As a young man living abroad, I chose to return to Sri Lanka. People ask me if I came back to ‘serve’ Sri Lanka or whatever, but it’s nothing so noble. I came back because I saw a better future in Sri Lanka than anywhere else in the world. Ranil was building that future from 2001-2003, and I came back because of him. This country has been at war my entire life, and he ended it. This country was been mired in backwards economic policies while India and China charged ahead, but Ranil set Sri Lanka on a pace to shine. My parents gave me every opportunity abroad, but I chose Sri Lanka because of Ranil. He was leading the country to a great and prosperous future, and I want him back. I honestly feel like the future I want to build here depends on it, and I believe that this election will make or break my generation.
My parents had to deal with terrorism, police states, ration cards and worse. My whole life all I ever heard from Sri Lanka was bomb blasts. I don’t want that. I just want to make a living and see more people get on the Internet and that’s all. For years Sri Lankan politicians have let people go to bed with hate for dinner and national dress to keep them warm. That’s all Mahinda and the JVP offer me. Ranil, on the other hand, began delivering a kick-ass Sri Lanka in 2001. I want him to continue. That’s why I support Ranil.
jaya wewa! :)
Dude, with the recent (and might I say stupid) comments by Navin Dissanyake and Milinda Moragoda, do you actually think the LTTE will be willing to sit down to talks? They were just told that the former regime just orchestrated the Karuna split. I mean, just how STUPID can you get? Moragoda and Dissanayake should be removed, and then given the prize for being the biggest douches in the world!
I agree with you, Ranil is the better candidate, whichever way you look at it.
Things are not looking good for him atthe moment, though, MR may win because of the LTTE boycott inthe North. There is a strange irony to this, Mahinda being supported by extremists on all sides.
It will be a black day if he wins.
indeed an irony…
it’s also similar to a war cry..
i just feel betrayed.. after all the political sacrifices and fending off he did for the People of the North & East.. this is just insane.
hpefully though sanity will prevail in the rest of the island.. and Ranil will be able to pull it off
yeah, it doesn’t look good. I think turnout was low in Colombo as well.
whatever happens ltte and those who followed it (in cleared areas) will get what they deserve.
what milinda and navin said was known long before. ltte knew that very well. they just highlighted that to justify the boycott, as if anybody will get fooled.
ltte and it’s followers showed they wanted war and they will probably get it.
did you see the kilinochchi result 1 vote, yes, that is right one vote ot of 89,454 registered!. and what’s more they took 12 hours to count it.
this would really be funny if it is not disgusting.
Hehhe… My poor kitties ;-)
What happened to all your predictions, statistics and all that? LMBFAO
Well I sure hope all the UNP bootlickers don’t end up with shat on their faces.
sinhala buddhist reced by ltte?
btw it ain’t over until election commissioner sings .
Well boys, its all over now.
The lunatics are now in charge of the asylum.
election commsioner is still not singing
Well, it’s official. Mahinda has won with an 186,327 majority……eeerr….I guess the appropriate thing to say here is, that we live in hope…………….
Also hope ALL YOU JVP MOTHERFUCKERS ROT IN HELL!!!!!!!!
don’t forget the ltte and its followers in cleared areas, they will soon, (much sooner) than jvp will get what they deserve . they had a chance to choose peace and refused, so they should get war and suffering as they wanted.
and do not forget mahinda went over 50% by about 29000 only. if got less we wold be counting the second preferances
my apologies for typos
Know about Real Ranil
Read Dr. Micheals Letter to ranil
Well, lets see what will be delivered.
On Dr Michael Fernando’s letter, the economic policies advocated in the chintanaya weretried between 1956-1965 and 1970-77.
They did not work. Neither have they worked in North Korea, Cuba, Zimbabwe or Burma, about the only other countries left that are clinging to socialism.
Mr Jack Point,
What close economic policies are you talking about? Why do you assume an economy that is modeled on the lines of India, China (Giants in Asia, and G.W. Bush had visited China 3 times now!! signifies its importance in the present context.) to be a close economy??? Come on mate, surely there is no such Economy as a close economy or open economy anywhere in the world>>>>>>>Every country has a mixed features of both forms, after all if there are policies which are detrimental to growth or does’t contribute to development as expected, you need to do away with it.
Whats wrong developing your agricultural sectors and promoting participation of local business sector? It does’t mean that Foreign Direct Investments are discouraged? Does it mean that Imports are stopped ? Does it mean that International schools are asked to shut down? From where on earth are these people imagining things!!!
Nowhere it is said that Socialism will take place>>>>>>>Its simply another way of saying, that you should promote domestic economy more, as ours is a small country and we don’t have a huge market base as India or China.
We need to adopt whats suitable to us, rather than embrasing anything unsuitable……Just look at India and China…..there are a lot Foreign Capital in certain sectors………..but there are restrictions on areas most vital and essential public services. Di- investment of certain public sectors cannot be done immediately!!
Read the following (Privatisation in India)http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/br/2002/02/26/stories/2002022600190400.htm
(Privatisation in China)http://mondediplo.com/1997/11/china
It seems , you have to do it methodically and select sectors which will not have a major impact immediately on the domestic economy…(Country like Sri Lanka)
Look at the Malaysian privatisation process (Now compare it to Sathosa………..Where is Sathosa today? )
Privatisation is neither bad or very good……One has to do it carefully to get maximum benifit
Privatisation doesn’t mean you sell every national assets to Mudalalis (Hingurana Sugar, Ruhunu Cement, Ceylon Fertiliser Corp, CWE, Veyangoda Textiles) Where are the benifits expected ??(Practically all are closed!!!)
Then there are good privatisations such as (Sri Lanka Telecom)
There are pros and cons of it……Its how you do it, how you select the final buyers(reputable companies vs fradulent Mudalalis), What strategic sectors to privatise initially etc>> (This is how Malaysia, China, India, does things)
Don’t get into conclusions by use of words such as (Closed, Open, Balanced) Just look at the context in which these words are used…..after all even Cuba has Foreign Capital..(Not necessarily US Capital)….there is no such economy as closed or open in its pure form!!! China has a favourable trade surplus many times against the US…..Now what is the Chinese economic system??? Is it pure communism or pure capitalism?…….How about India?? Is it a open economy??? or a pure closed economy?……Why do you think all American Multinationals, British companies and European companies set up their business in China and India? (India under Congress party has Maxist allies!, but do they object to anything good!…..then China as we all know is adopting Maxist policies with reforms coming in)
One can twist simple words and imagine things or make its own interpretations to suit , its own political agendas or ideologies!!!
But the voters are wiser now……You have to speak to their minds, rather than their stomachs……Pls remember modern socialists are not who advocate policies adopted in Russia or North Korea, Cuba in the early 1970″s….its all gone…….The socialists today are a new liberal lot! …..They have to play a game to balance their voter base expectations by using certain terminologies………but its only words!!!………..All maxists adopt and acknowledge the impact of globalization…..
So, we should not worry about their presence……..the secret is you have to manage them….After all you need them to win elections! but it does’t mean that they will oppose anything benificial to people!!…….
Mahind ahas categorically ruled out all privatisations. They are trying bring other parts of the state sector back from the dead.
He wants to create jobs by expanding the state sector.
We are currently more open than India. India was on the path to liberalising until the communists got into power and have blocked everything Manmohan Singh has tried to do. This is what the JVP wants here-to stop further liberalisation. China is liberalising.
Everybody else is on the path to greater liberalisation, Mahinda Chintanaya wants less.
Mr Jack Point,
Well why should you liberalise everything we got!! Surely ours is a poor country and the state need to support a certain section of the people. There are sectors to liberalise, surely you know that. Just because others do it, You can’t simply allow all our assets to be plundered by Mudhalalis!! We cannot sell our assets under the guise of liberalisation to buyers, who are promoted by the corrupt politicians!
Liberalisation also does’t mean that you sell your assets en block!…..You can promote private participation to a certain extent on select sectors, where growth is anticipated. (Pls read my previous posting)
Well talking about Mahinda Chintanaya…it is better than the UNP manifesto..(Both contains false promises, surely we all know that)…as the promises are not as absurd as the UNP…(Giving a million jobs, elimination of hunger by providing Maharajas ” Anchor brand Milk powder” or saying Rs 500 Million is allocated to eliminate hunger(When they are not even in power…just pure fantasy) etc………..promises should be realistic isn’t it?
Manifestos may spell a plan for the future, but in practice there will be privatisation………pls note opening for private participation and selling all the assets for a song is vastly different!!! (Maxist oppose the latter)…..Remember it is only a slogan for the hardline followers of the party……….surely you know…. It doesn’t mean total opposition to privatisation. I quite agree with you, that we have to move forward….but it doesn’t mean you blindly adopt whats suitable to other countries under different economic conditions here.
An efficient state sector is essential as well as a vibrant private sector! Let there be competion and why should we try our level best to cripple the state sector and promote the private sector? To whose interest are we hell bent on preaching abouit the need to privatise the state sector?
What happened when there was bus strikes recently? Who came to rescue of millions of commuters stranded (limited fleet of SLTB buses)….How come that the bus operators, dictate terms to the law enforcement authorities (to do away with traffic fines etc) and the transport authority , when price hikes are negotiated?
When the prices are soaring due to the direct impact of the oil crisis, how come that the private traders increase the prices in a more than proportionate increase? Why aren’t benifits of reduction of VAT , not passed to the consumer?…Had the CWE (Completely destroyed by the UNP….An enterprise that was selling goods at reasonable prices to the common man of this country) was in operation, at least people would have had some relief…………But where was the intended benifits of privatisation????
How come that the farmers have to pay high prices for fertilizer , for the Privatised Fertiliser sector…..(It was to a large extent was under the state control) Where are the intended benifits?
What has happened to the paddy marketing board, where are the storage facilities for the farmers???(It was sold to Mudhalalis…all under the name of privatisation)
How about the Milco? Are the prices cheaper or is there an adequate supply for the consumer?
How about the Cement corporation??? Are the cement prices cheaper?????
My dear Mr jack Point, Privatisation is healthy if there is competion(Telecom Sector, Insurance)….but if you sell all what we have to the private sector and paralyze the state sector….then there will be a monopolistic situation>>>>>>>>How about Shell gas?
Yes I agree with you that privatisation should be encouraged, where capital inflow and technology is welcome,but after careful scrutiny and selection of reputable sound companies, who have the capacities and experince to carry out similar businesses. In Sri Lanka its a case of selling the assets and the enterprises are closed down!!!! Classic case CWE, Hingurana Sugar, Veyangoda Textiles, Ruhunu Cement etc (Majority of the buyers of these institutions were local corrupt big Mudhalalis, who owed millions to the state banks and who has got Tax Concessions from the UNP)…. Is this the privatisation you are talking about! Ohh Come on now!……..
Our per capita is low and there should be a phrased privatisation at a much latter stage, if it enable us to reach the benifits intended. But right now , it cannot be done by adopting a blanket policy of privatisation.
Let the state sector flourish and compete with the private sector, and we stands to benifit! There is absolutely nothing wrong with it. Please note the Privatisation process of other countries> They have not sold enbloc all the assets to political croonies, like the UNP .
Just because a woman goes in a bikini in Florida beach, We cannot do that in Colombo. Its suits them, under different cultural settings!! We cannot embrace that in toto…….We have to modify that make it adopt to our requirements…
Ours is a small economy and the majority of the people are living below the poverty line…….So you cannot cripple the state sector to promote private investments, just like that……..It has to be done in a planned manner.
I was simply referring to what you said. You mentioned China, India, Malaysia, I told you what is happening there.
They are growing because they are liberalising. India from the 1990’s (Manmohan’s Singh’s first steps in liberalising and China( from 1978 after Deng started liberalising). The communists in power now (allied to Congress) are blocking Singh’s other reforms at every turn, which is what we fear with the new government.
You mentioned Malaysia. What did Mahthir Mohamed say when he came to Sri Lanka this year? He said that teh Malaysian experience was that they could not create enough jobs in agriculture.
Quote:
“In Colombo in 2005 Mahathir Mohamed said that in Malaysia he had based policy on the idea that one acre of land could provide an income to one farmer but if manufacturing industry was chosen, the same acre would provide incomes to 500 workers.”
Source:
http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2005/11/06/fea36.html
You said
“that you should promote domestic economy more, as ours is a small country and we don’t have a huge market base as India or China.” I think you need to look outside your home market when you are playing in a relatively small domestic economy.
Mr Jack Point,
I do agree with you on one point, that is it should not be opposed in total at all times. But that also does’t mean that you should embrace privatisation with open arms and sell profitable ventures for a mere sum (Under valuation of net assets) to select party henchmen and corrupt business houses/inviduals, who will discontinue the operations and whose only interest is to discontinue the newly aquired Corparation and sell the assets at a much higher value and obtain capital profits!!!!………This is the type of privatisation taking place in Sri Lanka!!!…..(Pls read my previous posts to find out the ventures that were sold like this and are closed down)
Now where were the intended benifits of privatisation??? Did the consumers get efficient and quality service? How about the continuity of these enterprises?…….Did the objectives of privatisations have been achived?…Can the consumers get the same goods at a lesser competive price?
If the answers to the above are negative, then why should you privatise????………Just because IMF wants it opened as a pre condition for granting aid??
If the service and quality improves and a fair competive price is given to the consumers, then there is nothing wrong in liberalisation? But in the Sri Lankan context had that been achived in the past????…..Then why privatisation?
You cannot compare the Malaysian experince with ours. Besides the Malaysian government has a controlling stake in most privatised ventures indirectly by way of government owned private companies. There is rule of law and tranperency in their dealings. There is a very vibrant agriculture sector in rest of Malaysia(If you go out of KL, towards
Rice cultivation is the major food crop enterprise but priority agricultural systems throughout Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak are based on oil palm, rubber and coconut. There are over 2.8 M ha of oil palm, 1.8 M ha of rubber (85% on Peninsular Malaysia) and approximately 1.0 M ha of coconut, together covering almost 60% of the total agricultural land in Malaysia. In addition, there are 163,000 ha under fruit orchards, 34% of which are durian. Smallholdings, of which the majority are
Did the objectives of privatisations have been achived?– yes. as long as the market operates, some will fold and others will thrive. what is important is that, it is the market that decides, not the government. as such all privatizations achieve their most basic goal.
Absolutely notat all times !!! Its the privatisation of state Enterprises (Corrupt business deals) that had happened in Sri Lanka. Before you can talk of buzz words and economic jargon and been higly taken up with theories, just ask the question ” If it was succesful, where were the intended benifits ? Be specific …..NAME IT WITH EXAMPLES…….WHAT ARE THE (State owned) enterprises since privatisation ,that have been able to deliver quality goods and services at efficient service levels, at effordable or competitive prices? Name it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In order to refresh your mind, how about starting with the following:
Ruhunu Cement (Sold to since closed by Yashoda Group, with billions of debt unpaid the state banks!!!!)
Hingurarana Sugar
CWE (Yes gentleman what has happened to CWE NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
Thulhiriya Textiles
Milco
Ceylon Fertiliser Corporation
Cement Corporation
CTB
and a host of closed down enterprises
Only Telecom, Distilleries, Insurance is functioning properly. There are a few others like the Steel corporation and Salt Corp , JEDB which functions satisfactorily.
You get a few good privatisations and a host of failed bad privatisations in Sri Lanka. You should not privatise for the sake of privatisation to appease your political fund contributors and corrupt Mudhalalis
It is crystal clear that privatisation doesn’t work all the times at all sectors. There are sectors which should remain with state ownership and you can allow private participation to a certain extent, by way of inflow of capital and technology, Management practices etc. But the state should have the ultimate control on enterprises of national importance and those which will have a direct impact on the lives of common man!! Such enterprises can never be allowed to privatise fully in the near distant future. Every attempt must be made to improve the efficiency of these enterprises by eliminating wste and corruption and intervention of politicians etc…….Yes the management can be privatised with a certain degree of freedom to take business decisions. But the crucial question of control of ownership should be retained even to the minimum of 51%. This is the first phrase of the process…..and depending on the results of the outcome after some years, partial privatisation of the government owned stake can chould be considered.
This is how its been done in other countries!!
Privatisation not at all times and certainly not in the way its done in Sri Lanka (Selling of valuable State assets for a mere sum to selected , corrupt inviduals as a favour for services rendered by way of contributions towards election campaigns !!! as a gesture of gratitude!!!!!)
Theories and mechanics of market operations doesn’t apply in all situations and in all countries with its local political, social and economic structures.One should not attempt to embrace it with own arms, nor should you reject it in total!!!
If it was succesful, where were the intended benifits ? Be specific …..NAME IT WITH EXAMPLES…….WHAT ARE THE (State owned) enterprises since privatisation ,that have been able to deliver quality goods and services at efficient service levels, at effordable or competitive prices?
your second question is wrong and does not flow from the first . intended benefits of privatization is not to ‘deliver quality goods and services at efficient service levels, at affordable or competitive prices’, intended benefit of privatizations is to get government out of unnecessary interference in the economy, and that benefit is always delivered by every privatization however it is carried out.
But the state should have the ultimate control on enterprises of national importance and those which will have a direct impact on the lives of common man– why? may i ask? to allow politicians to stuff them with their poster pasting boys?
Every attempt must be made to improve the efficiency of these enterprises by eliminating waste and corruption and intervention of politicians etc – dream on.:-) have you ever seen a government institution improving efficiency or getting rid of political interference or ‘deliver quality goods and services at affordable or competitive prices to common man’ for that matter. governments by nature are inefficient and political.
This is how its been done in other countries!! – countries with crony capitalism you mean. only singapore was ever successful in caring out such a strategy as yo describe. but there also ‘enterprises’ still under partial government ownership through it’s arms length holding co. are quite random and have not much ‘direct impact on the lives of common man’. it was more an attempt at government’s investment portfolio management than an attempt at social justice. if you have any other examples please state.
privatizations and liberalizations will continue in sri lanka whatever the government in power, and they will work as they have done in the past , it simply doesn’t matter whether they are corrupt or not.
learn to live in the free market or depart.
btw some of your examples of failed privatizations are doing rather well profitwise. pl get real facts before you post.
The governments of 1956-1965 and 1970-77 followed a policy of state investment.
They started dozens of state corporations, the tyre corporation, the cement corporation, the salt corporation, the timber corporation, the ceramics corporation amongst others.
They also went and nationalised the estates to form the JEDB, nationalised the private oil companies to form the petroleum corporation took over land, houses, everything.
AT the end of 1977, unemployment was 25%, infrastructure was crumbling, living standards hardly changed in quarter of a century. Food was rationed we were growing vegetables in the garden to eat (and cultivation was being taught in school so that we could improve further) When I went to school in 1974, the following were considered luxuries
1. An electric fan
2. A fridge
3. A radio.
Going abroad, what with exit visas (you needed a permit to leave the country-to save foreign exchange), an exchange allowance of about US$2 was unheard of.
Relatives from overseas would bring toiletries, shampoo, soap, perfume, alcohol, as well as chocolates, all luxuries)
In some ways it was almost idyllic, life was simple and we (thanks to my fathers contacts) were reasonably ok but perhaps I as a child was insulated from the unending drudgery that this limited life
The policy did not succeed in creating jobs, reducing poverty or increasing wealth. It only sent the best and brightest people overseas. (They even had to pass an act of parliament 1971 – requiring compulsory public service for graduates-people were leaving so fast – and that was before politicisation ruined the universities – now we generate thousands of graduates that no one seems to want)
1 & half years iof chinthana rule…..what a sad story.all what is predicted above have become true and srilanka is in a hell hole…
Priyalal, Are you in a different world where time passes bit slow?
http://indi.ca/2010/07/optics-wimal-vs-ranil/#comment-240131
now this is what we call a 180
haio haio…..the comments are really funny now