I’m sure the public is well aware of statistics on income according to races as revealed in Mid Term review of 9th Malaysian Plan. Specifically the average income for Malays and Indians were listed as below:
- Bumiputera’s mean income
increased by 5.2% to RM3,156 in 2007 from RM2,711 in 2004. - Indians’ income rose 3.2% to RM3,799 from RM3.456
That means the Indians on average earned 20 percent more than the Bumiputras in 2007 (RM3,799 versus RM3,156). The acceleration rate is 5.2 percent for Bumiputra against 3.2% for Bumiputras. If this continues, its possible that in next 5 years, the Bumiputras will earn more than the Indians, on average.
I’ve always asking why the term Bumiputra (and not Malay) is used. What would the statistics be like?
Thanks to MP Charles Santiago’s question in the Parliament, we get more details as below. It makes me think why those fellows in MIC never asked for such details before in the last decade (at least to my knowledge).
The statement and tables below show that the Malays in Peninsular earned RM3,311 on average in 2007 while those in Sarawak Rm3,503 and Sabah RM3,089. That means it doesn’t a genius to know that actual poverty is among the real Bumiputras (averagebetween RM2,063 and RM2,857). Orang Asli in Peninsular Malaysia are the worst with income around RM1,397.
That means, in 2007 the Indians earn on average only 14 percent more than Malays in Peninsular Malaysia (Its a fairer comparison as most Indians live in the Peninsular). Given the benefits and privileges the Malays get, is it fair to say that Indians are doing better than Malays? Shouldn’t the non-privileged communities be given handicap?
Reply on Average Income Breakdown
Reply on Average Income Breakdown 2