National defense and security is a typical of public good, therefore deserves to be subsidized. But what if the money is short? One may argue then, let the private to participate --in other words, to pay for their services. And this is the case of Freeport's payment to Indonesian armed forces reported by the Jakarta Post daily.
As quoted
"...Mahidin (the general, my note) added, though, that such payments should not result in the military being seen as mercenary."We've been deployed to difficult areas. Don't we deserve better supplies?" he argued..."
Morality aside, say, let us have private market, and, perhaps, legalize the bribe. But hey, is the national defense really a non-rivalrious goods (the Freeport's consumption would not suck up the service for indigenous people of Wamena tribe)--let alone considering the limited armed forces resources?
Or are we going to privatize the armed-forces/security services? Hang on, dude, does the state exist to monopoly the violence so that we have the so-called public order?
Apology for too many question marks on this posting. But I can't help it :-)
Hi Bang rizal... it's ok my guru if u have so many question cause it meant u are still alive. btw, could you allow me to add one more question i.e is true that our budget is so limited? is there any other ways to increase quality management of budget revenue as well as its allocation? I think the answer is: yes, there is. The phenomenon that private actor (in your case Freeport) is not reluctant to pay more for army services, at least IMHO, one of the prove that we can still improve the budget management from the revenue side and i think there is plenty other options that we can figure it out in expenditure side.
ReplyDeleteit's just my two cents. you might be more expert than me in this matter cause if i'm not mistake one of your specialization is in about budget management.
Hi Bang rizal... it's ok my guru if u have so many question cause it meant u are still alive.
ReplyDeletebtw, could you allow me to add one more question i.e. is it true that our budget still so limited? are there any other ways to increase quality management of budget revenue as well as its allocation? I think the answer is: yes, there is. The phenomenon that private actor (in your case Freeport) is not reluctant to pay more for army services, at least IMHO, one of the prove that we can still improve the budget management from the revenue side and i think there are plenty other options that we can figure it out in expenditure side.
it's just my two cents. you might be more expert than me in this matter cause if i'm not mistake one of your specialization is about budget management.
as a general, he definately got serious brain malfunction. two words : politically incorrect.
ReplyDeleteYou cannot legalize "bribe". One bribes to get unfair advantage over the others. To legalize it means that we would acknowledge "unfairness", which would be straightly in contradiction with our own constitution (that says so much about "keadilan"). I for one will not want to participate in a country where fairness is not one of its moral value.
ReplyDeleteThe correct mechanism to use is simply "tax". The cost to maintain security, including reaslistic personel salary, should be calculated to reflect the real cost, and reflected in the tax. However like everything else in Indonesia, the cost is relatively high because we're stimulating labor intensive approach. In the case of army, we typically maintain a host of low-rank soldiers. They cost a lot, leaving little to pay attractive salaries for the officers.
The solution should be in "efficient production". In the case of army, cut down drastically the number of soldiers. Try to use technology or other non-labor instruments to control security.
I love to see such posts.
ReplyDelete