Politweet.Org

Observing Malaysian Social Media

Posts Tagged ‘Economy

Twitter Stats on Pakatan Rakyat’s Alternative Budget 2013

Pakatan Rakyat (PR) revealed its alternative budget yesterday. Compared to last year there seems to be a slight increase in users tweeting about the budget.

On September 26th 2012, 1440 users wrote 2663 tweets about PR and Federal budget-related terms.

On October 4th 2011 when Pakatan Rakyat’s alternative budget was released, 1046 users wrote 2124 tweets about PR alternative budget and (Barisan Nasional) Federal budget-related terms.

From 2011 to 2012, that is an increase of 37.67% in users and 25.38% in terms of tweets. The average tweets/user decreased from 2.03 to 1.85 tweets/user.

One of the hashtags used by promoters of PR’s alternative budget, #BelanjawanPR, trended in Malaysia for a cumulative total of 340 minutes (5 hours 40 mins). It started at 6th place at 4.30pm for 10 minutes before quickly dropping to 8th place by 4.50pm. It continued to trend on/off at 7th and 8th places before ending at 8th place at 12.10am the next day.

Please note that in both years a significant number of people were tweeting about the upcoming BN budget and not the PR budget. An initial sampling of the tweets indicated that for 2012, an estimated 610 users (out of 1440) were referring to the PR budget. So it is possible that PR’s popularity when it comes to its budget has declined. A more detailed analysis will have to wait.

On October 7th 2011 when the Federal budget was tabled, 5972 users wrote 13961 tweets about PR and Federal budget-related terms. That’s almost six times the amount of users talking about the PR alternative budget. It should be interesting to see if the gap widens this Friday.

Written by politweet

September 27, 2012 at 2:01 am

Budget 2012 : The Possible Future of Public Debt

The public debt is the total amount owed by the Federal Government, both domestic and external. Since 1997 the Federal Government debt (public debt) has steadily increased. The latest figure for June 2011 places the debt at RM 437 billion.

Not only has the total debt been increasing, but the rate of growth has for the most part remained high. It crossed RM100 billion in 1998. It crossed 200 billion in 2004. It crossed 300 billion in 2008. It crossed 400 billion in 2010.

In other words, the time taken for the debt to grow has been:

100 billion to 200 billion = 6 years
200 billion to 300 billion = 4 years
300 billion to 400 billion = 2 years

That is an exponential growth rate. The average growth rate from 2005 – 2010 was 10.6%/year. If the current growth rate holds steady at 10%, the public debt will cross RM 1 trillion by 2020.

This chart shows the size of the public debt from 1995 – 2020, based on an estimated growth rate of 10% per year from June 2011 onwards. This serves as an illustration of the possible future of the public debt based on recent trends.

While the debt ceiling ensures this will not happen easily, this chart should make it clear that recent trends are not sustainable for the future. Economic reforms are needed to drive up revenue, lower expenditure or both.

Ahmed Kamal
19th October 2011

Update (20th October 2011)
The 1 Trillion figure is too far in the future to be proven valid or invalid, so there is no point in debating that. A 10% growth per year is a simplistic approach, but my intention is to get people to take notice and start asking the government and opposition how their economic policies will affect the debt.

If the public debt increases were largely due to development expenditure (true in most years) then it should ultimately be paid off by the revenue brought in by the development. But we have had larger increases in operating expenditure that have helped contribute to the debt. Our government has a tendency to increase operating expenditure hand-in-hand with revenue increases, if not through planned budget increases then via Supplementary Bills.

The most recent IMF forecast for 2016 estimates government revenue to be 293 billion, and the gross government debt to be 695 billion. This is lower than the 704 billion shown here. Nett debt would be smaller, lowest I can estimate based on IMF’s earlier figures is 670 billion. That is still higher than my 2015 estimate.

——
Data used in this graph:

Format : Year – Amount

Public Debt (RM million)

1995 – 91369
1996 – 89681
1997 – 89920
1998 – 103121
1999 – 112118
2000 – 125626
2001 – 145724
2002 – 164963
2003 – 188767
2004 – 216624
2005 – 228670
2006 – 242225
2007 – 266722
2008 – 306437
2009 – 362386
2010 – 407101
June 2011 – 437182
2012 – 480900.2
2013 – 528990.22
2014 – 581889.242
2015 – 640078.1662
2016 – 704085.9828
2017 – 774494.5811
2018 – 851944.0392
2019 – 937138.4431
2020 – 1030852.287

Written by politweet

October 19, 2011 at 1:22 am

Posted in Analyses

Tagged with , , ,

Budget 2012 : The Growth of Public Debt

The public debt is the total amount owed by the Federal Government, both domestic and external. Since 1997 the Federal Government debt (public debt) has steadily increased. The latest figure for June 2011 places the debt at RM 437 billion.

This chart shows the growth rate on a yearly basis from 1996 – June 2011. It is helpful for analysts to identify our worst and best years. From this it is easy

to see that the 2008 – 2009 recession was the worst period, where the debt increased by 18.26%.A lower growth rate can be achieved by the government either by increasing revenue or lowering expenses.

Not only has the total debt been increasing, but the rate of growth has for the most part remained high. It crossed RM100 billion in 1998. It crossed 200 billion in 2004. It crossed 300 billion in 2008. It crossed 400 billion in 2010.

In other words, the time taken for the debt to grow has been:

100 billion to 200 billion = 6 years
200 billion to 300 billion = 4 years
300 billion to 400 billion = 2 years

That is an exponential growth rate. The average growth rate from 2005 – 2010 was 10.6%/year. If the current growth rate holds steady at 10%, the public debt will cross RM 1 trillion by 2020.

Ahmed Kamal
19th October 2011

——
Data used in this graph:

Format – Year : Percentage change from previous year

1996 : -1.847453732
1997 : 0.266500151
1998 : 14.6808274
1999: 8.724702049
2000 : 12.04802084
2001 : 15.99828061
2002 : 13.20235514
2003 : 14.42990246
2004 : 14.75734636
2005 : 5.560787355
2006 : 5.927756155
2007 : 10.11332439
2008 : 14.89003532
2009 : 18.25791272
2010 : 12.33905283
June 2011 :7.389075438

Written by politweet

October 19, 2011 at 1:17 am

Posted in Analyses

Tagged with , , ,

Budget 2012: The Size of Public Debt

The public debt is the total amount owed by the Federal Government, both domestic and external. Since 1997 the Federal Government debt (public debt) has steadily increased. The latest figure for June 2011 places the debt at RM 437 billion.

Not only has the total debt been increasing, but the rate of growth has for the most part remained high. It crossed RM100 billion in 1998. It crossed 200 billion in 2004. It crossed 300 billion in 2008. It crossed 400 billion in 2010.

In other words, the time taken for the debt to grow has been:

100 billion to 200 billion = 6 years
200 billion to 300 billion = 4 years
300 billion to 400 billion = 2 years

That is an exponential growth rate. The average growth rate from 2005 – 2010 was 10.6%/year. If the current growth rate holds steady at 10%, the public debt will cross RM 1 trillion by 2020.

Ahmed Kamal
19th October 2011

(*) Domestic debt is debt owed to creditors within the country (citizens). Examples are treasury bills, securities (e.g. EPF), and other borrowings by the government.

(*) External debt is debt owed to creditors outside the country. Examples are external market loans in foreign currencies, and external bilateral and multilateral project loans.

——
Data used in this graph:

Format : Year – Amount

Domestic Debt (RM million)
1995 – 78038
1996 – 79211
1997 – 76968
1998 – 88197
1999 – 93750
2000 – 106805
2001 – 121396
2002 – 128680
2003 – 151483
2004 – 181970
2005 – 198670
2006 – 217220
2007 – 247120
2008 – 286121
2009 – 348600
2010 – 390356
June 2011 – 421016

External Debt (RM million)
1995 – 13331
1996 – 10470
1997 – 12952
1998 – 14924
1999 – 18368
2000 – 18821
2001 – 24328
2002 – 36283
2003 – 37284
2004 – 34654
2005 – 30000
2006 – 25005
2007 – 19602
2008 – 20316
2009 – 13786
2010 – 16745
June 2011 – 16166

Written by politweet

October 19, 2011 at 1:12 am

Posted in Analyses

Tagged with , , ,

How has the government managed the budget surplus in the last 16 years?

This graph shows the budget surplus trend as a percentage of GDP from 1996 – 2012. Since 1998 there has been a budget deficit.

A budget deficit occurs when the government spends more than it receives in revenue. Deficits are financed by borrowing, which increases public sector debt. This is not necessarily a bad thing, as government spending can help stimulate economic growth and benefit society through welfare, healthcare and measures dealing with job loss and owning property. This can become necessary during a recession.

What is important for voters is ensuring that the government works to reduce the deficit, so it does not remain high or increase over a sustained period. This can be seen from 2000 – 2007. The original budget deficit estimated for 2009 was 3.6%. It ultimately turned out to be 7.0%. Why?

In 2008/2009 there was a global recession and Malaysia experienced negative GDP growth and lower projected revenue. The export-focused manufacturing sector was the hardest hit. The government implemented stimulus packages (RM 67 billion) and other measures to help the economy. This brought the economy from a negative GDP growth of -1.6% in 2009 to a positive growth of 7.2% in 2010 (5.4% when compared to 2008 GDP figure).

Barisan Nasional has allocated RM 232.8 billion for Budget 2012, and aims to bring the deficit down to -4.7% of GDP.

Pakatan Rakyat has allocated RM 220.5 billion for Budget 2012, and aims to bring the deficit down to -4.4% of GDP.

Ahmed Kamal
12 October 2011

——

Figures used in this graph:

Format: Year – Deficit (% of GDP)

1996 : 0.7
1997 : 2.3
1998 : -1.8
1999 : -3.2
2000 : -5.8
2001 : -5.5
2002 : -5.6
2003 : -5.3
2004 : -4.3
2005 : -3.6
2006 : -3.3
2007 : -3.2
2008 : -4.8
2009 : -7.0
2010 : -5.6
2011 : -5.4
2012 : -4.7

Written by politweet

October 12, 2011 at 12:39 am

Budget 2012 : Pakatan Rakyat vs Barisan Nasional (Spending Allocation)

This graph shows the allocation in spending in both budgets across 7 different areas.

Barisan Nasional (BN) allocated RM 232.8 billion.
Pakatan Rakyat (PR) allocated RM 220.5 billion.
The previous 2011 Budget was 213.9 billion.

The percentage gap in spending priorities is greatest in National and International Affairs, Education, Talent and Employment and Community Wellbeing.

Pakatan Rakyat’s spending priorities are:

1. Education, Talent and Employment (25%)
2. National and International Affairs (21%)
3. Economics and Finance (16%)
4. Community Wellbeing (15%)
5. Security (11%)
6. Agriculture and Regional Development (8%)
7. Infrastructure, Resource Management and Environment (4%)

Barisan Nasional’s spending priorities are:

1. National and International Affairs (26%)
2. Education, Talent and Employment (22%)
3. Economics and Finance (16%)
4. Community Wellbeing (12%)
5. Security (11%)
6. Agriculture and Regional Development (8%)
7. Infrastructure, Resource Management and Environment (5%)

Despite similar priorities and a 5.57% smaller budget, Pakatan Rakyat has allocated more spending than Barisan Nasional in the following areas:

1. Education, Talent and Employment (54.3 billion vs 51.4 billion)
2. Community Wellbeing (32.8 billion vs 28.1 billion)

This was achieved by reducing the allocation in other areas, primarily National and International Affairs.

Ahmed Kamal
11th October 2011

——
Government agencies for each area:

National and International Affairs
——
Tanggungan
Parlimen
Pejabat Penyimpan Mohor Besar Raja-Raja
Jabatan Audit
Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya
Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Awam
Jabatan Perdana Menteri
Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam
Jabatan Peguam Negara
Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM)
Kementerian Luar Negeri
Kementerian Wilayah Persekutuan dan Kesejahteraan Bandar
Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Pendidikan
Kementerian Penerangan, Komunikasi dan Kebudayaan
Simpanan Luar Jangka
Kementerian Pembangunan Usahawan dan Koperasi
Kementerian Perpaduan, Kebudayaan, Kesenian dan Warisan
Kementerian Hal Ehwal Dalam Negeri

Education, Talent and Employment
——
Kementerian Pelajaran
Kementerian Sumber Manusia
Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi

Economics and Finance
——
Kementerian Kewangan
Kementerian Perdagangan Antarabangsa dan Industri
Kementerian Perdagangan Dalam Koperasi dan Kepenggunaan
Kementerian Pelancongan

Community Wellbeing
——
Kementerian Pengangkutan
Kementerian Kesihatan
Kementerian Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan
Kementerian Belia dan Sukan
Kementerian Pembangunan Wanita, Keluarga dan Masyarakat

Security
——
Kementerian Pertahanan
Kementerian Dalam Negeri

Agriculture and Regional Development
——
Kementerian Perusahaan Perladangan dan Komoditi
Kementerian Pertanian dan Industri Asas Tani
Kementerian Kemajuan Luar Bandar dan Wilayah

Infrastructure, Resource Management and Environment
——
Kementerian Sumber Asli dan Alam Sekitar
Kementerian Kerja Raya
Kementerian Tenaga, Teknologi Hijau dan Air
Kementerian Sains, Teknologi dan Inovasi

Written by politweet

October 11, 2011 at 12:09 am

How does the Pakatan Rakyat Budget compare with the Barisan Nasional Budget for 2012?

This graph shows the trend in spending by the Barisan Nasional government across 7 different areas from 2008 – 2012. The dotted lines indicate how the budget would be spent if Pakatan Rakyat was in control of the Federal Government.

Barisan Nasional (BN) allocated RM 232.8 billion.

Pakatan Rakyat (PR) allocated RM 220.5 billion.
The previous 2011 Budget was 213.9 billion.

The gap in spending priorities is greatest in National and International Affairs, Education, Talent and Employment, Economics and Finance and Community Wellbeing.

Pakatan Rakyat focused spending on increased Education, Talent and Employment and Community Wellbeing and a 20% reduction on National and International Affairs.

Barisan Nasional focused spending on increased Economics and Finance, Agriculture and Regional Development and Infrastructure, Resource Management and Environment.

Ahmed Kamal

10th October 2011

——
Government agencies for each area:

National and International Affairs
——
Tanggungan
Parlimen
Pejabat Penyimpan Mohor Besar Raja-Raja
Jabatan Audit
Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya
Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Awam
Jabatan Perdana Menteri
Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam
Jabatan Peguam Negara
Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM)
Kementerian Luar Negeri
Kementerian Wilayah Persekutuan dan Kesejahteraan Bandar
Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Pendidikan
Kementerian Penerangan, Komunikasi dan Kebudayaan
Simpanan Luar Jangka
Kementerian Pembangunan Usahawan dan Koperasi
Kementerian Perpaduan, Kebudayaan, Kesenian dan Warisan
Kementerian Hal Ehwal Dalam Negeri

Education, Talent and Employment
——
Kementerian Pelajaran
Kementerian Sumber Manusia
Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi

Economics and Finance
——
Kementerian Kewangan
Kementerian Perdagangan Antarabangsa dan Industri
Kementerian Perdagangan Dalam Koperasi dan Kepenggunaan
Kementerian Pelancongan

Community Wellbeing
——
Kementerian Pengangkutan
Kementerian Kesihatan
Kementerian Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan
Kementerian Belia dan Sukan
Kementerian Pembangunan Wanita, Keluarga dan Masyarakat

Security
——
Kementerian Pertahanan
Kementerian Dalam Negeri

Agriculture and Regional Development
——
Kementerian Perusahaan Perladangan dan Komoditi
Kementerian Pertanian dan Industri Asas Tani
Kementerian Kemajuan Luar Bandar dan Wilayah

Infrastructure, Resource Management and Environment
——
Kementerian Sumber Asli dan Alam Sekitar
Kementerian Kerja Raya
Kementerian Tenaga, Teknologi Hijau dan Air
Kementerian Sains, Teknologi dan Inovasi

Written by politweet

October 10, 2011 at 11:43 pm