Seniors can still laugh over old age

As we age and become senior citizens, our views and priorities would have changed. Gone were the wish and drive to earn more money, and in comes the need and wish to be healthy.

For the past few years, my wife was quick to reply to Chinese New Year wishes (Gong Xi Fa Cai which literally means Wishing you a happy and prosperous new year) with a 'No need for wealth, but health'. But I did not like the way she put it because it comes across as presumptuous, as though she already has plenty of wealth which is not true.

Anyway, I look forward to our almost daily breakfast meet and talk about any current issues and what comes to mind.

One suggested that one of us should plan and set up an old folks' home... preferably near a hospital... and a cemetery, to make it convenient.

Another commented that as we get older and die off, with the different religion or mentality of younger generations, soon there will not be any descendants inclined to do the yearly Qing Ming ritual. With the scarcity of burial grounds and increasing prices of plots, the trend is for cremation...now we have to think of 'condominium' for the dead, as in columbarium! Even this is not cheap. I was told a slot in Ipoh costs at least Rm15,000.

A more practical way is to throw the ashes into the open sea, and not having to ever face the problem of 'no descendants to pray for you'. Even having tablets in temples or communal associations' altars do not guarantee attendance, but have the consolation of having others praying for them during festivals.

A doctor advised an old patient to do a certain test. He said after each test, I had to go on a different diet, soon I will not be allowed to eat anything!

Meanwhile, during a mahjong session among seniors, it is common to hear of sarcastic complaints about a very slow player who will take his or her time to decide, like : 'Are you reading the papers?' Then there is another who would hold on to the 'brick' after throw it out, and when someone exclaimed 'game over' or something to that effect, she would reply that she had not decided (act of holding on) and had decided to change her mind!

It is also amazing to hear of a 70+ male senior commenting about 'the old lady' who is actually only in her 60s or even 50s! Some are really young at heart despite their old age.

Link

Azmi Sharom: Thanks for passing anti-terror bill, academic tells Pakatan MPs

'Azmi, who was charged under the Sedition Act last year, was in fact fuming at the opposition coalition, who were beaten by a mere 19 votes in the Dewan Rakyat where they were fighting against the new law, which allows for detention without trial.

"Let's give a big round of applause to the Pakatan Rakyat MPs who, God knows where they were, when they should have been voting against Pota. Thank you very much.

"Where on earth were you? You could have defeated this law... because you know where the BN fellows are at 2 o'clock in the morning. You could have been there to defeat it.

"I am so irritated that I am being extremely immoderate," he said to laughter from some 150 people who attended a forum titled "What is a Moderate Malaysia for Malaysians?" in Kuala Lumpur last night.

The Pota bill was passed at the Dewan Rakyat at 2.25am yesterday after almost 14 hours of debate.

The final vote taken favoured the government with 79 from Barisan Nasional supporting it and 60 from the opposition against it.

Pakatan won 89 seats in the last general election but now has 86 members of parliament after the sacking of Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim, losing the previously held DAP set in Teluk Intan and Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's conviction.

Azmi, in his heated tirade against both Pakatan and BN lawmakers, said the leadership of the country was "utterly useless".

"The leadership is absolutely, utterly useless. And when I say leadership, I mean all of them... Barisan and Pakatan."

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/where-were-you-academic-asks-pakatan-mps-after-anti-terror-bill-passed#sthash.mNg7PlAH.dpuf

MP Wong Chen's post in Facebook (shared by Bersih) explains:

'I now have a short breather after the hectic few days. So let me address the many, many comments on the matter of the absent Pakatan MPs on the POTA vote. The view of many is one of anger.

I don't accept excuses nor do I make them. Every MP is responsible and answerable to his constituents and the nation. Some were overseas and one had very serious health issues. Two were Menteri Besars and probably had official duties, but I am not sure what functions they have at 2.30 am. Some just chose not to turn up. Some felt they were not informed, eventhough Pakatan MPs have a dedicated whatsapp group.

All I have to say is let them answer for themselves, I am sure as an MP they can argue and justify their absence.

Could we have defeated BN if all 86 Pakatan MPs turned up? No, simply because UMNO BN will delay the process and call more of their MPs to attend Parliament. This is what they did in the 2012 budget bill. If we got all 86 Pakatan MPs to attend BN would delay the process and bring in 87.

Najib and Muhyiddin will get out of bed to vote. Maybe we should have forced him out of bed to make a point. But ultimately we would have lost.

On the fateful POTA vote night, they had 79 and we had 60. If you are mathematically inclined you will note that the turn up percentage for BN was 59% and Pakatan 70%. Credit where credit is due DAP had an outstanding 92% turnout, PKR 64% and PAS 48%.

The only conceivable way to stop POTA is thru a procedural matter in the standing order (like what we are now attempting for the Sedition Act). Another possibility is to get the BN backbenchers or BN component members such as MCA, MIC and Gerakan to support us against the bill. That will be asking for a miracle.

But in this country you won't get articles and headlines that say UMNO, MCA, MIC and Gerakan betrayed the nation for bringing back detention without trial.'

Before I read the above articles, my comment and some replies in Facebook:

Kok Son Ong: Let's be fair to PR. If there were more PR MPs do you think Speaker would have stopped the clock? BN is in control and they could decide whether or not any law is to be passed. Even if they failed this time they will do it again until successful.
Like · Reply · 13 · 19 hrs

Harriri Mohd Noor: What about solidarity? What happen to united we stand divided we fall?
Like · 16 hrs

Kok Son Ong: Without the numbers how many times can PR unite to stave off BN?
Like · 1 · 16 hrs

Davis Tan : That 86 monkeys should be there since we peoples give them salary to be there.
Like · 1 · 4 hrs

Kok Son Ong: Let them explain themselves for taking it lightly or some might have good personal reasons for their absence. We can certainly fault them for not giving a good fight before accepting defeat.

My comment in Facebook:

ISA was repealed by Najib with pride in projecting a liberal image. Sedition Act too was supposed to be repealed, but instead amended to more or less replace ISA! That's his style of transformation. Without popular votes in GE13, he claims the silent majority is supporting him. Now, with a more potent SA and a new POTA, I realise what he meant was the silenced majority will still support him! The man known for his elegant silence has been quietly strengthening the laws to his advantage. Now he is strong enough to face even Dr M and any opposition leaders who dare to cross him with further exposes. They have to tread very carefully so as not to fall foul under OSA, BAFIA or the amended RFA. It is going to be tested in law on confidentiality against transparency, with the case against Rafizi under BAFIA. The laws seem to favour the powers that be against disclosures of wrongdoings or corruption. Those engaged in exposes will find it hard to do so and risk being jailed in their fight for good governance. It is up to the voters to decide at the next GE whether to let our country continue to be ruled under unfair laws or biased institutions, and without transparency and good governance.

My comment in Facebook under Malaysiakini headline: Sedition Act provision can 'trap' opposition (by Khalid Samad):

It happened before: authorities enforced laws unreasonably and blatantly biased against opposition leaders and dissidents, which baited and elicited outrage, protests and supposedly seditious statements. But with the new laws and amendments, they can be jailed without legal recourse. Just imagine the ease by which BN could put away opposition MPs and ADUNs legally which would make elections meaningless and farcical. Let's hope this could be the tipping point for the voters to vote out BN and help a new government restore our faith in democracy and good governance.
Link

What GST boils down to

I was never in doubt that GST will be implemented. After all, BN passed the Bill into law, and short of a revolution, I did not think protests could stop its implementation on April 1.

Despite initial resistance and reluctance, enforcement will ensure registration of the bulk of those required to be registered. There might be teething problems but things will eventually sort themselves out, warts and all. There would be profiteers as well as those who collected in the name of GST and not remitting the due amounts to Customs. The general public should not be over concerned with the nitty gritty of GST collections which is the duty of those in Customs department. What concern us is how much it would affect our pockets and if necessary, boycott those traders who took advantage of us. Sometimes, ignorance is bliss. Let those who want to profiteer, do so at their own risks. By now, we should have been well conditioned to all kinds of imperfections in life, especially in Malaysia, where many criminals are still able to roam freely.

Initially, our government hinted at the possible introduction of GST (or VAT in some countries) with examples showing a rate of 4%. Nearer implementation date, the rate was increased to 6%. This, by itself, shows how easy it is for the government to revise the rate (even before implementation), once it is implemented.

GST is supposed to be a revenue earner for the government to cover for any future shortfall in oil revenues. Initially, we were told about the depleting oil reserves which could last less than 20 years. But our revenues fell very much short even before that, as a result of the dramatic drop in oil prices worldwide. Even our biggest corporation, Petronas, was so badly affected that it has to cut capex, opex and other substantial expenditures which in turn affected those companies who relied on it. Petronas used to contribute half of our national revenues.

GST has become so necessary for our dire financial situation that our government will not let its introduction be derailed by those anti-GST protests. Some of the leaders involved in the protests were arrested, under one pretext or other, but many believe that it had more to do with preventing the escalation of protests which might affect GST implementation.

In trying to explain to the public the advantages of GST (like getting more people to pay tax instead of the small percentage currently paying income taxes), literature and seminars were conducted for the benefit of business people likely to be affected, as well as the general public who will have to bear the brunt of its effects. The problem with using too simplistic examples is that the actual situations are so different that confusion prevailed on the first and subsequent days.

Each industry has its own problems in dealing with GST. Besides knowing whether it is exempted or not, it has to know what goods or services are zero-rated or standard-rated. For those dealing with a myriad of items, like sundry shops and hardware shops, it was a herculean task. If the shops are big enough like supermarkets and hypermarkets, they are financially and operationally ready to take on any changes in tax. But the poor marginal shops which are liable to be registered because their annual turnover exceed Rm500,000, it is more tempting to just close shop, which some actually did.

Consumers' first encounter with GST is likely to be at the coffee shop, sundry shop or supermarket. From feedback, prices rose across the board (rightly or wrongly) on the first day of GST. Some customers insisted on receipts to ensure they are correctly charged for the increase, but they fail to understand that for those businesses which are not required to be registered, they could not claim back any input GST and had to charge more as a result of the increased prices of raw materials and services. Yet, they can be penalised if they claimed the increase was because of GST! The other point is, how can they provide GST registration number if they are unregistered and how can they produce GST bills? So it was almost comical to see examples of traders forced to scribble a note to show the GST portion charged!

 

Courtesy of Leonard DCruz in FB

The other common confusion was the old Sales and Service Tax which was replaced by GST, as well as the old Service Tax (10%) and Government Tax (6%) charged by restaurants and fast food outlets. Most people confused the service tax charged on professional service with the service tax charged in restaurants which are meant to be for their waiting service. It has been explained that restaurants are allowed to impose 10% ST because Malaysians are poor tippers! In trying to sooth those who complained, a minister actually said that the ST is optional and customers can choose whether to pay or not. But I can imagine the argument between customer and waiter at the time of settling the bill.

I wonder if those in charge of GST implementation had sought advice from other countries which have implemented VAT or GST (like UK which had a long history, or Australia which introduced GST only a few years ago). I am sure we should have been able to avoid some basic problems by learning from mistakes of others.

If only we were not desperate for revenues... we could have reduced the number of items taxable and slowly increase them when the people are familiar with the tax. For example, most people complained about medical service and drugs which are taxable in the private sector. The list is very long and it seems those listed represent only 25% of all known drugs! Just imagine the confusion as a result of having to check against the list. There will be mistakes, deliberate or otherwise. How we wish all medical service and drugs are exempted or zero-rated instead! But like everything else, if there are more items taxable mean so much more revenues for the government. How can we expect our desperate government to miss the chance of collecting such huge amounts?

If there is going to be a backlash from GST, it would be from the lower income groups which form the bulk of those badly affected. Whatever benefits from BR1M will be negated by the increase in prices of essential goods and services.

To the middle income groups, they can still afford the luxury of choice as explained in this blogsite:
Pay Your Good Hawkers Whatever They Want
 http://malaysiafinance.blogspot.com/2015/04/pay-your-good-hawkers-whatever-they-want.html

To the super rich, which include Umnoputras and well heeled ministers, they are so out of touch with the common people that they think people could be fooled by unrealistic Rm1 chicken and impractical enforcements to ensure prices are controlled. The reality is more like 'take it or leave it'. How many times can we complain if traders refused to sell at controlled prices?
Link

How permanent is a PR status?

My wife went to UK in 1968 and was given Permanent Resident status after a few years. I went in 1973 and when I married her in 1976, I was given PR status by virtue of our marital status. Till today, I admire the British for their sex equality laws, something wanting in our own country. A number of my friends who married foreigners, migrated simply because of the periodic hassle at the immigration department.

There was a period when we used to hear of friends or relatives having to visit UK or Australia, to 'renew' their PR status! Soon, UK amended their law on this, and any UKPR leaving the country must return within 6 months, and had to stay for a minimum of 2 years, otherwise, they would lose their PR status. Of course, since then, the relevant law would have been amended many times and I am not sure about current requirements.

For those already in employment or business, it is unlikely they could meet those conditions. Even then, we had concluded that the most important seems to be money: if anyone has plenty of it, almost all countries would welcome him or her.

There was a time when many Malaysians, including wealthy ones, who applied and maintained their PR status in Australia (to the extent of actually living there for 6 months or whatever period required) just so that their children could benefit from the free university education then.

A few days ago, at breakfast, my regular 'kaki' mentioned about his daughter's Singapore PR status and seem to think the PR status is permanent and up to her to go back and work at any time in the future. I told him that offhand I think it is not correct, because PR is logically meant for those working in Singapore and once you are out for a number of years, you cannot claim you are a permanent resident for a fact, can you?

Back home, I searched on Singapore's PR status and was not disappointed with the information (in support of my view), though my friend would be disappointed with his wrong perception and the fact that his daughter probably lost her PR status already.
'Overview

A valid Re-Entry Permit (REP) is necessary whenever a Singapore Permanent Resident (SPR) wishes to travel out of Singapore. It will enable the Permanent Resident to retain his/her SPR status while away from Singapore.

A SPR who remains outside Singapore without a valid REP will lose his/her SPR status.'

Source:
http://www.ica.gov.sg/page.aspx?pageid=152
Actually, based on the number of Malaysians who are working in Singapore and the ease they obtained SPR status even now, my friend should not fret over it. Singapore still need foreign workers and Malaysians are particularly welcome.
Link

Kelantan: State government survey finds 90% in Kelantan want hudud... but are you convinced?

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/state-government-survey-finds-90-in-kelantan-want-hudud#sthash.ygxOvtRd.dpuf

Meanwhile political scientist, Dr Wong Chin Huat explains succinctly the fallacy of such a claim:

'How does Kelantan state government find 90% of support for its Syariah Criminal Code? Here is a simple methodological analysis.

***

Teacher: Raise your hand if you are absent.
Teacher: Great, 100% attendance!

Statistician: 100% self-selection bias.

***

PAS Kelantan: Reply to our sms whether you agree with Syariah Criminal Code
156,138 surveyed.
9,654 responded. (response rate: 6.18%)
8,940 accepted. ("acceptance rate": 92.60%)
8,198 support. (support rate: 91.70%)
PAS Kelantan: yeah, 91.70% support Hudud!

Hold on, here are more details:

Question 1:
"After 20 years the Shariah Criminal Code (hudud) is going to become a reality. Agree/Disagree?" Surveyed: 77,382
Responded: 5,395
Accepted: 5,284

Question 2:
"To ensure that the Shariah Criminal Code (hudud) is implemented, it is necessary to work with the federal government. Agree/Disagree?"
Surveyed: 78,756
Responded: 4,259
Accepted: 3,656

Here is the arithmetic:
5,395+4,259 = 9,654
5,284+3,656 = 8,940

So
1. Can respondents from two different surveys be added together to produce a single percentage?
2. Why is there not a question asking "Do you support the Syariah Criminal Code?"
3. Why are 111 questions to Question 1 and 603 responses to Question 2 "unaccepted"? May we have some samples of the rejected responses?'
Link