3 Comments

1. 

   Kauana says:

   April 6th, 2012 at 2:11 pm

   this month. “I didn’t say anything for two years. I was quiet. I overebsd his promises. I had high expectations. I expected his view to be different from me, but I don’t see the government doing what it promises to do.”The former prime minister’s impolitic comments may prompt investors to avoid one of Asia’s more underappreciated economies. In recent years, most of the surprises in Asian markets came not from reports on growth or inflation, but politics. Asia has seen all too many market-shaking spats, scandals, disputed elections and impeachment efforts.And so Mahathir’s rebukes of the prime minister are unsettling Malaysia’s markets, too. “It seems now to be having some effect on a domestic economy which is already slowing,” Gerald Ambrose, managing director of Aberdeen Asset Management’s Malaysian business, said in an interview in Kuala Lumpur.Record oil prices are weighing on Malaysia’s $131 billion economy, slamming consumer and business confidence. Add to that a slowing U.S. economy and concern about the nation’s ability to compete with Asia’s upstarts. Malaysia could be too affluent to outperform China; too underdeveloped to join the ranks of Japan or South Korea. It also has a public relations weakness.That became clear in interviews with investors in the United States and Europe over the last couple of months. There was, of course, huge interest in China and India. Yet in cities like London, New York and Stockholm, I found great interest in economies such as Thailand and Taiwan. In Chicago, Paris and Lisbon, folks wanted to talk about Korea, Singapore and Vietnam. In Brussels, San Francisco and Washington, it was Indonesia and Japan.Oddly, Malaysia didn’t come up unless I mentioned it first. Given its rich resources, technology industries and unique status as a moderate, predominantly Muslim nation, you’d think Malaysia would be a bigger blip on investors’ radar screens. It’s not, and politics bear some of the blame.In his 22 years in power, Mahathir morphed a tropical backwater into an Asian tiger. While it doesn’t excuse him for bizarrely blaming Jews for Malaysia’s troubles in the late 1990s, Mahathir had his economic successes. Yet Malaysia has been too slow to boost entrepreneurship and move beyond manufacturing and resource-based industries.Whether it’s wounded pride, an attempt to look out for associates hoping to profit from his megaprojects, or anger at the release from prison of his former rival, Anwar Ibrahim, Mahathir is back with a vengeance.Mahathir has a point on at least one thing: Abdullah can be painfully indecisive. Many Malaysians are disappointed by how timidly Abdullah has attacked corruption and policies giving preferential treatment to the ethnic Malay majority. Abdullah should also go further to convince Malaysians that his family hasn’t benefited from government contracts, as Mahathir has alleged.Many of Mahathir’s other protests are weak, at best, relating to megaprojects that seem more about pride than necessity. If the former prime minister is upset that Abdullah is unilaterally scrapping his initiatives, he has himself to blame. It was Mahathir who masterminded the centralization of power that Abdullah wields. In Malaysia, for example, one man acts as both prime minister and finance minister. It’s an awkward arrangement that should be reconsidered.Even if Mahathir’s concerns are legitimate – and one certainly meets businesspeople who share them – he needs to learn to bite his tongue for the good of Malaysia’s economy.”It might be difficult to swallow at first, but for the sake of keeping his dignity intact and sparing us unnecessary embarrassment, he should disabuse himself quickly of any notion he might continue to harbor about his indispensability to the Malaysian body politic,” Tunku Abdul Aziz, a former head of Transparency International Malaysia, wrote in the New Straits Times on Wednesday. Mahathir must learn to “eat humble pie once out of office,” he said.Mahathir is anything but a spent power. He still has charisma to spare, and retains a clear vision of where Malaysia should be in 2010, 2020 and beyond.Yet along with tarnishing his legacy, his tirades could unnerve investors and dent the government’s credibility abroad.Fair or not, Malaysia still has a lot of work to do on its public relations. The economy deserves more attention from international investors than it receives. It won’t get much – at least not the kind it wants – with its present and former leaders trading barbs.
2. 

   Agung says:

   April 6th, 2012 at 9:26 pm

   AHem. I can safely say I am reutnal. I am not formerly from NST, and am certainly not in any way, aligned to any parties.But I can say this. Forget about Pak Lah and TDM’s issue.PM’s manifesto was transparency.Why was it as far as all this businesses are concerned? DId he rightly owned up to the ‘supporting’letter where the food fiasco was concerned? Nevermind all this.Can we look around and say that corruption today is less than that of days before TDM? Does it mean that if less , it is acceptable?How can DrKhir be still entrusted with the Selangor Gov after all the bugles that his staff has made? MBPJ Funeral Parlour? The wanton destruction of Reserved land? By PKNS!! etc etc.Lets not even mention Zakaria and Mazlynoor.Looks like we are all focussed on the two elephants at war whilst the deer lays dead in between!It is quite obvious from a reutnals point of view that the mainstream media is playing up this issue, whilst suppressing TDM. Making him out to be some half senile nitwit! But rest assured he is not.TV3 is certainly biased, and it was really sad to note that they have resorted to using emails (by individuals) to add fuel to the fire! It is commone knowledge that reflecting emails are thoughts of an individual. And to this blog, laud the moderator that he has such a forum for us to debate, an uncensored one.So, here is food for thought.I don’t think that the comments here refer to anyone doing well, but definately about them doing things in a questionable manner.What can we do then to right the wrongs?
3. 

   Sasha says:

   April 9th, 2012 at 1:51 am

   There were a few other things he ieetmonnd but he stopped, thinking it was already two hours. I figured the meeting was over and I collected my recorder and said good bye to him at the door and I came out. On the other hand, the excerpts’ carried by the NST (24th Oct, page 8, column 2, para. 3), quoted Dr. M saying: There were a few other things he ieetmonnd but as he talked I saw that it was nearly two hours and I decided that the meeting was over . Subtle deletion of words, addition of others ..and there you have it: The NST tells another LIE!!! Why? Of course, to imply that Dr. M was not keen to allow AAB to rebut or explain his side, despite the sainted and elegantly silent listener’ having given Dr. M 90 minutes to air his grievances! But in today’s NST, Abdullah once more (as per the Japan encounter) foils the NST spin. I kept to my plan, Tun took one-and-a-half hours. We agreed to meet for two hours. So, only half an hour was left for me,” said Abdullah, explaining why he spoke sparingly during the meeting at Seri Perdana. Ah-hah!! So, Abdullah was most certainly keeping his eye on the clock, and it was he who stopped talking when the time was up. It was not Dr. M who decided that the meeting was over , but it was Abdullah. The Star’s verbatim is correct, and NST’s caught with its pants down, yet again!! Will the GEIC apologise? Certainly, no!Word of advise to the NST louts: Next time you lie, do brief your boss, so he doesn’t expose you, or himself, for the imbeciles that you both are!