I refer to the Malaysiakini report Najib: RapidKL subsidies to be withdrawn .

The purpose of a subsidy is to support a firm or an industry that would otherwise fail without the subsidy. It is also used to encourage an activity (the utilisation of public transportation in this case) that would not take place or occur less should the subsidy not be given out.

In the case of Rapid KL, if its subsidies were to be removed, Rapid KL would fail as a provider of public transportation as a service (not a business). A bus service is one that has a strict schedule to follow regardless of the number of people in the bus.

The minute the government takes away the subsidy, Rapid KL will not vanish but it will simply move to operate like a business where profits are prized. This is because businesses or firms practice an economic theory called profit maximisation. It is a process where the company itself determines the level of price and output to achieve optimum profit.

Rapid KL will be forced to alter its business practices with profitability as their number one priority. The following are the consequences:

• Busses will not run as frequently during non-rush hour periods.

With competitiveness in mind, one might argue that should one bus operator choose to delay services and increase interval times, people may opt to choose for another bus operator. Hence, the free market will sort itself out and it will be the survival of the fittest.

However, what if all bus operators are forced to conduct such practices because the volume of passengers during non-rush hour periods simply does not suffice? The only people that lose out are consumers who will be forced to take taxis in order to be punctual. Should the individual not be able to afford a taxi, there will be an inevitable opportunity cost to time spent waiting for the bus.

I agree that competitiveness and the survival of other non-government assisted firms is essential in an economy. However, competitiveness and the survival of certain bus operators should not be prized over the well-being of the people. The sole purpose of the government is to ensure that the welfare of the people are safeguarded.

What if TNB was not government-regulated and run autonomously by a private firm from the start? The potential profits of selling electricity to rural areas would not justify the cost of erecting a national grid to those areas. Hence, part of the country might not have electricity!

I suggest that subsidies be reduced to the point slightly below that of where Rapid KL is able to maintain their frequent trips and comfortable buses. This will push Rapid KL to become more efficient and competitive and I genuinely believe that they will be able to do away with the subsidy in time. In addition, the money potentially saved from one submarine or one fighter jet could be used to subsidise other bus operators.

Najib has asserted that it is not fair to use taxpayers' money to subsidise Rapid KL and that there is a 'moral principle'. One of the purposes of the government is to redistribute income in an equitable manner. If the Rapid KL subsidy is maintained, low-income earners who depend on busses for transportation will benefit as busses will be clean, well-maintained and on time.

'Not fair to use tax payers' money' and 'moral principle' sound like a more adequate phrases for the purchase of submarines and jet planes with subsequent 'commissions' to supposed 'deal- brokers'.

In my opinion, Najib should attempt to step out of his black Perdana with tinted windows and police escort and go about his daily errands utilising the private bus operator services.

I commuted using the bus to school until I finished Form 5 less than three years ago before the new Rapid KL busses were put into service and prior to the new schedule being implemented. I must say, those rainy days waiting for the bus weren't very pleasant.