I Don't Need A Parachute

One of the hilarious moment when I was in Dewan Rakyat last week was when Deputy Minister of Rural Development answered his ruling coalition partner, also from Sarawak, the fact that the infrastructures projects have not been going on for a very long time. The answer given was the project is on going with several technical issues and will be resolved soon. Oh, I really think that government has failed to ensure its money spending for greater value.

I was “what actually happen on the ground?” Why there are two different propositions of public interest projects within ruling coalition? Could this case happen to Warisan Merdeka later on? Wait and see.

Now, I believe more and more projects under the surveillance and planning by the government are seriously plagued whether in terms of implementation or bloating cost. As I mentioned previously, if you have simply a mega vision and dreams without proper capacity to perform, the losses will be socialized. Absolutely socialize.

I prefer and advocate a small and limited government. Some of you might think so; small government is the solution of all these bad repercussions of bigger intervention. If I were a politician, certainly I will do necessary such as, cutting spending on welfare an subsidies programs, empowering state governments, reform taxes friendlier to small businesses, no too big too fail philosophy, reward the performed while punish the failure, no monopoly, more free trade and economic freedom and lastly privatization.

Those in opposites may assume these principles as fallacy or mirage. Some point out that I might put status quo in discontentment. Agree. Malaysia’s politics is very intractable from popularity and modeling a street fighter version whereas I do understand it still important, but looking at the other side of you encouraging them to be highly dependence to the government! I am not surprise at all if your politician endeavor their best to bring more pork spending to their constituencies.

This is not a contemplat ion against politicians who committed to the sort of agenda. But I would like to emphasize on the truth, accuracy is much more vital than popularity. Anyway, I do understand our society is emerging into free and open matured democracy. What I define as less intervention is the best managed resources and even the best form of government ever. The more government intervention, the more disappointing result you will get.

It does not mean if I were a politician, peoples are not my top priority. Why there must be thinking a capitalist man is the oppressor or destroying foundation of good socio economy? Left thinker justified by saying capitalist and free market leads to starvation, selfishness and immoral. In 1916, H.L Meckhen said “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.’’ In my interpretation, let the peoples feel good and hard in many life of democracy; be it spending, taxing and voting.

Well, I say your misleading facts that wealth distribution exercising by the government all this while is absolutely futile. I tell you, government seems like to define poor peoples as recipient of benefits and it will always remains be. Government redistributing wealth must result in destruction of capital, less job creation and prosperity. Thus, reduces income too. You make it worst for poverty because breaking down of capital cycle and wealth creation. Is Malaysia designing itself to that path?

I say, if all of us well employed well paid, well business and as a result wages increase, I believe the poor also enjoy the benefits from it through job employment unless you are lazy. Who needs politicians both Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional then?

Economist Schumpeter was indeed question “Can the capitalism survive” blatantly “No”. At the other hand, let me quote a former top International Monetary Fund (IMF) economist, Vito Tanzi described how difficult it has been for entrepreneurs to compete with governments;

“When in the past the government entered a sector, it introduced laws and regulations that facilitated and justified its own intervention in that sector. It inevitably made it more difficult, or at times even impossible, for the private sector to develop in that sector . . . the only realistic option became, or appeared to be, the government’s activity. Public monopolies in electricity, communications, transportation, the provision of pensions, health services, education and several other services prevented the private sector of many countries from developing efficient alternatives to the government.”

Vito Tanzi was absolutely right about the freedom of every one of us from government intervention. In addition, I supposed enjoy listening Yusmadi Yusoff’s (MP of Balik Pulau) debate in property ownership or property rights. Property rights as part of human rights. Many heard of all men are created equal, free and independent by nature and thus have all inherent rights.

We also possess free mind and bodies (using natural law approach) and government again must not interfered in the intention to master anyone else. We do seek property and we defend it, and there is role of government to do what it constitutionally avoiding our property from being deprived. I want to tell you this is violation of my liberty and unjust acts if there is deprivation. In the point of justice, whether you are poor and determine to acquire property, you are allow to do so and the government must provide necessary mean of acquiring for both benefits.

I can understand Yusmadi stand points is to urges the government to protect the faculties (free mind and bodies) themselves, not the physical property itself. If Pakatan Rakyat MP’s have this ideas in their mind, for the beginner, I think it is good enough. I will endorse to those politician who believe Mises and Hayek creed.