You are confusing between Bumiputera and Malays. I am from Sarawak.
We have more Bumiputera Christians here than Muslim Malays.
Most of them are being help to progress with these policy you are trying to abolished.

Have you been to the rural areas and see how rural people lives. How many are they are non Bumi?
Race based policies is better than targeted social policies because we live according to our races,
We self segregated ourselves, as a mini society within a much broader hierarchy.

We rarely conduct business, marriage, social gatherings etc outside our own kind.
Wealth distributes within races whether you agree or not.
When a poor person marries a rich person, the poor family status is positively affected.
When someone wanna organize a social event like weddings or birthdays, they uses their own kind for services like caterings, event planners and such.
This distributes wealth within the society which is commonly under the same race.

If you say we should only help the poor regardless of the race. It is like giving fish to a cat.
Instead teaching the cat to fish works better because cats will teach other cats.

Have you ever been in school where you sometimes need to copy your homework or assignments because you somehow forgot or lazy to do?
Tell me who will help you? Your own kind or the opposite?
That is how our society works.

Bumi policy does not cover everything except certain economics, education and housing policies.

I don't believe equality but i believe in fairness.
If you preach equality, then every person should be given for example RM100 each regardless of their wealth.
If you believe in fairness, then the lesser should get more.


Until there is balance in wealth distribution between races, these policies will be needed.
I do believe one day, we will not need this policies anymore.
Unbalanced wealth distribution is the reason for race and religious divide in Malaysia

This post has been edited by seriosekitt3h: Nov 8 2020, 09:23 AM

read my first sentence again, the core of my argument.

you used MALAY 3 times instead of using BUMIPUTERA in you counter argument.
The BUMI polices is not exclusive for the Malays only.

Answering your question above,
Who do you think the non Muslim Bumi (they are not all Christians or Catholics, some are pagan and atheist)
voted for in Sarawak for the last 50-60 years?
DAP? Who is vocal about bumi policies?

Sarawak is the stronghold of BN and they are quite unique in social demographics but they often stand united with the Federal government.
Sarawak is a fixed deposit for BN because they know their constitutional right is protected.

I have been to this one longhouse in deep Sarawak. The leader is pagan/atheist and also a political party leader of this one major ethnic.
This specific longhouse of 50 families have 22 degree holders, 3-5 post graduate holders.

In fact the nearest town sees more development in a decade than the one city being held by opposition nearby.
The small town have Rural UTC, government buildings that helps famers/entrepreneurs in between the town and longhouse.
Even the new highway passes through that town.
I have been living in that city for quite a bit and Opposition did nothing much in helping the poor economically there when I was there.

My point, if if was not for the Bumi policies on education, loans and housing, i doubt that the people in that longhouse will have anything higher than a SPM certificate
and they will be farmers and laborer for the rest of their lives.

I have many real life personal examples to share that involves non Malay Bumi

This post has been edited by seriosekitt3h: Nov 8 2020, 12:40 PM

There is a difference. Thank you for correcting it. I already answered it initially.
What you are suggesting is we should be equal in distribution according to demographic
and the rich Bumi is exploiting the allocation of these poor Bumi?


A shorter answer:
A rich <insert race> will give back to it's own less fortunate kind because we are a self segregated society bounded by race and religion.

Example:

Middle Income Ahmad got good education because he got tongkat to University making him smart.
Middle Income Ahmad got tongkat in loans making him able to start his own business.
Middle Income Ahmad also got tongkat in housing making him saving his money more.
Middle Income Ahmad got rich in the span of 10 years, now people call him Rich Ahmad.

Now,
Rich Ahmad need to hire workers for his new project he got from tongkat.
Rich Ahmad hires Middle Income Abu and Middle Income Hassan to help with the project.
Middle Income Abu and Middle Income Hassan hires Poor Ali, Poor Sufian, Poor Hafiz and Poor Mohd to work for them.

In 10 years time,
All the Middle Income becomes Rich and all the Poor becomes Middle Income.
Rich Ahmad is getting richer, don't forget that. We call him Mega Rich Ahmad now

So,
Mega Rich Ahmad now opens up another tongkat business producing lots of newly Rich guys and Middle Income guys
Now Rich Abu and Rich Hassan tongkat summore.

Now
The son of Mega Rich Ahmad wanna marry a Poor Syed daughter, his dad approves and financed a grand wedding
Mega Rich Ahmad hires Moderate Income Hussein as caterer, Middle Income Halimah as Mak Andam, Rich Azman as Event Planner.
Now all the people working for Mega Rich Ahmad's son wedding hires a lot of Poor individuals for work.

And,
Family of Poor Syed also benefited from marrying the Mega Rich Ahmad by getting some work or small projects
Poor Syed's family boosted their statues to now as Middle Income Syed.

So in short, wealth trickles down to it's own society in a long run, this is why race based tongkat policy works.
It is a way to get of from the poverty cycle.

If Middle Income Ahmad does not have a university entry approved, his bank loans rejected, his housing quotas rejected
Abu, Hassan. Ali, Sufian, Hafiz, Hussein, Halimah, Azman and Syed would be stagnant economically.

Yes it is fair.

Who said about other poor people needed to die?
We have Jabatan Kebajikan Masyarakat, Baitulmal (non muslim can apply)
and many more govt and NGO bodies to help them.

You are propagating here that the Poor Non Bumi should not be helped?
It is a false accusation.

And why I think this is fair?
This graph from this study explains why

Population shares of ethnic groups in each percentile, 2002 (pre-tax national income)


Until we make the line between red and blue horizontally flat (red group have more rich than poor compared to blue group and vice versa),
we will not achieve racial/religious unity that is 100% essential to our economy.

or

Work honestly and but don't let money dictates your life.
Balance your life with spending time with people you love and those who loves you.
Spend some the hard earn money in helping the poor whether it is RM1 or RM1000

Be tolerant to people who does not share your skin color, beliefs or political party.
It is okay to disagree, we are not created the same.

Money does bring happiness and solves problems but it does not give you joy in life.
It is impossible to be happy all the time, so enjoy those little moments.
Don't escape when ever there is a problem unless it is life threatening.
Instead try to work around it if you are unable to solve it.

#1
So you are saying Sarawakian Bumiputera does not benefits from the Bumi policy?
I am Melanau and I sure do does not having a problem with in in KL or Kuantan or Penang where I studied
It is a Federal constitution and it covers the whole Malaysia. Sarawak and Sabah is why Malaysia exist.

#3
Colonialism.

British favors the Chinese in business and education during its tenure.
Singapore and Hong Kong is the crown Jewel of the British Empire.

Divide and conquer is their tactic even in Africa, Middle East and America.
They also educates the royals by giving them false powers to rule.
But majority of the people are uneducated and oppressed.

I did not say you need to shut up.
You have every right to say your opinion as long as there is tolerance.

You don't eat beef in front of a Hindu or eat pork in front of a Malay because you tolerates their belief, right?
But no one is stopping you to consume whatever you want in your own space, right?

If you just argue for the sake of arguing and won't be involved in a proper discussion,
then,
you are not practicing your right as a civilian.

You can be friends with others who does not share the same opinion with you, why make them your enemy
and fill your life with hate?

If you see corruption, you can report to MACC.
If you see a crime, you can report to the police.
If you see someone making a false remark, you can educate them about the truth.

But simply saying you've given up on things and everybody is wrong is just not right in anyone's mind.
I don't wanna you to be sad, depressed or having thoughts on migrating.

All I am saying is you should not make money as your only goal in life.
Focus on your relation with another human being instead.
A life with a good relationships is a life fulfilled.

I am a Sarawakian. I know.
I met Sarawakian who builds the huge mall in KL, those towers in Damansara, plays golf with PM and Obama etc.
Who are you bullshitting that Sarawakian does not have privilege?

I went to MRSM and have MARA scholarship to Uni. My classmate/unimates are non Muslim Sarawakian.
I work for government for 10 years before. My colleagues are non Muslim Sarawakian.
I have non Muslim Sarawakian classmate/housemate who now works with our government in New York

The list goes on and on. Stop with your lies

To answer your next question, yes because there are a lot of poor bumi that until the late 90s sees their life being changed by NEP that was initiated in the 70s.
But what halted the progress?

Communism.
We basically started building our country back after they surrendered in 1989.
That is where the whole money and policy really taking effect
We are a bit halted in 1998 due to political and economical unrest
but we are still growing strong today

Plus
I did a long Poor and Rich Malays example a few comment back. It takes generations to change a status of a self segregated community. (check my long answer 3-4 comments back)

So you are dismissing this study as invalid due to it being 18 years old?

secondly,
look at our racial demographic population.
Bumi and India sounds about right because we got 70% bumi and 9% Indian roughly,

Shouldn't Chinese be 24% instead of 16%?

So in other words, Chinese have less poor compared to Bumi and Indian

Thirdly,
Since there is Bumi allocation for Bumi policies, then by right it should be given to Bumi
Right?

If not, by your logic
Then if there is a Sarawakian allocation for Sarawak, a Selangorian should have a piece of it?
Or an allocation for Sabahan should be share by all Malaysian.

Now I understand why people in the West always a wanna a piece of Sabah and Sarawak.
Even though there are allocations to each and every citizen and state given every year.
That is why we are still underdeveloped compared to the West.
The West have been songlaping our money to build their MRT, PLUS, KLCC and KLIA with our oil and gas money

I work for federal government in both Selangor and Sarawak for 10 years. There are lots of Sarawakian here in my PJ office.
One of them is the head of (our expertise) department. But then Sarawakian wants to go back where home is.

In my work place i can say it is 65% Bumi and 35% non Bumi in PJ and in Sarawak, it is close to 60-40% (we have no indians)

Secondly, you ask 2 sets of different question.
one is why the Bumi have so many poor and one is why NEP changes their economic statues.

If you learn history, colonialism is the reason why most country are poor and slow to progress.
Look at the middle east, that is what colonialism did to the region.
Intellectuals are killed, the native are suppressed in education and their wealth is plundered and destroyed.
You can learn what French did to Algeria for a more in depth study of effects on colonialism

If you know about economics, things that will affect it is political instability. Hence communist insurgencies (not CCP ideology per se) halted our progress in rural area.
That is why we need stability to help the economy grows.
That also includes racial stability.
Why does Japan, Korea and Singapore have in common that makes them progress economically?
Racial unity (one major race in power)

One person
Mahathir
He have been hating Sarawak from early on.

Only Najib (sadly it is him as an example) that helped building Sarawak back on their feet
With highways and bridges and other things to help Sarawakian in development.
And Mahathir have to fuck up things again when PH is in power

For decades we have been fighting for our oil and recentl
Now that he is gone
We have our oil rights back and Shell is moving all of their offices to Sarawak exclusively.

Firstly
Generational poverty is prevalent amongst the people in the rural because of lack to access of education, lack of job opportunities and basic need like electricity, water and roads.
This is why Bumi which resides in these locations often find it difficult to compete in economic growth compared to the people in the urban areas, which surprise, surprise, is non Bumi.

Thus billions is needed to improve the infrastructures that is needed to help their economy and giving them fair chance to compete with others.
Thus lots of training centers, entrepreneur training, industrial training, schemes and loans are given to them in order to push them to the right direction.
People in the urban areas often have access to internet, tuition centers, training centers, high paying jobs and state of the art transportation compare to people living in coastal or inlands rural places.

So you get my point or do I need to elaborate more?

Secondly
Singapore is the crown colony of British colony same to Labuan, Malacca, Sarawak and Penang but not Malaya.
Meaning Singapore is under direct rule of the Crown.

But Singapore is the jewel colony for the British because of it's location and trade route.
There is nothing to plunder because it have no natural resources but it links all the islands in the region to a central location of it's port

This is part of the reason why Penang, Malacca and Labuan declined in being the port of the region.
It was pretty successful way before the world wars.
Even when the Japanese invaded that region, Singapore is the pinnacle of their invasion objective.
British fought hard to protect Singapore but not Kuala Lumpur or Labuan.

Another reason is Singapore is pretty much one race nation where it is politically stabile thus economic growth is the by product of that
Then, it have only one language to unite all.
Lastly Singapore have developed all it's landscape and no further development like building roads or bridges or tunnels needed to connect one town to another

These three last reasons is why Malaysia is far left behind in economic growth but now only can match Singapore in infrastructure growth.

it is good that the T20 is growing, the wealth can trickle down to the lower halves in term of more employment, business opportunity and such
What you are suggesting is socialism where everyone should be equal in wealth

#1
One word (person) - MAHATHIR

#2
What's your point other than being ad hominem?

#1
Everyone is taxed accordingly.

If you use the facilities and protection given by the government,
then you should pay your tax. If you live in a far away jungle without electricity, roads, police, fire brigades, army
then it is your right not to pay thses taxes

#2
Does the Indian enjoy the subsidies or not?
Are they protected by law?
Are they protected by the constitution?
Are they Malaysian?

If no, then you have the wrong interpretation of things.

I don't believe in equality but in fairness and just.
You allocate them with the value of things that will help them, not in numbers but in the overall effect

For example,
Giving a farmer a Hilux is better than giving him a Lambo not because of the price but how it affects his life

It is relevant to the arguments. I explained it in my Middle Income Ahmad example a few pages back.

Yes.

In short summary,
Affirmative action in Malaysia is needed to balance out wealth gap between races in order to maintain racial unity which is crucial to the nation's economic progress.

you've asked me two questions and I answered it. The recent answers got nothing to do with what you've just said above

Let's understand your argument first on
Affirmative action as it is currently only benefits the rich and connected bumis.

So it does not benefits the poor and unconnected? I believe that is false.

On your second argument,
With needs based policy, poor bumis will naturally gets a bigger share of the affirmative pie by nature they are the largest segment of B40. How is that not balancing the wealth gap?

I believe no. Here is why.

For example,
Poor Hashim gets a bigger share in tongkat (let's use this word to sum up Bumi benefit's).
Poor Ikau also gets a bigger share too like Poor Hashim
Poor Jibeh also gets a bigger share like those two.

So Poor Hashim, Poor Ikau and Poor Jibeh decided to start a business.
With proper training because of tongkat, they are smart enough to open up one.
With proper loans, they would be able to set up a shop

But
Poor Hashim lives in a fishing village, he does not know any Moderate Income or Rich people personally, just poor like him in his area
Poor Ikau also lives in a longhouse the rural area, he hardly can speak English so his business have communication limitation
Poor Jibeh lives in the highlands village and he lacks the roads to connect his shop for supplies and such.

Now,
Poor Hashim, Poor Ikau and Poor Jibeh have limits to their business and such tongkat can only bring them that far
Even if they work hard, their business would just be limited to their area, language, ethic groups or religious clusters

Maybe in 2-3 generations, their offspring would be educated at least on a diploma level or even a degree level.
Then again, there is no guarantee that these 3 poor fellas families would escape the generational poverty cycle.

But what if the Tongkat policy is based on races?

Poor Hashim would still be poor?
Maybe.

But Poor Ikau might know someone who is Moderate Income Akun.
So Moderate Income Akun have the extra money to help Poor Ikau under his wings
until Poor Ikau have the fluent way to communicate not only in English but also in Mandarin
Moderate Income Akun is a mentor to Poor Ikau in business since they share the same language, religion and ethnicity
As time pass by Poor Ikau becomes Moderate Income Ikau.

Poor Jibeh still having difficulties in getting supplies and this is where Rich Gonolon comes in
Seeing that he can sell his product in Poor Jibeh's village which shares the same language, religion and ethnicity with him
Rich Gonolon set up a shop there and helped Poor Jibeh in getting his supplies by sharing his lorry.
As time pass by, Rich Gonolon is able to help other villagers in getting supplies so in time
Poor Jibeh village have more people setting up all sorts of businesses,

Back to Poor Hashim, tongkat does not work for him no matter how hard he works
But Poor Hashim stike a goldmine
He met Rich Ahmad's daughter and fell in love.
They get married and Poor Hashim moved out from his village and works for Rich Ahmad
Now me is Moderate Income Hashim

So,
would Rich Gonolon help Poor Hashim?
Certainly not, they don't share any connection

Would Moderate Income Akun help Poor Jibeh?
Nope, they are way socially segregated to even have a chance to meet

Would Rich Syed help Poor Hashim when Poor Hashim called him to ask for help.
Probably yes, because they share the same language, religion and ethnicity

This post has been edited by seriosekitt3h: Nov 8 2020, 05:24 PM

So the bolded one is your question, before that, please state your claim first about the amount of money being spend, Give me a link to support your argument.