang Jaya, Shah Alam, Cheras and Puchong can be termed "autombile suburbs" i.e. the towns that were designed with the automobile as the primary form of transport in mind. So, I think, all those towns were designed correctly, based on the idea that oil would always be cheaply available.

These automobile suburbs can't even be serviced by buses properly. LRT extensions to these areas would be futile. The suburbs in Japan, Hongkong and Singapore were designed to be serviced by buses and trains. These countries don't have oil, so they planned that way. We are blessed (or, maybe cursed?) with a surplus of oil, so that's why we don't plan our towns that way.

The exception here is probably, Wangsa Maju. I am not sure whether this town was planned to be serviced with rail and buses in mind, but this town should be a model for future suburbs, with the clear notion that oil can never be cheap anymore.

v2k20,

I think our cities cannot survive this century and you’re right as our lives are so dependant on the black gold. The LRTs are by right designed to be extended to go further into the outskirts of KL (I hope the designers knew then that Klang Valley population grows about twice the national rate). I have previously worked in Singapore for a few years. The Land Transport Authority of Singapore planned the MRT years ahead to the future as I saw their Year X plan when I was there. Punctuality was +/- 1 minute when I was there 10+ years ago. The Singapore government understand that to stay alive they must utilize their resources as optimal as possible hence one way of looking at a country’s competitiveness is by looking at the way they use their resources especially petroleum products. I think we can do this too.

Now coming back to home, I only can vouch for Kelana Jaya as having enough car parks (under high tension cables) but majority of the stations don’t have ample car-parks hence I think “automobile suburb” was not really in the plan. We really have no choice but to keep improving the LRT here (redesign, extend, work on the accessing part to the stations for more people etc.) for the city to survive 21st century. I hope the government will use this year’s savings of RM 4.4 billion wisely and plan for Year X. Communicate it to the rakyat so that their anger will be soothed. As for the other cities and towns, improve their bus systems. Keep communicating these plans to the rakyat and make it happen. Only then can you slowly increase the petrol pump price i.e. give us options.

As for spaghettized KL, I’ll try to look at Google Earth from a crooked angle to see it straight. Let's work our way out of this.

3rd Generation,

If every LRT commuter has to find a carpark lot to park his car, the LRT system would be doomed. If one bothers to take the LRT from KLCC to both ends of the track (Kelana Jaya and Terminal Gombak), you'll notice all the popular stations along the way.

The popular stations are KLCC (CBD), Masjid Jamek(for connections to STAR-LRT), Kelana Jaya(decent-sized carpark), Wangsa Maju and Terminal Gombak(decent-sized carpark). What about all the stations in-between? How come Wangsa Maju, which does not have a large carpark, is a very popular station?

The answer is simple - Wangsa Maju is a medium-density housing estate. PJ,SJ,KJ, SA are all low-density housing estates. Klang Valley probably don't have a high-density housing estate like Ang Mo Kio in Singapore. If one takes a small survey in Wangsa Maju station, you'll probably find that more than 75% of the commuters there actually walk to the station.

Taman Bahagia in PJ, which is so close to the LRT station, have comparatively low number of LRT commuters.

So, by your logic that the LRT should have big carparks to succeed, then they would need hundreds of thousands of carpark lots, which would definitely be very costly, as well as creating congestions around themselves.

I believe that the long-term city planning solution would be to have a limit of outward expansion of the suburbs and redevelop the inner city. The creation of new low-density automobile suburbs should be severely restricted. Local government taxes should be restructured to favour medium and high-density housing estates.

If the automobile suburb dweller does not want to be transplanted to a medium density suburb, please save lots of money to prepare for the RM5/liter petrol in probably 10-15 years time. Google for "peak oil" and you would understand. I support the 30 sen increase and I hope the govt would end all the subsidies as soon as possible.

the last time i was back in malaysia there was no LRT or KLCC.

This is so absolutely bull**** !

So, Spore has no natural resources! So, what?

Are we saying that just because Msia is a net oil exporter (for now), that it should subsidise the cost of fuel in the domestic market? By what contortions of economic logic does one justify this?

All rational economists will tell you that any form of subsidy is a distortion of the pricing mechanism that underpins a free market.

It seems that subsidies are a form of "ganja" that most Malaysians are addicted to, and which they persist in wanting, in spite of the clear economic disadvantages. This is selfishness of the highest calibre.

The arguments about salaries in Spore and Malaysia are spurious. For example, no one has even bothered to work out the total cost of ownership of a car in Spore, as compared to Malaysia. Why? Because such an exercise is hard work. Its so much easier to post emotive opinions and arguments than having to live with the consequences of said opinions and arguments!

But that's par for the course. Emotive arguments and the conspicuous lack of hard-headed, rational economics. Or charity, for that matter.

Hey guys I passed by KLCC yesterday and I was surprised that the traffic was so bad until I found out that there was a demonstration. How come it was not reported on the press today?

Spock, u r absolutely right as i said in my previous post that the subsidies cut is inevitable for M'sia's future BUT gov must make sure that the savings from fuel subsidies go to developement.
They must make sure everything is transparent n
adopt an open bidding system,not by granting gov's projects to UMNO members'owned companies for the benefit of 60000 kontraktor bumiputera.If this is the case, i would rather gov used up every single cent of revenue from oil&gas to subsidise the fuel,at least the people enjoy something than nothing.
Yes, subsidies cut is inevitable but the gov must put in all its effort to minimise the impacts to the people xpecially single parent,handicapped,senior ciziten and etc.Don't just talk but deploy more manpower to check prices around and immediately prosecute any profiteer in
the court.Not just telling
people that they are doing their jobs and it must be ongoing practice,not keeping their hands stop after this issue comes to the end.

V2k20, Spock,

Many good points from both of you. But we can’t end the subsidies yet, not like this. The way it is now is to rob Peter to pay Paul, and Peter here is not you or me but the small people in our midst while Paul happens to be a glutton and prodigal son. In Singapore, they make sure the economic support systems including the transportation is good first and bare in mind they do give subsidies (in other forms like shares to the public, tax cuts, incentives etc.) that do not burden the economy. I can live with that. I read peak oil articles mid last year and it’s an excellent reminder of our mankind precarious situation but the government must do its part as mentioned by teh-o. At this moment I side with the protesters as we don’t have many cards left when we deal with previous and current government.

The govenment's mindset is backwarded. A progressing human should spend his time looking for ways to get more money so he can match the higher cost of living and not look for ways to save money to do so.

First the gov makes decisions that only chases foreign investors away making us poorer by the day. Then they themselves go broke in the end. All you ministers who hide your money in foreign banks give back the money you stole from us la then we won't be complaining...

firstly, check on the lifestyle inflation and not solely on the food inflation in malaysia. 2nd check on the average salary increase per individual. Now may the government tell the poor how they are going to adapt their living to the new environment with their current lifestyle given that they have literally given up hope on improving their lifestyle!

The recent increase in the price of petroleum at an all
time high increment of RM0.30 was a major betrayal of
the people's trust by the leadership of Pak Lah
who is suppose to be a fair and caring person. The
current spate of upward revisions in the prices of
petroleum products were preceded not only by the
increase in the price of the said commodity in the
international market but also by a major revision in
the salary of our elected representatives from state
councilors ,federal cancellers to cabinet ministers.

Meanwhile inflation had made an upward trend which by
now, I believe, is already well pass 3.5 %.Interest
rate had also been increased twice this year.
Unemployment among fresh graduates is at all time high
let alone those without such qualifications.

I appreciate the fact that continued hefty subsidy by
the government is not sustainable as the opportunity
cost is high and there had been a very substantial
loss due to smuggling to neighboring countries like
Thailand, Indonesia and even to Singapore,

What is to be regretted is the fact that both the
escalation in the price of petroleum, inflation and
interest rate happened at the time when there is still
tremendous supply of money in the inter-bank market
and the ringgit is still significantly undervalued.
The government therefore appears to be managing the
economy on piece meal and fragmented basis. The
macroeconomic management objective appears to be very
heavily skewed towards subsidizing the exporters
through a policy of undervalued ringgit at the
detriment of the general consumers by having to pay
higher prices for imported goods in general and
petroleum in particular.

A more balanced macroeconomic stance should have been
to allow the ringgit to strengthen further to say RM
3.60 to RM3.65 to the USD.This would have allowed the
government to increase the price of petroleum by
RM0.15 only and yet produce the same impact in terms
of releasing the subsidy by the government and also in
terms of discouraging cross-border smuggling of
petroleum,as our exchange rate would firmed up against
that of our neighbors.

The other factor to consider is that at the moment
Bank Nagara has to spend a lot of money in having to
mop-up excess liquidity in the inter-bank market in
order to maintain the bench mark inter-bank policy
rate within the band it has predetermined. This so
?called sterilization cost actually reflects the
amount of subsidy that is being given to Malaysian
exporters in order to make the price of their exports
competitive in the international markets as it has to
?sterilize? the inflow of hot money in keeping the
ringgit at an artificially undervalued rate as against
major currencies such as the USD.This too is not
sustainable in the long run as it invites speculators
to crack this artificial exchange regime.

Now this misdemeanor has fueled cost-push inflationary
trend. It is the common people who would suffer not
their elected representatives or Bank Negara officials
as they all are well paid and have been taken care by
the recent revision in their compensation
package.Indeed it had been a well thought off forward
planning at their personal level.

The fact that the government continue to be willing to
subsidise exporters but have taken the stance to
reduce the subsidy for petroleum to the citizen at
large on progressive basis is something that is much
to be regretted. To be frank both of these subsidies
are not sustainable on long basis; but why create a
double standard?

The government should have given more thought on how
to manage the economy on a more co-ordinated and
integrated basis rather than finding an adhoc and
simplistic way out.