Just buy a connector and let the pressure down the work

I thought businesses use big gas cylinders?

who so free spray 14kg cylinder into purple paint just to save RM44 per tong. The paint and timing also can't justify the saving. Some more u have to paint the whole tong into purple, including the bottom and top.

hahahahha incoming roti canai kosong rm5

Don't lah.. Y'all just have to make sure y'all wantan mee still taste as great after the new price hike will do. Let the professionals handle the rest.

Suda ada, last month sapu 1 port doing that.
Waiting those port to kebabom.

Okla tu. some of us are so patriotic that we chose to pay more taxes than a flat 6% tax. I don’t see why some of us especially those who are here are against paying more for food. 😉

Nope. Go to any hawkers or mamak and you see those subsidised ones being used.

Haram jadah.. neighboring country without subsidy can sell cheaper.

By right they can't

Plenty used minyak paket in business too, which is again wrong

The government spends RM3.4 billion annually on LPG subsidies. With a population of around 36 million, that’s approximately:

RM3.4 billion ÷ 36 million = RM94.45 per Malaysian per year

Apply some logic:

After removing the subsidy, will the average person end up paying more or less?

If the average Malaysian ends up paying more than RM94.45 annually due to inflation or price hikes, then removing the subsidy achieves the opposite of its intent—especially for B40 and M40 groups, many of whom rely on outside food because cooking isn't economical for single or dual-income households.

Let’s run the numbers:
If the cost of a meal increases by RM1 per plate:

2 meals/day × RM1 = RM2/day
RM2 × 30 days = RM60/month
RM60 × 12 months = RM720/year

Of course, not everyone eats out every day. Assume 30% of the population eat outside.

0.3 × RM720 = RM216/year

Clearly, with a RM1.00 hike, a person could end up paying almost 2 x more than what they "gained" from the subsidy cut (RM216 vs RM94.45).

So the key question becomes:

Does this subsidy removal really reduce government spending, or does it merely shift the burden to the people without net savings?

If it’s merely a transfer mechanism—removing RM3.4B from public subsidy but forcing civilians to pay RM7.7B in cost increases—then it’s not cost-effective. In fact, it's economically regressive.

Lol, told already you all will be affected by Petronas starting to remove subsidies/tongkat, ni baru nak remove subsidies from commercial sector, dah mula kecoh.

No prob

All these costs will be pass down to consumers

Electricity will be revised also right ?

they dont care. die die want to cut the subsidy first. of cz they justify by giving to the b40 some assistance by punishing the m40 and t20.but in the end all those 3.4B dono go where

This post has been edited by Pain 9000: May 27 2025, 08:18 PM

I do see these big ones but they are a usually at higher end mamak and aircon restaurant and situated at the back of the shop. Some tai chao kopitiam also use. Small individual stalls, yes they all use the green small tong.

My gut feeling tells me they will say we need to pay for the loan taken for 1MDB. It's so easy to push all the blame onto that.

If they don't flame that, then maybe we can get around 2mil/bed = 1700 beds hospital. If one new hospital says 80 beds, maybe we can get 21 nos of new hospitals ?

Mentality tongkat betul korang ni, buat malu jek.

Must cut subsidies now, in case in the future Sarawak asks for more MA1963.

Road side seller can now sell 3 times higher

#HidupSusah

Fucking better just remove Ron95 la

keep petrol but everything else increase, Sohai betul