Macro-Economic Policies Consolidation

Macro-Economic Policies Consolidation for National Economic Security In The Mitigating Circumstances of The Global Down-Turn

By Gadis Ranty
The World Economic Outlook published by the International Monetary Funds and East Asia & Pacific Update (topic: “East Asia: Testing Times Ahead), published by the World Bank, in April 2008 had unfolded the East Asia and the world economic preview for year 2008 and 2009. They stressed that the whole world will undergo the economic slowdown for these two years.

According to the Bappenas (National Development Planning Board) analysis publication on May 27, 2008, during 2008-2009, the world economic growth will wane from 4,9 % in 2007 to 3,7 % in 2009. The whole world will follow the US economic slowdown (due to the subprime mortgage crisis), from 2,2 % in 2007 to 0,5 % in 2008, and 0,6 % in 2009. This economic slowdown will affect either the developed countries or the East Asia developing countries.

These past few years and the last one was in 2001, the US economic slowdown generally followed even by the worst slowdown in the rest of the world. However, for 2009, the US economic slowdown purportedly would not turn the severe impact within the East Asian developing countries economies. If the US economy tumbles from 2,2 % in 2007, to 0,5 % in 2008 (descended 77 % from the past years), in the same period, the East Asia developing countries will experience slowdown for only 15,7 %. Consecutively, Indonesia economy and Korea economy will be suffered slowdown by 4,8 % and by 6,1 %. Meanwhile, Thailand economy will otherwise increase by 4,2 %.

Based on The World Bank publication, there are several reasons behind the leverage of East Asian developing countries economic securities. First, the East Asian countries underlying trend is higher 4-5 % than developed countries trend. Hence, whenever there is any economic growth fluctuation among the industrial countries (e.g. the US economic slowdown in the early of 2008), the fluctuation happened inside the East Asian region would not diverge from the trend. The trend is going to ease the economic shocks towards the region. Second, in the prior US recession in 2001, caused by the burst of growth “bubble” in “high-tech” sector, the fall of US import incited incommensurate US import from other countries. Notwithstanding, as stated in the World Bank report, the development data of 2008-2009 indicated no significant on East Asian countries import decrease, as happened in 2001. Third, unlike the 2001 crisis, and the years before, after the China and Middle-East countries had emerged as the new economic forces, the level of trade dependency on US recoiled from 34 % in 1999 to 29 % in 2006.

Learning of how strong are the East Asian developing countries withstanding the cyclus economic tremors from the developed countries, Indonesia could start to consolidate its macro-economic policies (fiscal policies, monetary policies and its payment balances). The term of consolidation was implied from the “Leader-Follower” model--suggested by Miranda S. Goeltom, as cited by Mudrajad Kuncoro (2008) . The point is, the coordination has to refer to the sequence of the policies actions. An authority has to issue the policies which are compatible with the external environmental challenges. Next, these policies shall be responded by the other policy makers. Whenever the oil price soars, the fiscal authorities need to adjust the government expenditure policies immediately, while the monetary authorities need to be the follower by setting the monetary policies which not disrupt the macro-economic stability. The monetary authorities in other case (the currency crisis), could undertake the leader position by direct intervention in the obligation and the foreign currency markets while the fiscal authorities become the follower by countenancing the safety net to diminish the serious serial effects of financial systemic risk.

Not only the policy mix on the macro level, the policies coordination on the metaeconomy level shall be conducted as well. The meta environment comprises the anticipation of the natural disruption in the sectoral and in the regional scale. Integrating the farming policies, industries and national energy to optimize the whole capabilities that we have, for warranting the food and energy security.

Indonesia needs to prioritize bridging the national economic development gap (by supporting the most impoverished areas and strengthening the partnership between the areas). The simultaneous movement of the planned economy towards the market economy (through the market liberalization for foreign direct investments)--oriented to boost the export flows; and focused in the education and health management development and real economy rescues for the poverty reduction. In addition, the saving culture could be a recourse for capital and education accumulation for the youth generation. As we can see from China, the saving is a domestic investment prerequirement that become the crucial factor for the economic growth.

The Soap Opera Discourse

The Sinetron a.k.a. Indonesian Soap Opera Discourse

by: Gadis Ranty The sinetrons screened on television have already been far from educative element. At least that's what I saw from the soap opera ala Indonesia that circulates around prime time, from 6pm to 10pm to be exact. Hatred, jealousy, profanity, mockery, become the sentimentality elements, comodificated in form of entertainment. Women's image are discredited, becoming the evil who love violence and profanity. Indonesian society apparently likes such drama. Not only making the audience to sympathize with the victimized women, but the audience are also most likely would scream cursing the demoralized women who intimidate other women. What is this?! Some sort of a match between women, which is then packed in form of sinetron, then presented in front of stupid audience?! Such sinetron programs, bizarrely, are approved by Film Censor Institution (as seen in the opening of the sinetrons). What standard has they used in measuring the decency of a sinetron to be screened in national-scale TV stations such as RCTI and SCTV (two TV stations that sell sinetrons)? I also honestly don\'t understand whether such sinetrons are still monitored or not by Indonesian Broadcasting Commission or KPI. Where's the heart of TV programmers in selecting such sinetrons? We surely don't want the society to keep fed with such boring substance. This equals hidden trickery. If Louis Althusser claimed TV as an Ideological State Apparatus with false consciousness in commercial terms, I will go beyond that to think about the impacts of trickery, dementia or madness, to psychological disorder. A bit paranoid? Yes. I care with the young generation who is continuously exposed to programs with unclear content such as stripping sinetrons that only sell sensationalism of life conflict, tears and meanness beyond the limit of normality. For example, in an episode of “Alisa”, there's a scene where Alisa Subandono was forced to clean her boss' teeth using toothpick. The scene (though it didn't shoot the boss' teeth), clearly doesn't portray decency in information ethics. How difficult it is for the entertainment workers to look for money, until they continuously have to stay angry during the sinetron shoots. I think, a good artist at least should be wise in selecting smart scenarios also to care more on the impacts caused by tasteless sinetrons, which are usually very profitable (for the artist). Why do production houses in Indonesia also continuously produce such tasteless sinetrons? Is the young's creativity in this country has sunken down? Or do they see that such sinetrons are the ones preferred by mothers, teenage girls and other women from certain groups? Women are women, why women are the only ones seen?! Production houses have acted politically incorrect or only move through stereotypical mind frame, by thinking shallowly that only women watch sinetrons and women are the only target for such sinetrones because only women have sensitive feelings, which will be crushed when they watch the tacky sinetrons. What do production houses see from the existence of the audience? Is the audience considered as a passive group who will gawk and absorb every program given? Or, media practitioners, particularly these production houses see the audience as an active and smart group that select the desired program themselves? Audience has choices. Audience needs to say ENOUGH to these sadistic, boring sinetrons. Never be proud seeing sinetrons that display your own country's polemics. I think, an information program is a representation of a nation's reality of life. Such argumentation was born without detaching itself from the essence of hyper-reality presented by a media. Indirect socialization that occurs in a long span of time, I believe, can cultivate certain behavior to children and young generation. If sinetron's content is still stuck in the trends of wrath and other heartaches, it is highly possible that Indonesians will change into a temper, emotional, irritable, unfriendly society. We have a need to boycott Indonesian sinetrons. We have to show that we care for the nation's character building. If a hundred even a thousand people don't watch TV, I think it will influence AC Nielsen's rating significantly. Further impact, the sinetrons might be plugged off, because they're no longer considered preferable. Indonesians' diversity should be anticipated by media institutions in Indonesia. I think, the broadcasting system in Indonesia still needs to transform again. The large amount of centralized national TV station (with the emergence of local TV stations), can no longer be relied on in disseminating information variations with quality. The morality of market's taste, is still held tightly by our TV industry. No wonder the national TV stations can determine what program will they choose as they like. Their standard is rating, for bigger ad cakes. If that's the case, I think many things need to be improved for a friendlier Indonesia, aside form its media program side. There's a broadcasting system that also supports each other with the national education system, for more educative programs. I gave this statement without wanting to deny Indonesia's broadcasting industry condition that highly needs capital. I think smart programs can also attract the market—if only media practitioners are more aware on their smart audience. Creativity is surely the answer—where there's a willingness, there should be a way, moreover for a good intention. Aside from that, the creation of a better broadcasting system by facilitating local and community broadcasting should be facilitated. So the unique local content from a certain area can raise to the surface and is not always marginalized. It's even better if, for instance, our broadcasting system can facilitate local entertainment exchange from one area to another, so we know more cultural diversity of each area in Indonesia. Boycotting sinetron and rearrangement of broadcasting system are the only things needed to banish the inhumane sinetrons. The birth of new rating institutions aside from AC Nielsen, can reduce its monopoly in delivering 'magic' ratings for our national TV sinetron programs—if only the institution's auditing is more transparent to the public. Rejection against sinetrons that degrade intellectuality and humanity, along with reorganization of broadcasting system and rating institution, contribute to the birth of friendly Indonesia, that respects its national culture. We need refreshing enterteinment, not a mere schadenfreude entertainment—or entertainment that comes from other people's suffering! *Gadis Ranty is currently a diplomat in training in Ministry of Foreign Affairs. She still actively writes articles for Indonesian Student Association for International Studies.