Malaysia is Only a Tiger Cub?

An economist suggested Malaysia was only a “little tiger” or “little dragon” but not an “Asian Tiger”. Madeline Berma was of the view that only four Asian Tigers could be recognised – Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore and Hong Kong.

She is partly right when growth rates dipped after the Asian Financial Crisis. In addition, income inequalities have widened within racial groups rather than between racial groups. If more than 5.5 million workers (of a total of 11 million) earn less than RM1,900 per month then the “Tiger” is still a cub. This stunted growth is because of structural issues. If politicians keep harping on race and religion, should we expect private sector to invest in the country or overseas?

On Saturday (30 March 2019), M. Shanmugam tried to relate the yawning remuneration gap between Government-linked banks and privately-owned ones. The basic salaries of CEOs in GLC banks were above RM2.5 million per annum while that of Public Bank or Hong Leong Bank was above RM5.0 million for key executives/directors. The key point “missed” is what is the gap between the lowest paid staff and the CEO of that institution – is it 20 times or 200 times (or more!)? Income inequalities “brake” the growth proposition as much as business environment impacted by political shenanigans.

For any cub (or child) to grow to its full potential, constraints and hamstrings have to be removed. Will PH have the courage to do so?

References:

1.  Malaysia was never an Asian Tiger, say economist, Ainaa Aiman and Noel Wong, 1 April 2019, https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com

2. Yawning chasm between GLC and non-GLC bank CEOs, M. Shanmugam, The Star, 30 March 2019.