Ageson coming price hit RM3 is a normal thing.....stay tune

Abba84 The director ceo told the edge the 27 billion wud give Ageson around 25% profit..my clculation..25%>6 billion
>400 million a year.Qtrly profit>$100 million.
To me tis massive all alone on sand business.!
08/06/2020 4:18 PM

Americans have superior firepower. However they failed to contain their foes in Vietnam, afghanistan, iraq, syria, Lybia.........
Is America a paper tiger? lol

Every step by step +0.05 i earn 10k :D

QR report within 3 days.......seems like not bad this quarter!

cantik

“It would be better called a relief programme for small and medium-sized enterprises and households,” he said.
The coronavirus outbreak has also hit China’s jobs market, with the official surveyed urban unemployment rate standing at 6.0 per cent in April, implying that nearly 30 million Chinese workers are now unemployed.
Cai admitted that many migrant workers were not included in the official unemployment figure, as they have been forced to stay at home because of the coronavirus restrictions.
“A fundamental solution is to allow more rural migrant workers to settle in cities and be included into the urban social security system,” he added.

International supply chains are so complicated that China’s dominance will not be changed overnight, Cai said. China still enjoys advantages in terms of both the size and skill of its labour force, while it has the room and potential to improve its technological innovation. China’s home market of 1.4 billion people can also sustain its development path, he added.
“First we must do our own things well, because our [growth] potential has not yet been fully realised,” the economist added.
Although a large part of Beijing’s 3.6 trillion yuan (US$503 billion) economic stimulus plan announced last week will be used to fund new infrastructure spending, Cai said the new construction drive was small in comparison to the economic rescue package adopted in 2008 in response to the global financial crisis.

Cai’s view is representative of a growing consensus in Beijing policymaking circles that, whether China likes it or not, Washington is becoming an adversary and so China has to cut its reliance on the US.
China has been labelled by the Trump administration as a “strategic competitor” since early 2018. The subsequent trade war, the creation of an entity list that bars US-made hardware and software sales to Chinese technology heavyweights without special US government permission and incentives to lure American manufacturers to move production away from China, have already pushed the US down to third among China’s largest export destinations.
In the new international context, China’s policies will focus more on pushing its own companies and products to compete in global markets, Cai said.
“Previously opening-up was interpreted as being solely related to the domestic market. Not any more. Instead, our enterprises, innovations and products need to go out and prove themselves in international markets – that’s a new opening-up,” he said.

Xi said over the weekend that the domestic market “will play a dominant role” for China going forward, signalling a shift from an export-led growth model to a new one that relies more on the domestic market.
“Xi said the world is witnessing changes unseen in the past 100 years, and the core of these changes is that the centre of gravity is moving from the West to East,” Cai added. “It is not just about China’s rise, but also other changes – the share of developing countries in the global economy and their voices in global governance are rising.
“The US will [attempt to] contain China’s rise … it’s something that China can’t change. The strong motive to contain China will continue into future administrations [beyond US President Donald Trump].”

Cai is an expert in Chinese labour economics and one of the top architects of China’s economic policies. He is an academic adviser to the Chinese Economist 50 Forum, a pro-reform think tank co-founded by Vice-Premier Liu He, the top economic aide to President Xi Jinping.

China eyes ‘diversified’ relations as US becomes increasingly hostile, Beijing economic adviser says
Cai Fang is a vice-president of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and an academic adviser to the Chinese Economist 50 Forum
The US-China trade war, the US entity list and the fallout from the coronavirus outbreak have accelerated the decoupling of the world’s two largest economies

China will seek “more diversified” external relations during a period when “globalisation is at a low ebb” to be able to thrive in a world where the United States is becoming increasingly hostile, according to a senior adviser to the Chinese leadership.
Maintaining China’s place in the global supply chain will be a key theme for Beijing after the coronavirus, especially since Washington is becoming more aggressive in containing China’s rise, Cai Fang, a vice-president of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, a major state-funded think tank, told the South China Morning Post.
“There are many things we can do … we need to talk with the Americans while we struggle against them,” Cai said on Wednesday. “And we should not put all our eggs in one basket.
“We’ll seek more diversified international cooperation and industrial supply chains. The faster the US seeks decoupling, the quicker China will embrace the trend.”

On the way.....

It’s not the first time India has denied contact between the two leaders.
In July, Trump said Modi had asked him to intervene in India and Pakistan’s decades-long dispute over Kashmir. Again, India denied any such conversation took place.
India and China are locked in a border stand-off, after several rounds of talks failed to ease tensions between the nuclear-armed rivals.
Officials in the Indian establishment said there was no change in the ground positions of troops on Friday.

India denies Trump’s claim that he spoke to Modi about border tensions with China
US President Donald Trump said he had a phone conversation with India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi – but India said no such call took place
Trump offered to mediate in India’s border stand-off with China, but New Delhi said it was in touch with Beijing using diplomatic channels
Did US President Donald Trump speak with India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi over the phone to discuss the South Asian nation’s border tensions with China?
Trump, who reiterated his offer to mediate between New Delhi and Beijing over the rising temperatures at their border, told a reporter in Washington on Thursday that he spoke to Modi. The Indian government says no such conversation took place.
“But I can tell you, I did speak to Prime Minister Modi. He’s not – he’s not in a good mood about what’s going on with China,” Trump said of his chat with the Indian leader.
When asked for details of the phone call, India’s foreign ministry said in a statement on Friday that Modi has not spoken to the US president since April 4 when the leaders discussed shipping hydroxychloroquine from India.

There has been no conversation around the recent border stand-off with China, and New Delhi was directly in touch with the Chinese government through established mechanisms and diplomatic contacts, the foreign ministry said.
On Friday, China’s foreign ministry said there was no need for a third party to mediate.

The border tensions between the world’s two most populous nations have grabbed international headlines and caught the attention of US President Donald Trump, who made an unconventional offer on Twitter to mediate in the “now raging border dispute”.
But observers said the offer was merely an empty gesture by a US leader with a tainted image who is well known for his impulsive, transactional approach to diplomacy.
“The Trump administration can no longer be viewed as an honest broker on anything China related, especially in light of its recent efforts to exploit China-India tensions and draw India into its orbit,” Luft said.
The border dispute was likely to remain localised and unlikely to spin out of control, he said.
“The two powers have much bigger issues to deal with than fighting over some border outposts at 14,000 feet, and much more to gain from preserving their economic relations,” Luft said.
“While both want to save face in light of what they view as infringements on their sovereignty, neither can afford to lose a billion potential customers. At a time of a major economic slowdown this is all that matters.”
According to a 2019 survey of nearly 2,500 Indians by the Washington-based Pew Research Centre, 46 per cent had an unfavourable view of China and Xi Jinping, while just 23 per cent saw them in a favourable light.
While Indians generally saw the US as more important economically than China, 61 per cent of those polled regarded China’s economic expansion as a bad thing for Delhi.

Shashi Asthana, a retired Indian major general and chief instructor at the United Service Institution of India think tank in Delhi, cautioned against any provocative steps that could exacerbate tensions due to rising nationalism in the two countries.
“It needs to be noted after the experience of the Doklam incident that any intrusion in India will ignite nationalism in India, refuel a national response and be resented by the whole nation, despite the pandemic,” he said.
“In this context, it needs to be deliberated that it’s easy to start a stand-off, but it’s difficult to find a graceful exit.”
Mohan Guruswamy, chairman of the Centre for Policy Alternatives Society, a Delhi think tank, said people should be wary of Indian media hype about border disputes, citing the hazy reports that were published about what happened in Doklam.
“Due to the lockdown, we are mostly reliant on the official [Indian] narrative [but] to my mind that is about as trustworthy as the official Chinese sources,” he said.
“At this moment, both countries have politically beleaguered governments that are keen to cover up their mishandling” of the coronavirus pandemic, he said. “Both regimes need a good diversion.”

Sun and retired Chinese colonel Yue Gang said that the number of scuffles and skirmishes had risen since India began catching up with China in terms of infrastructure building in the disputed region.
Official data from India showed that nearly three-quarters of the Chinese transgressions since 2015 occurred in Ladakh region, with their number soaring to 497 last year, from 284 in 2018.
“Under Xi, China is increasingly seeking to redraw its land and sea frontiers,” said Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the Centre for Policy Research think tank in Delhi.
“Its success in the South China Sea, where it has fundamentally changed the status quo without firing a shot, has emboldened its moves in the Himalayan borderlands.”
However, as the latest military flare-ups had taken place at multiple locations along the Himalayan frontier, the situation could become more serious than the 2017 Doklam stand-off, which was confined to a single area, he said.
“India values its strategic autonomy and foreign policy independence. But Xi, through his provocative actions, is working to push India into the US camp,” Chellaney said.
“This is just one example of how Xi is acting contrary to China’s long-term interests.”

Sun Shihai, an expert on China-India relations at Sichuan University, said the skirmishes and stand-offs along one of the world’s longest land borders were largely due to territorial ambiguities and overlapping claims along the Line of Actual Control.
“The priority is to prevent it becoming another Doklam stand-off, as neither side can afford an escalating confrontation or even conflict,” he said.
Sporadic border rows have disrupted and even derailed years of effort to address the mistrust and hostility between the two countries and their people as they jostle for dominance in the region.
“Bilateral ties have seen some progress since Doklam, especially following the frequent leadership exchanges, but there remain some deep-rooted problems marring our relations, with the unresolved border dispute topping the list,” Sun said.
China’s relations with India have also been plagued by Delhi’s warming ties with Washington, its resistance to the Belt and Road Initiative – Xi Jinping’s pet infrastructure development plan – and their opposing positions on spiritual leader Dalai Lama, who lives in exile in northern India.
Sun confirmed the presence of a large number of Chinese troops but said they were there mostly to safeguard Chinese territory and counter any transgressions by Indian forces.
“The mission is not over yet and we don’t know yet if they [Indian troops] will come back again,” he said.

As many as 5,000 Chinese troops have been deployed in recent weeks at several locations in eastern Ladakh, including Pangong Lake and Galwan Valley, according to Indian media reports, where about 250 Chinese and Indian soldiers were involved in a tense clash on May 5. More than 100 troops from both sides were injured in fist fights and by flying stones.
According to a report by The Indian Express newspaper on Friday, satellite images from Indian military showed Chinese forces had built temporary structures on its side of the border, and deployed at least 16 tanks, numerous infantry combat vehicles, excavator machines and trucks.
Nevertheless, an unnamed senior Indian military official was quoted by the Press Trust of India news agency as saying that the “strength of the Indian Army in the area is much better than our adversary”.
During a press conference on Wednesday, China’s foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian did not deny the media reports about the Chinese troop build-up but sought to play down the seriousness of the stand-off.
As in previous skirmishes, both sides have accused the other of trespassing on their territory and stirring up tensions.
Citing military sources, the Chinese nationalist tabloid Global Times warned last week of “necessary countermeasures” and said the Indian Army had repeatedly obstructed Chinese troops’ normal patrols and tried to “unilaterally change the status quo” in the border area, including the Galwan Valley.

While the coronavirus has already caused the postponement or cancellation of many events planned to mark the 70th anniversary of China-India diplomatic ties, the latest border tensions are set to further dampen the mood for celebration.
As Covid-19 continues to ravage much of the world, including India and the US, China’s increasingly adversarial ties with America have taken a turn for the worse, with the world’s two largest economies edging closer than ever towards an all-out confrontation.

“China is in the middle of what could be called a nationalist moment,” said Gal Luft, co-director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, a Washington-based think tank.
From Beijing’s perspective, the deteriorating global economic conditions no longer allow it to focus on the Chinese dream, President Xi Jinping’s best-known mantra, as the only source of the legitimacy for one-party rule.
“Instead, it now focuses on other issues, like nationalism and sovereignty. This shift is reinforced by a sense of besiegement caused by the escalating rivalry with the US,” Luft said.
With both sides refusing to back down to defuse tensions, pundits believe the latest row is the most serious since the 73-day military stand-off in 2017 along an unmarked border in the remote tri-junction of Sikkim, Tibet and Bhutan known as Doklam, or Donglang in Mandarin.

China-India border dispute fuelled by rise in nationalism on both sides, observers say
As the global economy has slumped, ‘nationalism and sovereignty’ have replaced Xi Jinping’s ‘Chinese dream’ as the primary focus for Beijing, co-director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security says
‘Both countries have politically beleaguered governments … [that] need a good diversion’, chairman of New Delhi think tank says

A fresh dispute with India over their long border in the desolate mountains of the Himalayas has created a new dilemma for China to go with its intensifying rivalry with the United States and international backlash against its handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
Beijing risks pushing New Delhi further into the American camp, analysts have warned, if the current border face-off continues to drag on and spirals into another protracted stand-off like the Doklam row three years ago.
Although China said on Wednesday that the overall situation was “stable and controllable”, with no reports of fresh scuffles along the disputed Line of Actual Control, tensions remain high according to observers and Indian media reports amid one of the biggest border troop build-ups in years.
Details remain sketchy about how the dispute started, but scuffles and eyeball-to-eyeball face-offs during regular patrols over three weeks ago in the north Ladakh region and near the pass of Naku La along the Sikkim border have turned into a tense military stand-off.



While skirmishes like this are usually considered routine in the long-running dispute between the two Asian neighbours, what makes it stand out are the timing of the latest row and the way it is being handled on both sides.

can i renovate my house to make it bigger without increasing the assessment?

Race and religion have delivered untold and disproportionate wealth to them without reciprocal productivity. No wonder that value of the ringgit. Is this group outside the us. Get Rais to declare his assets.

Please take note that like Covid-19, it spares no one whatever the creed or religious background you are from. The underlines speaks volume to open our eyes that we are at the mercy of God. Do not further try to divide and rule. United we stand, divided we fall as a nation. To show mercy, respect and love to one another, we can build the nation together. We need to throw out such gutters in Politics, nation building for our future generations to come. We are all created in the image of God, so, be respectful to all . Refugees are human too and deserve our support for their plight. None will like to end up as refugee if the country that they derive have the love for one another.

With insecure Malaysians anyone not “ just like me” is a second class citizen

we can always rely on you when idiocy from your colleagues in Bersatu, PAS and Umno is temporarily lacking.

Let us examine some of the more salient points in your traditional blame-setting on other “races”.

You warn the Malays to be cautious lest the other races maul you. In the centuries the Indians and Chinese have been here, we have never intruded into Malay life - we only ask for our rights in culture, language and religion, obviously our entitlement as citizens. So when did we ever maul you?

The mauling aspect of Malaysian life was executed by the Malays themselves under the guise of race, religion and ruler. Rais, are you suggesting that the mauling and rape of Tabung Haji, 1MDB, Felda, or Mara was the work of “other races”?

It is telling that you refer to “other races” in the same breath as referring to Rohingyas. Where does your leader, Mahathir, fit in? Is he Malay, Indian, or perhaps Rohingya?

Remember, unlike citizenship, race is not a status accorded by a piece of paper, it is a biological fact.

Where are the Indonesians to be slotted - as Malays or “other races”? Whatever any similarity in ethnicity, they are recent immigrants who came here seeking their fortune through skill and hard work, especially in Chow Kit.

Some made it big. Some with feminine lure and despite being maids here, earned enough to build palaces back home.

Guys, how many refugees are living among your neighborhood?

Of course, most refugees come from less developed countries but they are also able to contribute to society, like us, if given the opportunity. Many refugees and their children have done that. They have changed the world and made a difference in our lives.

Just Google (you probably can’t Google if Brin was not allowed to seek refuge in the US) the list of prominent refugees. And there are many more who are not on the list but who have become doctors, lawyers, artists, musicians, scientists, philosophers, singers, businesspersons, white and blue-collar workers, just like us. Refugees are just like us.

8. Refugees have done terrible things here including committing crimes.

Certainly, there are some bad apples. But isn’t it the same with us Malaysians? Many Malaysians have committed crimes overseas as well. Should those countries ban Malaysians?

The issue of refugees is not something new. Refugees have been in Malaysia since the 1970s, if not earlier, with the arrival of the Vietnamese refugees. We have been living with refugees since then. Why are we suddenly casting them in such a negative light so strongly?

During this stressful and challenging time where we are facing the Covid-19 pandemic, it is important for us to ensure that we are not doing this as a coping mechanism by deflecting the blame and attention to the refugees. We should stop persecuting the already persecuted.

Again, as mentioned at the beginning of this article, it is okay if you disagree with the rights of the refugees, just like different people have different views about capital punishment, abortion, gay rights etc.

But it is not okay when you spread fake news about them. It is not okay to sow hatred towards them. And it is not okay to demean them. Let us learn to agree to disagree but to disagree with facts. Let us learn to debate and discuss issues rationally, for our words reflects who we are.

Many have said that the way to solve the refugee crisis is to stop those "refugee-producing countries" from "producing" more refugees. Indeed, that is the solution. However, just like the pandemic, until and unless the vaccine can be developed, we have to embrace and learn how to live with the crisis.

So long as wars, armed conflicts and persecutions are continuing, refugees are here to stay. In fact, that is also the reason why upholding human rights is important. To end this crisis, we have to uphold and defend human rights to ensure no one is persecuted. To end this crisis, all of us have a role to play and it can be as simple as treating your fellow human being as one.

Since 1980, the US has resettled more than 3 million refugees. Canada and Australia have resettled more than 600,000 and 400,000, respectively.

4. As Malaysia is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention, we do not have any responsibility towards refugees. We should send them back.

Not true. While it is true that Malaysia is not a signatory to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 protocol, it does not mean that Malaysia has no responsibility and can send the refugees back.

This is because the principle of non-refoulement guarantees that no one should be returned to a country where they would face torture, cruelty, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and other irreparable harm. The principle of non-refoulement is considered to form part of customary international law and therefore, the principle applies regardless if Malaysia is a signatory to the 1951 convention.

It has also been argued that “pushback” operations, that is, by intercepting the boats carrying refugees by not allowing them to land, may also amount to a violation of the principle of non-refoulement.

5. Refugees and economic migrants are the same. They are here to earn money.

Not true. An economic migrant normally leaves a country voluntarily to seek a better life. They can return to their home countries should they chose to do so, and they continue to receive the protection of their governments, even when they are abroad.

Refugees, on the other hand, flee because of the threat of persecution and cannot return safely. The 1951 Refugee Convention defines a refugee as a person who is outside his/her country of nationality or habitual residence; has a well-founded fear of persecution because of his/her race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion; and is unable or unwilling to avail himself/herself of the protection of that country, or to return there, for fear of persecution.

Of course, when the refugees are here, they have to work in order to survive. However, as refugees are not recognised in Malaysia, they are not able to work legally. This often leads to exploitation. They often work in what is known as the "4D" sectors – jobs that are deemed to be dirty, dangerous, difficult and demeaning, jobs Malaysians would normally shun away from.

Also, as refugees are not recognised, they are being treated as illegal migrants where they are always at risk of being arrested and detained, and that also includes refugee children.

In detention, they can be subjected to abuse and torture. The mistreatment and abuse of refugees in Malaysia were exposed by Al Jazeera in its documentary in 2014, Malaysia’s Unwanted, which is an extensive investigation, complete with undercover filming.

6. If someone can afford to pay US$2,000 to US$3,000 to human traffickers or smugglers to get here, surely they cannot be a refugee.

Not true. And that shows the person who says this clearly does not understand what a refugee is. First, not all refugees have to be poor. Again, referring to the definition above, a refugee is someone who flees his or her country of nationality or habitual residence due to the fear of persecution.

Second, for refugees who are poor like the Rohingyas who have been living in hardship and exploitation, they often end up in a kind of bondage agreement with the traffickers.

7. Refugees are a burden and will always be a burden.

Not true. Again, that is the perception that most people have – refugees must be poor, uneducated, and low-skilled and they will always be. But Albert Einstein was a refugee! Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google, was a refugee too.

1. There are too many refugees in Malaysia.

According to UNHCR, as of end-March 2020, there are some 179,520 refugees and asylum-seekers registered with UNHCR in Malaysia. Too many? Maybe and certainly 180,000 is not a small figure. But let us put the numbers in perspective.

In the first quarter of the year, Malaysia is estimated to have 32.73 million population. Therefore, the number of registered refugees and asylum-seekers in Malaysia is only around 0.55 percent of the whole population of Malaysia.

2. All refugees here are Rohingyas.

Not true. According to UNHCR, only around 56 percent of the refugees and asylum-seekers here are Rohingyas and the rest are other ethnicities from Myanmar and from other countries, including Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Iraq and Palestine.

3. All refugees are coming to Malaysia and other countries are not helping.

Not true. As of June 2019, there are 70.8 million forcibly displaced people worldwide, where 25.9 million of them are refugees. Therefore, Malaysia is only hosting around 0.7 percent of the total number of refugees worldwide and around 0.25 percent of the total forcibly displaced people.

Many other countries, including much poorer and less developed countries, are hosting way more refugees than us. In 2018, the top five countries which hosted the largest number of refugees worldwide are Turkey (3.7 million refugees), Pakistan (1.4 million), Uganda (1.2 million), Sudan (1.1 million) and Germany (1.1 million).

Countries such as Bangladesh are hosting more than 900,000 (possibly up to or even more than one million now) refugees and Thailand with more than 90,000.

In 2018 alone, 92,400 refugees were resettled globally with Canada admitting 28,100 refugees. Other countries that admitted large numbers of resettled refugees include the US (22,900), Australia (12,700), the UK (5,800) and France (5,600). When refugees are being resettled to these countries, it often means that they will get a permanent residency which may eventually lead up to citizenship.

compare to malaysia

Myth: I need a mobile phone, refugees don’t
Connectivity is an essential part of modern life, and the idea that refugees are locked out of digital communities is misleading.

Refugees around the world are at a disadvantage, and data shows they are 50% less likely than the general population to have a smartphone. But this is mainly because of costs; refugees around the world often spend up to a third of their disposable income on staying connected.

Myth: refugees leave their countries to find better jobs
Semantics matter here. Using the words 'refugee' and 'migrant' interchangeably causes problems for both populations.

People who run for their lives and cross international borders without papers often put themselves and their families at great risk. Consequently, one of the most essential principles established in international law is that refugees should not be forced to go back to areas where their life would be under threat. But these risks are rarely faced by those people who move to a new country in search of a better life.

Identifying refugees and migrants as one group of people can have real consequences for the safety of refugees because blurring these lines obscures the importance of legal protection that countries are committed to providing refugees.

Myth: refugees get access to education in countries of asylum
Data suggests that for each additional year people stay in school leads to an earnings bump of 5% to 10%. But when people flee conflict in their communities, they also leave schools and universities behind. People who are seeking safety often have distinct motivations to learn valuable skills and earn new qualifications.

Learning a new language can be life-changing for someone trying to adapt in a new place. A degree recognised by employers in a new country can open many doors.

Globally, 34% of university-age youth are in education, but that figure for refugees is just 1%. Why is that so low?

“Access to education is a fundamental human right,” says UN High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi. “Yet for millions of women and girls among the world’s ever-growing refugee population, education remains an aspiration, not a reality.”

Only 61% of refugee children have access to primary education, compared to an international average of 91%. At secondary level, 23% of refugee teenagers go to school, compared to 84% globally.

Refugees face huge challenges to finishing school and achieving similar grades to people who are not affected by conflict.

Myth: most refugees flee to the US, Europe and Australia
Media coverage regularly shows refugees landing on Greek or Italian islands after the dangerous Mediterranean crossing. Footage from the US southwest border suggests Arizona is being flooded by people fleeing violence in Central America.

But data shows a different picture. Eighty percent of the world’s displaced people in 2018 were registered in countries neighbouring the one they fled.

Take the 6.7 million people who have escaped war in Syria and are now registered in Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq. According to UNHCR, most people who fled South Sudan are now in Sudan or Uganda, and the vast majority of Rohingya refugees who fled human rights violations in Myanmar are now in Bangladesh.

Refugee admissions to the US are actually at the lowest levels since 1980, when the Refugee Act was introduced. And Canada welcomed more refugees through resettlement than the United States in 2018.

Myth: all refugees live in camps
Refugee camps differ from country to country. In some places they are organised areas with government-provided facilities. Elsewhere, camps can be a group of makeshift shelters built by people fleeing conflict.

One thing that is true of most refugee camps is there is “some limitation on the rights and freedoms of refugees and their ability to make meaningful choices about their lives”.

The reality is most refugees live in towns and cities. According to data published by UNHCR, 61% of all refugees were living in urban areas in 2018.

The largest number of urban refugees in 2018 were people who had fled the civil war in Syria. In fact, of all Syrian refugees in the neighbouring countries only 8% are in refugee camps.

Data from Germany showed over 1 million refugees living there were in urban areas.

UNHCR even encourages governments to ensure camps are only temporary, and the OECD has collected data showing the benefits of integrating refugees into local communities.

The 5 biggest refugee myths: debunked

Refugees are people who have been forced to flee their country because of persecution, war or violence. That is broadly the definition in the 1951 Refugee Convention — the key legal document that outlines the rights of displaced people.

But all too often this official record gets ignored, and refugees endure the consequences: hate speech and discrimination.

On World Humanitarian Day, committed aid workers get well-deserved recognition, and the world shows support for people affected by the world`s worst crises.

We mark this day by taking aim at common misconceptions about refugees and revealing how displaced people bring value to societies, economies and communities.

2moro price will blast..... rm1.20 is coming

Based on what ... no harm to dream!

It is easy for well paid JUSA A civil servants to brandish brazen rhetoric. Does he know the real world and the real Malaysia we are all living in?

Myanmar need to keep their own people at home. Don't export illegally and then expect them to return 'clean'. Now clean that dirty linen at home and keep them safe from now onwards.

When fuel prices down,minister's salary and allowances also never reduce.

If fuel prices down, you also reduce your salary because Petronas will be making less profits for the country, then you can tell the businesses to reduce their price, because you are standing at a higher moral ground.

If you are as rich as Tengku Adnan, who treats 2 Million ringgit as pocket money, then you actually should not draw any salary, just, treat the minister post as national service.

By the way, why rich ministers still draw salary, do they really need the salary like Rakyat, to put food on table?

Or, big ministers with big salaries, so that they can put their left and right foot on their office table, goyang kaki happily?

The social distancing is 10 meters and not 1 meter as frequently expounded by him if either party is not wearing mask?

SEE my name? I am always READY!!!! Let's do this!!!!!

YES guys! This is definitely do-able with good conscience and a bit of hard work. Ignore the nay-sayers like the ever negative commentator before me, who never offers anything positive or constructive. The provision of clean and easily maintained surfaces, running water and washbasins for each stall is a good start. Good drainage is a must. Once the infrastructure is improved, education and enforcement must take place and be consistent. Let those PR people get out on the ground and do some genuine public relations

pssstt......let you guys know where those sochai naysayer promoted in.......Bat, xox, ogse (sorchai sure die counter). Now their counter go holland liao come out to attack other good counter!

Guys, if Ageson NO AP? What is the purpose JV with Sultan Company for? No AP you dare and go dig and sell sand in Terengganu and Pahang or not? NO AP you dare announce to the whole world and on the news you have BIG SAND PROJECT or not? You think Ageson in charge are Daredevils is it? Those naysayer are just childish and envy! Where they promote for so long period also cannot survive, price sangkut like no tomorrow, project also don't have! Go back to your hole and cry father cry mother lo, sochai naysayers!