Deficit hawks are hypocrites.

In my time, I was very concerned about cumulative deficits. My reservations were anchored on the suspicions that deficit spending may be due to financial indiscipline and financial indiscretions. Departments writing their budgets wanting to buy things or enlarging departments without actually using the additional expenditure. Budget deficits could also be accounted for by the manner by which departments do their budgets. Each year end, they will spend money frantically fearing that any leftovers would indicate they don't need the money in the first place. Otherwise,  next year's budget will be scaled down. No department heads want to have scaled down budgets.

More importantly, whenever the state presents its budget, less emphasis is placed on strategies to increase revenue. Tax base, tax collection. But you can't squeeze blood out of stone. What about non tax income? Government investments are one. But if your GLCs are managed by nincompoops, you can't expect to rake in money. Hence you are doomed.

I never questioned though, the deficit portion that is spent on the needy. The expenditure I termed and used as transfer payments. Subsidies going to free loaders- I object.

When Minister Idris Jala made his doomsday predictions, I questioned his blanket denunciation of subsidies, in particular those going to the needy. His predictions created havoc leading to contradictory statements coming from the 15^th Floor of the MOF. He accepts the outcomes predicted based on an economy growing at 3% p.a besieged by a deficit rate growing at 12%. He assumes further, government ministers do nothing to address the situation other than enjoy some musical soirees at PETRONAS Philharmonic amphitheater or the PM's plush residence.

I think the PM will of course do something. Dropping Idris Jala is one option.

Idris is perhaps an unregistered member of the deficit hawks. In particular those who sanctimoniously declare we should stop giving subsidies to the poor but at the same time say nothing when there are ideas to build a new parliament building, spend more on constructing the king's place. I am not sure whether the cost has escalated from 400,000,000 to over RM 800,000,000. For I hear whispers that the actual expenditure has gone up to 1,200,000,000, 1.2 billion. The same voices become mute when told of Felda's dwindling cash reserves and the appointment of Felda's cash reserves to some bizarre applications as revealed by Minister Ahmad Maslan.

What do you call them? They can only be termed like what the economist Paul Krugman described as hypocrites, pure and simple

Perhaps the PM should ask Ahmad Maslan to go down to the grassroots, ask them whether they support cutting subsidies or they would rather object to the escalating cost of the new istana, or the building of a new parliament or are they happy with Maslan's explanation of Felda's disappearing cash reserves.