There is the large endless hole in between the abounding as good as the poor. And this endless hole will go upon to grow. The abounding will turn richer as good as the bad will turn poorer. Not only in Malaysia yet all over the world.
There have been most reasons since the endless hole cannot be simply bridged.
One of the categorical reasons is which the abounding have been "louder" than the poor. (By rich, we am additionally including the middle class, whatever which means)
The abounding (and the middle class), by trait of being improved educated, carrying improved entrance to media, being closer to the corridors of power, have been means to articulate as good as hold up causes which have been dear to them. Just look during all the new "causes" which has attracted critical activist as good as media courtesy "Pakatan Rakyat", Lynas, GST, press freedom, PJ Local Plan, miss of Indonesian maids, MRT alignment, etc. These have been all civic as good as middle-class issues [I am not saying they have been not important. They are]. These issues sow the media as good as capture courtesy of many. Governments always react to these. As the result, jagged volume of time as good as resources have been committed to civic as good as rich/middle-class causes. Because they have been "louder", it creates the fake impression which these have been the most serious/urgent problems in the country.
These "loud" fake impressions have critical impacts upon resource allocation. By sketch courtesy upon civic as good as middle c! ategory issues, they inadvertently force the supervision to outlay some-more time as good as resources here thereby neglecting critical farming as good as bad issues.
Why doesn't the critical complaint of miss of irrigation water in the paddy fields in Kelantan as good as Kedah sow the newspapers as good as online portals? Why aren't there most activists fighting for the Orang Asli, the most marginalised community in the country. Why aren't there people championing the rubber smallholders who have been badly influenced by the low rubber price. Why do not activists who have been fighting for orang utan as good as elephants additionally hold up the oil palm smallholders who humour critical economic problems. The estate workers when was the final time their problems made it to the newspapers?. The beggarly living conditions of the bad in Sabah, Sarawak, Kelantan as good as Kedah frequency get any attention. 20,000 fishermen in Sabah live in misery nonetheless their voices have been never heard.
The bad have been mostly voiceless. The abounding have been damn loud.
The category order along the Kelang Valley MRT is the great example. The 50 km line runs by both abounding (TTDI, Damansara) as good as poorer (Kajang, Cheras) areas. The issues as good as impacts have been the same. Yet, 90% of the media reports have been about the impacts during Taman Tun, Kota Damansara as good as Bukit Bintang. These have been abounding people who have great entrance to media as good as politicians. Hardly anyone mentions the problems in Cheras as good as Kajang (mostly poorer, Malay neighbourhoods). It is as yet it is okay for poorer people to remove their land yet the supervision must look ! after th e rich. [I am sureif we verbalise to SPAD or MRTCo, we will get to listen to about the number of Datuks as good as Tan Sris who have exerted all sorts of pressure to obstruct the fixing away their homes. The bad do not have which influence]
The PTPTN is another classic example. University students have been the absolved lot (not necessarily rich, yet privileged). we contend absolved since 80% of the youths do not even get to go to universities. They go to vocational schools or find any jobs which come by. Their challenges have been distant greater, their salaries distant reduce as good as their lives some-more difficult. The university students during slightest get the aloft preparation as good as should turn means to get improved paying jobs as good as lead improved lives than the non-graduates. As we would have noticed, the volume of time committed to the "problem" of the absolved is really high. The problems of the under-privileged non-graduates frequency capture attention.
These have been only some examples where the issues of the abounding (and middle class) get some-more than their fair share of attention. There have been most some-more cases.
The sad thing is the abounding (and the middle class) mostly action as if they have been the deprived or impecunious lot. They complain, they moan, they whine, they bitch as yet their complaint is the most worthy of supervision attention. Harmless as it might seem, this action diverts critical resources away from the poor.
Don't get me wrong. we am not saying the problems of the abounding as good as! middle have been not important. They are. The abounding as good as the middle class, only like everybody else, have the right to voice their grievances. Unfortunately, since they have been "louder", their problems get larger courtesy than those of the poor. Poor people's problems have been mostly unattended.
The abounding (and the middle class), by trait of being improved educated, carrying improved entrance to media, being closer to the corridors of power, have been means to articulate as good as hold up causes which have been dear to them. These issues sow the media as good as capture courtesy of many. Governments always react to these. By sketch courtesy upon civic as good as middle category issues, they inadvertently force the supervision to outlay some-more time as good as resources here thereby neglecting other critical farming as good as bad issues.
As we have said earlier, the abounding being louder is just one of the most reasons since the order in between the abounding as good as the bad will not simply be bridged.
BTW, nobody thinks themselves as rich. Surveys have already been finished in most countries. The fellow who earns $ 100,000 the year does not consider he is abounding yet will contend which his neighbour who earns $ 200,000 the year is rich. The neighbourwho earns $ 200,000 the year does not additionally consider he is abounding yet will contend which his lawyer who earns $ 300,000 the year is rich. To the waiter who earns $ 24,000 the year, which fellow who earns $ 100,000 the year is filthy rich. So be clever when we credit the abounding of anything - we might be the single of them.Amaran kitar semula
I have posted the identical square the few mon! ths ago. But somehow felt it is an appropriate time to repost it. Read More @ Source
More Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus |
Courtesy of Bonology.com Politically Incorrect Buzz & Buzz
No comments:
Post a Comment