Akainzo:

I really am amused at how the two of you came to the conclusion of abuse in my post here.

^^Apparently you don't read what you write. So if I tell you that you are spewing rubbish. . .I 'm praising you, right?

Akainzo:

Please you guys should at least read up and learn before coming to spew rubbish on NL ages.

Akainzo:

For your education, the salary scale is what it is, a scale from a - b, where a is the minimum wage and b is the maximum wage. However along that scale of a - b, are a -a1, a2-a3, a4 - a5 , ,  until you'd get the last band. That your newspaper writeup is funny, to have an increase of 1,000 on the Minimum wage would translate to 62% across board! That guy must be doing some voodoo mathematics.

That the minimum wage is increased does not necessarily translate to an increase in the wages of ALL workers across board.  To verify, please ask any HR personnel in a government establishment or company. It's an advice, please read up or conscientiously seek information. That way all of us will benefit.

All this one you wrote is nothing but beer-parlor theory and analysis. Typical of most ignoramuses pontificating on matters they have little knowledge of. Do you actually think salary scales are as simplistic as you outlined above? Did you understand what I meant when I said:

aletheia:

. . .an increase in the minimum wage translates into a graduated increase in the salaries of workers. Lower cadre workers will have a proportionally higher increase in wage compared to higher cadres but nonetheless; all workers will experience an increase in wages.

 
Obviously not.

I repeat:

#1. This is the 3rd time since 1998 that the minimum wage is being raised. On both previous occasions all workers had a pay rise. I know because I benefited. I even explained to you that the pay rise is graduated (if you don't know what that means, go look it up). If you had a job in the Civil Service or a Federal Government Parastatal, you wouldn't be talking this nonsense. So take my advice and go ask a civil servant what are the ramifications of the increased minimum wage for his salary.

#2. It is obvious you have difficulty with the 3 Rs: Reading, Writing and Arithmetic! Where in the quoted Newspaper article did you find:

Akainzo:

to have an increase of 1,000 on the Minimum wage would translate to 62% across board!

a) You show that you do not understand what the phrase across board means.

b) You manufacture figures in order to cover your gross ignorance---just like you manufactured 10% earlier. Where did you find in the article that the minimum wage increased by 1,000. FYI the minimum wage increased from N7,500 to N18,000 (an increase of 240%). Where did you get an increase of N1,000 from? You are one of those ninnies that argue without facts.

#3. Here is a quote by the Minister of Finance:

Tribune Newspaper: Giving further positive indices on the economy, he stated: “Despite absorbing the full impact of the salary increase by 53 per cent in July 2010, we have reduced Non-debt Recurrent Expenditure by 7.02 per cent to N2.48 trillion. Non-debt Recurrent Expenditure includes overheads which we have reduced by 29 per cent from N536 billion to N382 billion, with cuts that affect both the Executive and Legislature;

As anyone can see highlighted above, the increase in minimum wage resulted in an overall wage increase of 53%.

Take your own advice and acquaint yourself with the facts before you come and start spewing forth rubbish figures that you pull out of thin air. And lastly, get an education.

Atiku stated that capital expenditure in this budget is the lowest in recent times compared to other budgets. Can atiku do us the favour of matching capital budgets in previous years with tangibles in terms of implementation?

well GEJ has replied. lets hear from Atiku again

The total projected fiscal deficit was cut from 6.06% of GDP in 2010 to 3.62% in the 2011 Budget Proposal; this is the first meaningful attempt to start to bring the deficit within the limits prescribed by Nigeria’s fiscal rules under the Fiscal Responsibility Act;
Despite absorbing the full impact of the salary increase by 53% in July 2010, we have reduced Non-debt Recurrent Expenditure by 7.02% to N2.48 trillion. Non-debt Recurrent Expenditure includes overheads which we have reduced by 29% from N536 billion to N382 billion, with cuts that affect both the Executive and Legislature;

Aggregate expenditure has been reduced by 18%, from N5.16 trillion in 2010 to N4.2 trillion in the 2011 Budget Proposal;
Borrowing in 2011 is projected at N865 billion (a reduction of 38% from the N1.3 trillion in 2010) and not N1.4 trillion. This level of borrowing is 20.4% of the Proposed Budget, and not the 33% that is presented in the letter;

The level of capital expenditure in the proposed budget is N1 trillion which is a 43% reduction compared to the 2010 appropriation. However this N1 trillion is higher than the highest amount that has ever been implemented in a 12 or 15 month implementation period. The N919.5 billion utilised in the 15 months comprising the 2009 fiscal year represents the largest amount of capital expenditure expended by our MDAs in any fiscal year.
When considered in the light of this administration’s new approach to funding infrastructure, we believe that our proposal is practical and realistic. As a Government, we recognise that reducing Nigeria’s infrastructure deficit requires more capital and greater implementation capacity than we can afford or provide. We have had to think and act creatively.

The breakdown of the 2011 Federal Budget is very explicit about how the fiscal gap in the 2011 Budget will be funded. According to the details, only N865 billion will come from new borrowing, while the rest will be funded by specific special items. Therefore, it is incorrect, as claimed by the writer in the letter, that with a total deficit of N1.4 trillion, there will be new borrowing of N1.4 trillion;
Accordingly, the planned borrowing of N865 billion would be 20.4% of the entire budget and not 33% of it, while the planned borrowing would be 2.24% of GDP and not 3.62%, as claimed by the writer;

The statement in the letter concerning the figure of the budgeted debt service payment of N542 billion is certainly misleading in the context in which it was portrayed. This is because the debt service obligation of each fiscal year is a reflection of the total debt accumulated over several years by successive administrations and does not simply reflect the size of recent borrowings. For example, it is important to note that over 85% of Nigeria’s external debt was obtained before

@all

I must confess that i have learned more on economic matters on the this thread than i have in my 3 years of senior secondary school. the kind of brilliant contributions from some note worthy contributors and vice versa is what gives me hope that this country will be great one day as we need a mixture of true intelligence and outright stupidity to survive as a country.

now to my contributions. I became a Big fan of Atiku when he spearheaded the fight against Obasanjo on a number of keys issues. He did not have to because all he needed to do was renegotiable is involvement in the Obasanjo presidency. Most Nigerians would have simply asked what is in it for me if you get the third term. My man ATIKU was brave enough to say NO and thus part 1 of the ENIGMA when now np\ow as ATIKU began.

at that time, the only thing our power drunk Obasanjo did not do was ask EFCC to arrest him, because Atiku was too intelligent for the likes of Obasanjo. he did everything humanly possible to cast aspersion on his personality and majority of the name calling atiku get's nowadays are vestiges of those era, for crying out load he even called him a thief. who is the thief? A sitting president clearly telling the organized business community to form a wholy nigerian company to bid for government properties and 48hrs later TRANSCORP was formed with our dear president buying a huge stake with a loan he collected from a bank. Who can refuse a sitting president of a country loan?. the Low for me was him returning to the PDP, but i guess there where is only able to achieve his legitimate ambition because PDP remains the only party with enough spread in Nigeria to win the presidency, Lets not kid ourselves here.

in comparison to ATIKU, GEJ is really pale. he relies on his goodluck to hand him the presidency, hmm we'll see. But it will be wise for everyone to remember that GEJ did not get the presidency until Mr. Obasanjo came out to say on word and thus the doctrine of necessity was born. OBJ made GEJ governor in Bayelsa, He made him Yaradua's VP and now he has made him a president who wants to contest for reelection against clearly stated principle of rotation. GOD save us all.

Atiku should go and keep quiet and it is very good that goodluck is not even replying him. Atiku does not have the right to ask goodluck to defend the budget so he should just keep shut.

9ijaMan:

Since you know better, oya na how many %age of the work force the minimum wage go affect?

I'm still awaiting your response on how you intend to link your posts and comments on this thread with Atiku's letter to the president on that rdiculous budget o!

When you come up with a good reason for foolishly backing up the 10% theory just because it's concerns Jonathan "your headache" then i might just begin to answer you proper.

Now here is an excepts from the finance minister reply to Atiku letter meant to cajole desperate and highly frustrated folks like you.

"Aggregate expenditure has been reduced by 18 per cent, from N5.16 trillion in 2010 to N4.2 trillion in the 2011 Budget Proposal;

“Borrowing in 2011 is projected at N865 billion (a reduction of 38 per cent from the N1.3 trillion in 2010) and not N1.4 trillion.
This level of borrowing is 20.4 per cent of the Proposed Budget, and not the 33 per cent that is presented in the letter;
“The level of capital expenditure in the proposed budget is N1 trillion which is a 43 per cent reduction compared to the 2010 appropriation. However this N1 trillion is higher than the highest amount that has ever been implemented in a 12 or 15-month implementation period. The N919.5 billion utilised in the 15 months comprising the 2009 fiscal year represents the largest amount of capital expenditure expended by our MDAs in any fiscal year.”

He said, “when considered in the light of this administration’s new approach to funding infrastructure, we believe that our proposal is practical and realistic.

“As a government, we recognise that reducing Nigeria’s infrastructure deficit requires more capital and greater implementation capacity than we can afford or provide. We have had to think and act creatively.

“Therefore, our policy focus is on creating the enabling environment to encourage private sector investment in the provision of critical infrastructure services. We are taking bold and decisive actions to address and resolve the infrastructure deficit within the next three years,” the minister said.

jmaine:

so if the borrowed funds means solving the epileptic power situations , pumping money to resuscitate the manufacturing economy by giving out soft loans to qualified personnel also boosting job creation. provision of amenities and also paying the civil servants a wage that can sustain and keep them active and productive to the economy, we should say no. Now how much money ( Trillions) does the U.S.A owe china. maybe with a strong economy like the US ( though not really as sound presently). they shouldn't borrow to finance their means.  is it the debt or the performance of the loan that  is your problem. The problem with Nigeria have never being in the Budget but in the performance of those budgets and i stand to be corrected on that. untill we stamp out nepotism and corruption low budget performance will continue to be our bane. very soon we will hear that Jonathan is the main reason why Nigeria is corrupt, the main reason why PHCN is not functioning, the main reason why we import fuel into the country, the main reason why election violence is rife in the country and the main reason why Nigeria is under developed. You guys should please get a life and be solution channels and not agents of doom just because your candidate is not there.

Now tell me how the emboldened part is far away from the reply of Segun Aganga to that little piece of political scribblings Atiku succeeded in derailing and massaging the ego of his disciples just like you. And you claim to be all knowing, the main reason why some folks are better off not talking at the latest whim cos over time your shallowness is there for all to see. it's even more appalling that you are not even conversant with the perennial problem of low budget performance of the Nigerian government and you are quick to swallow hook, line and sinker of all whatever is thrown at you by your role model Atiku without taking some time out to digest some of the facts placed before you. Don't allow your personnel frustrations to clog your sense of reasoning, it does no one good but unnecessary despair. Damn.

jmaine:

When you come up with a good reason for foolishly backing up the 10% theory just because it's concerns Jonathan "your headache" then i might just begin to answer you proper.

Now here is an excepts from the finance minister reply to Atiku letter meant to cajole desperate and highly frustrated folks like you.

Aggregate expenditure has been reduced by 18 per cent, from N5.16 trillion in 2010 to N4.2 trillion in the 2011 Budget Proposal;

“Borrowing in 2011 is projected at N865 billion (a reduction of 38 per cent from the N1.3 trillion in 2010) and not N1.4 trillion.
This level of borrowing is 20.4 per cent of the Proposed Budget, and not the 33 per cent that is presented in the letter;
“The level of capital expenditure in the proposed budget is N1 trillion which is a 43 per cent reduction compared to the 2010 appropriation. However this N1 trillion is higher than the highest amount that has ever been implemented in a 12 or 15-month implementation period. The N919.5 billion utilised in the 15 months comprising the 2009 fiscal year represents the largest amount of capital expenditure expended by our MDAs in any fiscal year.”

He said, “when considered in the light of this administration’s new approach to funding infrastructure, we believe that our proposal is practical and realistic.

“As a government, we recognise that reducing Nigeria’s infrastructure deficit requires more capital and greater implementation capacity than we can afford or provide. We have had to think and act creatively.

“Therefore, our policy focus is on creating the enabling environment to encourage private sector investment in the provision of critical infrastructure services. We are taking bold and decisive actions to address and resolve the infrastructure deficit within the next three years,” the minister said.


Now tell me how the emboldened part is far away from the reply of Segun Aganga to that little piece of political scribblings Atiku succeeded in derailing and massaging the ego of his disciples just like you. And you claim to be all knowing, the main reason why some folks are better off not talking at the latest whim cos over time your shallowness is there for all to see.

I can't help it but to simply laugh at your level of ignorance.
Aganga, sidestepped by referring to aggregate expenditure and you took it in 'cos you are clueless about what he meant. What Aganga should have done was to compare the budget of 2010, which GEJ was also part of anyways, with that of 2011. The aggregate expenditure in this case would more than likely be referring to expenditures after several appropriations and adjustments made to the 2010 budget during the course of the year. By the end of 2011, this same government would have completely surpassed the figures he's referring to.

The excerpts you posted also shows how completely myopic the GEJ crew are. He expects the private sector to invest in provision of critical infrastructure, a completely laughable comment. Abeg name one single country in the world were they jumped started their economy through the the provision of "CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE" from the private sector.

Great economies evolved through government led investment in the provision of such infrastructures. It's only after then that you'll have private investmnt coming in to make the economy flourish.

If the private sector dey develop "critical infrastructures" wetin our government go dey develop? I guess the answer they'll be developing their individual pockets ad bank accounts!

Do appropriate research with your God given grey matter and don't just sit down lazily swallowing every junk that comes from the government.

9ijaMan:

I can't help it but to simply laugh at your level of ignorance.
Aganga, sidestepped by referring to aggregate expenditure and you took it in 'cos you are clueless about what he meant. What Aganga should have done was to compare the budget of 2010, which GEJ was also part of anyways, with that of 2011. The aggregate expenditure in this case would more than likely be referring to expenditures after several appropriations and adjustments made to the 2010 budget during the course of the year. By the end of 2011, this same government would have completely surpassed the figures he's referring to.

The excerpts you posted also shows how completely myopic the GEJ crew are. He expects the private sector to invest in provision of critical infrastructure, a completely laughable comment. Abeg name one single country in the world were they jumped started their economy through the the provision of "CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE" from the private sector.

Great economies evolved through government led investment in the provision of such infrastructures. It's only after then that you'll have private investmnt coming in to make the economy flourish.

If the private sector dey develop "critical infrastructures" wetin our government go dey develop? I guess the answer they'll be developing their individual pockets ad bank accounts!

Do appropriate research with your God given grey matter and don't just sit down lazily swallowing every junk that comes from the government.

While you sit down lazily and ignorantly swallowing all Junks and rubbish emanating from the desperate and failing Atiku. thank you

aletheia:

^^Apparently you don't read what you write. So if I tell you that you are spewing rubbish. . .I 'm praising you, right?All this one you wrote is nothing but beer-parlor theory and analysis. Typical of most ignoramuses pontificating on matters they have little knowledge of. Do you actually think salary scales are as simplistic as you outlined above?

Obviously since to you they must be rocket sciece, therefore you failed to read up about it or engage people that know and then get educated.
Let me ask you a simple question, Does ALL person in the federal civil service on Grade Level 15 earn the same salary? Once you cannot answer that with a 'Yes', then go an get knowledge about bands in salaries from qualified people.

[Quote] Did you understand what I meant when I said:
 
. . .an increase in the minimum wage translates into a graduated increase in the salaries of workers. Lower cadre workers will have a proportionally higher increase in wage compared to higher cadres but nonetheless; all workers will experience an increase in wages. [/quote]

Let me even humor you by taking your above analysis, so how can this reasoning in the above statement of yours translate to a 62% increase across board?

#2. It is obvious you have difficulty with the 3 Rs: R[/b]eading, [b]W[/b]riting and[b] A[/b]rithmetic! Where in the quoted Newspaper article did you find:
a) You show that you do not understand what the phrase [b]across board means.

As it shows you do not understand the 3Rs neither do you understand the meaning of across board.

b) You manufacture figures in order to cover your gross ignorance---just like you manufactured 10% earlier. Where did you find in the article that the minimum wage increased by 1,000. FYI the minimum wage increased from N7,500 to N18,000 (an increase of 240%). Where did you get an increase of N1,000 from? You are one of those ninnies that argue without facts.

#3. Here is a quote by the Minister of Finance:
As anyone can see highlighted above, the increase in minimum wage resulted in an overall wage increase of 53%.

Take your own advice and acquaint yourself with the facts before you come and start spewing forth rubbish figures that you pull out of thin air. And lastly, get an education.

I did not need to have it in the article that the minimum wage dispute was over the extra 1000, while government was offering 17.5, labour was asking for 18.5

Hmmmm,. now your Minister increased wages in October by 53%, yet wants us to believe that he reduced his non-debt recurring expenditure by 7.02%! So where did the increase by 53% on wages alone disappear to?

As you've been advised, read up and learn. Great people read a lot to amass knowledge.

Akainzo:


Hmmmm,. now your Minister increased wages in October by 53%, yet wants us to believe that he reduced his non-debt recurring expenditure by 7.02%! So where did the increase by 53% on wages alone disappear to?

I wonder o!

Akainzo:

Let me ask you a simple question, Does ALL person in the federal civil service on Grade Level 15 earn the same salary?

Keep making noise; pretending that you know what you are talking about. I hope you understand the distinction between basic salary and allowances? All those on the same salary scale will have the same basic salary. FYI; there are several different salary scales in operation in the Federal Government: CONTISS, CONMESS, CONUASS, TSS etc. Just like your friend Atiku; you know very little about what you are pontificating about yet you seek to bamboozle us with noise and braggadocious bombast. We will not be deceived. As they say: empty vessels make the most noise!

Akainzo:

Let me even humor you by taking your above analysis, so how can this reasoning in the above statement of yours translate to a 62% increase across board?

You are an excellent example of the failed Nigerian educational system.

#1. First of all; go and educate yourself on what a graduated increase means. I had even explained it for you. . .

aletheia:

In case, you don't know: an increase in the minimum wage translates into a graduated increase in the salaries of workers. Lower cadre workers will have a proportionally higher increase in wage compared to higher cadres but nonetheless; all workers will experience an increase in wages.

#2. The minimum wage was raised from N7,500 to N18,000. This represents an increase of N10,500 not N1,000 as you so disingenuously misrepresent. In percentage terms that is a 240% increase. The 62% increase that you are getting agitated about is a weighted average of the differential increases in salaries. I hope you understand what weighted average means?

Akainzo:

I did not need to have it in the article that the minimum wage dispute was over the extra 1000, while government was offering 17.5, labour was asking for 18.5

Misrepresenting the facts as usual. The dispute was for Government to raise the minimum wage from N7,500. Government was offering N17,000. That was a proposed increase of N9,500 not N1,000.

Akainzo:

Hmmmm,. now your Minister increased wages in October by 53%, yet wants us to believe that he reduced his non-debt recurring expenditure by 7.02%! So where did the increase by 53% on wages alone disappear to?

^^If you weren't so obtuse, you will find that he already answered you in his statement. Apparently Arithmetic and English comprehension is not your forte.

For the sake of neutrals who may be misled by all your hot air let me summarize the ebb and flow of this conversation:

#1. Ibime raised a concern:

In Yaraduas last budget, recurrent expenditure was N2.01 trillion. Now its N3.23 trillion.

How did recurrent expenditure jump 35% in just one year? I did not know inflation was that high.

#2. To which I responded:

aletheia:

The FG is still the single largest employer in the country. The increase in the minimum wage can easily account for the 35% rise in recurrent expenditure. . .bearing in mind that wages and salaries are a significant component of recurrent expenditure.

#3. Without taking time to acquaint yourself with the ramifications of the increase in minimum wage, you jumped in with a rather tendentious, insulting and false claim.

Akainzo:

The minimum wage increase affected less than 10% of the FG workforce. That the minimum wage was increased did not mean an increase in the wages of all FG workers. Please you guys should at least read up and learn before coming to spew rubbish on NL ages.

#4. Till now you have been unable to support your claim that less than 10% of the FG workforce is affected by the rise in wages. All you have presented us with is bluster and unsupported claims.

#5. It has been pointed out to you that this is the third time that minimum wage is being raised since 1998. On both previous occasions; All[/b] FG workers experienced a wage rise. I know because I and others all benefited (and I am not a low cadre staff being at GL14 currently). There is no reason for this time to be different. "A man who has an argument is always at the mercy of a man who has an experience." You have your beer-parlor arguments and economic theories; I have the experience of the actual facts.

#6. The Minister of Finance has even provided us with the specific increase in the wage bill of the FG as a result of the increased minimum wage (53%). His words directly show that your claim above is completely false. The workers in Lagos have also provided us with their calculated expected average increase (62%) to affect all Lagos workers, not your hallucinatory less than 10% of workers.

The 53% is even more than the 35% that Mr Ibime expressed concern about. A budget being what it is; receives input from different sectors. In some sectors there will be an increase in spending as in the FG wage bill, other sectors may experience a cut in spending. At the end of the day, the final deficit or surplus will be summation of different income and expenditure streams. I doubt if you have ever prepared a budget before otherwise you would not have asked such a pathetically inane question as:

Akainzo:

So where did the increase by 53% on wages alone disappear to?

#7. I will not respond to the various red herrings that you desperately drag out in an attempt to cover up your gaffe.

#8. You are obviously a man who says: "Don't confuse me with the facts. My mind is already made up."

#9. I shall no more respond to your tirades.