ANALYSIS THE REVENUE AND EXPENSE ON ECONOMIC GROWTH, POVERTY, AND UNEMPLOYMENT (Study of State Revenue and Expense Budget for 1999 – 2006)

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study are to know effect variables expense and revenue on economic growth, poverty and unemployment. The samples of the study are APBN for 1999 – 2006. The result study with descriptive analysis indicate that revenue and expense meanly increase, but increase expense bigger than revenue. Indicate this meanly deficit. The gowth economic and unemployment meanly increase, while poverty fluctuative from year to year. The result of study with regression indicate that expense_t-1 positively significant effect on revenue_t. For effect revenue_t and revenue_t-1 on unemployment_t indicate positively significant effect. The effect expense_t and expense_t-1 on unemployment_t indicate positively significant effect. For effect economic growth_t-1 on unemployment_t indicate positively significant effect.

Keyword: expense, revenue, economic growth, poverty, unemployment

BACKGROUND

Fiscal policy will influence the economics growth through state revenue and expense. Stable economics growth expected will lessen the poverty level and depress the unemployment amount. Others fiscal policy according to Musgrave in Bastian ( 2001) is as allocation, distribution and stabilization function. For that, management of revenue and expense being based on economic, efficient, and effective (value for money) representing compulsion to all handle of policy and finance organizer in this country. Existence of difference between revenue and expense will generate the surplus or deficit. In deficit or surplus calculation of state revenue and expenditure budget require to be paid attention to revenue type which can be categorized as national income and expense type which can be categorized as state expenditure.

At revenue be optimal of existing acceptance do not only hold on to the extensification, but also intensification and also economic activity growth. In area of development expense representing the part of state expense in order to assisting to depress the deficit, proposed to conduct the rationalization by revising development project which its priority relative lower without having to sacrifice the social programs of especial base which can degrade the service quality to society or program the economics stimulus. Priority scale in development expense do not only affect at make-up of quality of society service, but also at revenue in period to coming. Optimalization of revenue and selectifitas and also expense priority will grow the economics affecting directly and also indirectly to decrease poverty and reduction sum up the unemployment. Research of Dritsakis and Adamopoulos ( 2004) proving that state expense have an effect by signifikan on economic growth. Mayper Dkk (1991) indicating that expense have an effect on poverty level.

Policy of value for money at state revenue and expense cover the policy of applying of acceptance system, expense and friction of state revenue and expense budget in development budget which is concerning efforts optimalization at step of planning and execution of state revenue and expense budget. The Efforts for example (Ritonga, 2004): (1) Elementary policy stipulating. In the case of stipulating, scale of selectifitas and priority in economic growth, decrease of poverty and unemployment reduction represent matter which must prioritize. (2) Macro assumption stipulating. This related with the goals to reach the optimal economics growth, reduction sum up the poverty which significant and also depress the unemployment amount. (3) Adequate planning stages stipulating. In conducting management of state revenue and expense of planning stages start from compilation evaluate and monitoring and also feed back conducted systematically. (4) Stipulating of execution rule. In the stages execution hold on to the input, process, output, outcome, and affect and also target. Fourth of the effort have to be executed by sinergy, synchronize and systematic in order to supporting efficacy of value for money to increase productivity of management of state's finance in the form of revenue and expense instructing at healthy economics, stabilize and delay.

Economics growth non-stoped show the settled for a number of years repair did not mean that work have. Economics not yet convalesce full, activity in number of sector specially real sector still below capacities. Economic growth also not yet last for permeating unemployment and overcome poverty. This because of economics still fragile to shock, either due political factor, social, other state condition and also other matters. Final purpose economic Growth is improve the people prosperity through decrease of poverty and reduction sum up the unemployment and also various other problems which knock over this country.

RESEARCH PURPOSE

Pursuant to description which this research background, hence this research purpose as follows:

1. To know the influence expense_t-1 on revenue_t.

2. To know the influence of revenue_t and expense_t on economic growth_t, poverty_t, and unemployment_t.

3. To know the influence of revenue_t-1 and expense_t-1 on economic growth_t, poverty_t, and unemployment_t.

4. To know the influence of economic growth_t and economic growth_t-1 on poverty_t and unemployment_t.

RESEARCH CONTRIBUTION

Pursuant to background and research purpose, hence this research contribution shall be as follows:

1. Theory contribution. Adding and extending theory of state revenue and expense and related also with the economic growth, poverty, and unemployment.

2. Policy contribution. For taker of policy and organizer of state's finance serve the purpose of appliance to be optimal of value for money related state revenue and expense with the economic growth, decrease of poverty and reduction sum up the unemployment.

3. Practical contribution. To all investor serve the purpose of reference in inculcating its invesment related with the policy of management of state revenue and expense and also economic growth.

THEORETICAL STUDY AND HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT

Optimalization in execution state revenue and expense budget also very determined by how budget consumer specify the such stages for example through policy in applying system of acceptance and expense, that is in executing state revenue and expense conducted by standarization of activity component of inclusive of its unit price. Others, its optimal budget execution also determined by how budget consumer adhere the rule which have been specified, what in it for example arranged to hit the principles, organizational, groove the budget compilation, things prohibited et cetera. The rule And stages represent some of evaluation in public expenditure.

For that element of public expenditure which always evaluated to cover six aspect, that is (Bastian, 2001) 1. Middle macro plan evaluation. Evaluate this focussed at process of budget planning and program the middle measure. 2. Evaluate the composition of expenditure intern and sectoral intra. Evaluate this focussed by a expenditure item to one unit work and sinergy with the unit work the other. 3. Eavluation of governmental role and private sector. Evaluate this addressed to know the governmental role change and private sector in society. Ever greater of private sector role, hence progressively role less be governmental 4. Evaluate the strategic programs impact for impecunious society group with the approach cost-effectively. Evaluate the program of poverty decrease become the especial program in make-up of society prosperity, besides elementary service program, health and education 5. Evaluate the routine expenditure and development expense. Evaluate this more addressed at governmental performance mechanism in handling various duty of operational and invesment 6. Evaluate the expenditure impact to make-up of governmental capacities. Evaluate this focussed at efectifitas of expenditure of human resource in developing organizational capacities.

In execution of state revenue and expenditure budget oftentimes met that what have been planned in its execution met by the difficulty so that need the change or which often referred revisedly. Change of state revenue and expense constituted with the correct consideration and ripeness will be optimal of state's finance management. The change also followed by selectifitas and priority scale specially at state expense. It optimalization is state expense at the moment expected will have an in with revenue in a period to coming. Adi (2006) conducting research to test the impact of expense structure on economic growth as well as area origin revenue. This Research to test the influence directly and indirectly expense change to area origin revenue. Data used in this research is data of area revenue and expense budget realization of regency and town of se Java - Bali for 1998 - 2003. This research result indicate that the expense structure have an effect on by signifikan to economic growth and area origin revenue. This Research also find that governmental decision for the allocation of bigger capital expense to support the economic growth will improve the area origin revenue. Relate at the mentioned, derivable hence the following hypothesis:

H_A1: expense_t-1 have an effect on revenue_t.

The state revenue and expense budget represent the integral part from economics by agrerat. Thereby policy of state revenue and expense budget in turn will influence the economics activity. The numbers of state revenue and expense budget very determined by economic growth estimate and plan the policy taken by government. Thereby, goals of economic is state revenue and expense budget prospect and have to be compiled as realistic as possible by considering all causality from the reciprocal interaction. In general, society in fact confess the governmental function as public supplier and public facility like health, education and housing, governmental expense matching with economic service and revenue in general. Politically and economics, public expense and revenue that can classificated in (Bastian, 2006): (1) Social invesment - project and service improving economic growth and labour productivity. (2) Social consumption - project and service debasing expense reproduce from labour. Both the things playing a part in to lessen the amount of poverty and unemployment. (3) Social expenditure - project and service signed to ascertain the social stability.

Classic problems in state finance is expenditure requirement non-stoped progressively mount, whereas on the other hand strive the state acceptance unable to keep abreast of the expenditure requirement, either due reason of limitation of capacities of administration and also degradation of acceptance bases. This condition cause the execution of programs of social trouble-shooting and development, economic, politics and punish and also poverty decrease not yet get supported full through state revenue and expense buget. Dritsakis And Adamopoulos (2004) conducting link research between expense of economic growth and state. The research purpose is to analyse the tendency in public expense at growth of political economy of Greek and determine the cause and economic growth source by long-range link existence with the economic growth. Data used cover the time period between for 1960 - 2000. Mayper Dkk (1991) checking factors having an effect on to budget change. Result of research show the expense have an effect on to poverty level. Effort made to determine the causality between economic growth and expense use the theory Wagner'S. Empirical Analysis of public expense pursuant to law Wagner'S show related between public expense with the economic growth. Based at the mentioned, derivable hence the following hypothesis:

H_A2: revenue_t have an effect on economic growth_t.

H_A3: revenue_t have an effect on poverty_t.

H_A4: revenue_t have an effect on unemployment_t.

H_A5: expense_t have an effect on economic growth_t.

H_A6: expense_t have an effect on poverty_t.

H_A7: expense_t have an effect on unemployment_t.

H_A8: revenue_t-1 have an effect on economic growth_t.

H_A9: revenue_t-1 have an effect on poverty_t.

H_A10: revenue_t-1 have an effect on unemployment_t.

H_A11: expense_t-1 have an effect on economic growth_t.

H_A12: expense_t-1 have an effect on poverty_t.

H_A13: expense_t-1 have an effect on unemployment_t.

Decline that happened at real sector result the increasing of poverty number and sum up the unemployment, either in urban and also in countryside. In order to poverty decrease and lessen the unemployment, claimed governmental to take the fiscal policy initiative to grow the economics. With the existence of settled economics growth and stabilize will push to decrease of poverty number and depress the unemployment amount. Relate at the mentioned, derivable hence the following hypothesis:

H_A14: economic growth_t have an effect on poverty_t.

H_A15: economic growth_t have an effect on unemployment_t.

H_A16: economic growth_t-1 have an effect on poverty_t.

H_A17: economic growth_t-1 have an effect on unemployment_t.

RESEARCH METHOD

Research Design

This research design see the influence expense_t-1 on revenue_t, influence revenue_t, revenue_t-1, expense_t, and expense_t-1 on economic growth, poverty, and unemployment and also influence of economic growth_t-1 and economic growth_t on poverty and unemployment. By scematic, research design to depict the path of problems and answer expected and also model its examination can be described as following:

expense_t-1 revenue_t

Regression

Figure 1.

revenue_t poverty_t

expense_t economic growth_t

revenue_t-1 economic growth_t-1

expense_t-1 unemployment_t

Regression

Figure 2.

Sample and Data

This research represent the explanatory research as a mean to test the raised hypothesis. Sampel in this research is state revenue and expense budget for period 1999 - 2006. Research variable is revenue, expense, economic growth, mount the poverty and sum up unemployment.

Data Analysis

Analysis the this research data done by using analysis in line with research. As for technique which used as following.

Descriptive Analysis

This analysis used to know data description in the form of minimum, maximum, mean, and standard deviasi value from variable expense_t-1, expense_t, revenue_t-1, revenue_t, economic growth_t-1, economic growth_t, poverty_t and unemployment_t.

Regression Analysis

This Analyse used to test the alternative hypothesis 1 - 17. By means of this enabled by influence examination variable on other variable. To know how big independent variable influence on variable dependen seen from value significantion. If value of significantion smaller than 0.05, hence independent variable have an effect on variable dependen, conversely. Regression model used in this research applicable if assumption in the following can be fullfiled. The assumption cover the distribution data normally, not happened the autocorellation, not happened the multicollinearity, and not happened the equality between variance from residual one perception with the other perception.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Descriptive Analysis

This analysis done to count minimum, maximum, mean and standard deviasi mean of research variable. Pursuant to calculation which have been done at each accurate variable, hence obtained result as contained in tables 1. in the following.

Table 1.

Description of Result of Variable Calculation

	N	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Deviation Standard
Revenuet-1	7	200.64	509.00	322.6100	108.96621
Revenuet	7	205.33	621.60	382.7471	141.68322
Expenset-1	7	221.45	542.40	350.7971	114.02098
Expenset	7	221.45	647.70	411.6871	143.45577
Economic Growtht-1	7	0.97	5.53	3.8829	1.54313
Economic Growtht	7	3.34	5.53	4.4871	0.91118
Unemploymentt	7	6.40	11.20	9.3614	1.69167
Povertyt	7	16.00	21.50	17.8500	1.89934

Source: Secunder Data of State Revenue and Expense Budget for 1999 – 2006 (processed)

At above mentioned tables show the value of revenue_t-1 minimum is 200.64 triliun in the year 1999 and maximum revenue_t-1 is 509 triliun in the year 2005, revenue_t-1 mean is 322.61 triliun with the standard deviasi is 108.966 triliun. Revenue_t-1 from year 1999 until year 2005 in meanly experience increase except year 2002 degradation experience. Assess the minimum revenue_t is 205.33 triliun in the year 2000 and maximum revenue_t is 621.6 triliun in the year 2006, revenue_t mean is 382.747 triliun with the standard deviasi is 141.68 triliun. Revenue_t from year 2000 until year 2006 in mean experience improvement except of year 2002 which experience of the degradation. This matter indicate that the effort to increase revenue in an optimal fashion have been done by government with the existence of increase in national income mean.

Value of the minimum expense_t-1 is 221.45 triliun in the year 2000 and maximum expense_t-1 is 542.4 triliun in the year 2005, expense_t-1 mean is 350.797 triliun with the standard deviasi is 114.02 triliun. For the expense_t-1 from year 1999 until year 2005 in mean experience of improvement except year 2000 and 2002 experience of degradation. Value of the minimum expense_t is 221.45 triliun in the year 2000 and maximum expense_t is 647.7 triliun in the year 2006, expense_t mean is 411.687 triliun with the standard deviasi is 143.456 triliun. For the expense_t from year 2000 until year 2006 in mean experience improvement except year 2002 experience of degradation.

For the revenue_t-1 of expense_t-1 in bigger mean at expense_t-1 compared with revenue_t-1. This show in mean of existence deficit of state revenue and expense budget for period 1999 - 2005. For the revenue_t of expense_t in bigger mean also at expense_t compared with revenue_t. This show in mean of existence deficit state revenue and expense budget for period 2000 - 2006. The existence of this deficit usually covered with by debt from outside country or governmental obligation sale to other party. In the event of continuous deficit, hence governmental debt will be ever greater because of fundamental and interest which always experience of the increase. For that, need the existence of management of state expense which stimulus of make-up of national income through selectifitas and project priority executed by government.

Value of the minimum economic growth_t-1 is 0.97% in the year 1999 and maximum economic growth_t-1 is 5.3% in the year 2005, mean economic growth_t-1 is 3.88% with the standard deviasi is 1.54%. For the economic growth_t-1 from year 1999 until year 2005 in mean experience increase except of year 2001 experience of degradation. For the minimum economic growth_t is 3.34% in the year 2001 and maximum economic growth_t is 5.3% in the year 2005, mean economic growth_t is 4.487% with the standard deviasi is 0.91%. For the economic growth_t from year 2000 until year 2006 in mean experience increase except year 2001 and 2006 experience of degradation.

Seenly the mentioned in economic growth mean at period 2000 - 2006 higher compared with the period 1999 - 2005. This matter because of economic growth in the year 1999 which still relative minimize caused by cure process from economics crisis which knock over this country. Every 1% economic growth will be able to permeate the labour to 200.000 people. With the existence of the mentioned at period 1999 - 2005 labour which can be permeated by as much 776,000 people or in mean as much 129,333 people. At period 2000 - 2006 labour which can be permeated by as much 1,060,000 people or in mean as much 176,667 people. This means at the period mount the unemployment decrease as much absorbent labour. Relative minimize the absorbent labour or decrease sum up the unemployment represent the homework which must be improve and improved by government by various program which grow the economics and also lessen the unemployment amount.

Sum up the minimum unemployment_t is 6.4% in the year 2000 and maximum unemployment_t is 11.2% in the year 2005, unemployment_t mean is 9.36% with the standard deviasi is 1.69%. For the unemployment_t from year 2000 until year 2006 in mean experience increase except year 2001 experice of degradation. For sum up level of minimum poverty_t is 16% in the year 2005 and sum the maximum poverty_t is 21.5% in the year 2001, level of mean poverty_t is 17.85% with the standard deviasi is 1.9%. For sum the poverty_t from year 2000 until year 2006 experiencing of fluktuatif from year to year.

Regression Analysis

Rgression analyssi done basically represent answers to assorted of influence between various variable used in this research. This Model show link pattern which comprehensive to relative various research variable, in direct context and also indirectly. Regression analysis in this model determined seenly value of significantion, when value of significantion smaller than 0.05, hence independent variable have an effect on signifikan on variable dependen, conversely. Before conducting examination regression, hence conducted classic assumption test that cover normality, multicollinearity, heteroskedastisity and autocorellationi. Result of classis assumption test indicate that the variable used at this research have fulfilled the raised classic assumption, so that model the the regresi represent the good appliance prediksi and not deflect. Result of examination between variable expense_t-1 on revenue_t shown in tables in the following.

Table 2.

Result of Examination Between Variable of Expense_t-1 on Revenue_t

	Coefficient
constanta	-30.229
expenset-1 revenuet	1.177**

** significant at level α = 0.05

Source: Secunder Data of State Revenue anda Expense Budget 1999 – 2006 (processed)

Pursuant to above mentioned tables indicate that the expense_t-1 have an effect on positively on revenue_t. Thereby acceptable H_A1. This result support the research conducted by Nikolaos and Adamopoulos (2004) expressing that expense_t-1 have an effect on revenue_t. This also indicate that the expense relied on selectifiti and priority scale for the project of which can improve revenue in period to coming. Every increase expense_t-1 one set of will improve the revenue_t is 1.177. Value R² is 0.898, this means that revenue_t influenced by expense_t-1 is 89.8%, while 10,2% influenced by other variable.

To result of examination between variable of revenue_t on economic growth_t and variable of revenue_t on poverty_t and unemploymen_t and also variable expense_t on economic growth_t and variable of expense_t on poverty_t and unemploymen_t can be shown in tables in the following.

Table 3

Result of Examination Between Variable Revenue_t and Expense_t on Economic Growth_t, Poverty_t, and Unemployment_t

	Coefficient
constanta	3.056
revenuet economic growtht	0.004
R2 = 0.338
constanta	22.246
economic growtht povertyt	-0.980
R2 = 0.221
constanta	20.013
revenuet povertyt	-0.006
R2 = 0.178
constanta	5.708
economic growtht unemploymentt	0.814
R2 = 0.192
constanta	5.322
revenuet unemploymentt	0.011*
R2 = 0.781
constanta	3.039
expenset economic growtht	0.004
R2 = 0.178
constanta	20.032
revenuet povertyt	-0.005
R2 = 0.160
constanta	5.034
revenuet unemploymentt	0.011*
R2 = 0.795

* significant at level α = 0.01

** significan at lecel α = 0.05

Source: Secunder Data of State Revenue anda Expense Budget 1999 – 2006 (processed)

Reference at tables 3 above mentioned indicate that the revenue_t have not an significant effect on economic growth_t. Thereby H_A2 refused. Influence of economic growth_t on poverty_t nor show the influence by signifikan. Thereby H_A14 refused. This matter possible because of economic growth not give the opportunity of impecunious resident to obtain the higher level production. Others, also caused by project giving contribution of economic growth do not or less affect at poverty decrease. For the influence of revenue_t on poverty_t not show the influence which significant. Thereby H_A3 refused. Influence of economic growth_t on unemployment_t not show the influence which significant. Thereby H_A15 refused. This matter possible because of economic growth not touch the real sector so that not affect reduction sum up the unemployment. For the influence of revenue_t on unemployment_t show the influence which positive significant. Thereby H_A4 accepted. For increase of one set of revenues will improve the unemployment amount to 0.011. Value R² is 0.781, this means that unemployment_t influenced by revenue_t is to 78.1%, while 20.9% influenced by other variable.

The influence of expense_t on economic growth_t not show the influence which significant. Thereby H_A5 refused. Result of this research not support the research that conducted by Nikolaos and Adamopoulos (2004) expressing that expense_t have an effect on economic growth_t. This matter possible because of expense released not pursuant to selektifity and priority scale of project giving contribution of economic growth. For the influence of expense_t on poverty_t nor show the influence which significant. Thereby H_A6 refused. Result of this research not support the research that conducted by Mayper et.all (1991) expressing that expense expenditure have an effect on poverty level. This possible because of expense released less or is not used for the project of giving the make-up of revenue for pauper or lack of accessing pauper to project from the expense. The influence expense_t on unemployment_t show influence which positive significant. Thereby H_A7 accepted. Every increase one set of expense_t will improve the unemployment is 0.011. This indicate that the state expense less or is not selective to project which aim to to lessen the unemployment amount. Others, also enabled by the existence of leakage and corruption at state expense.

At examination result between variable of revenue_t-1 on economic growt_t, variable of revenue_t-1 on poverty_t and unemployment_t, variable of expense_t-1 on economic growt_t, variable of expense_t-1 on poverty_t and unemployment_t and also variable of economic growt_t on poverty_t and unemployment_t can be shown in tables in the following.

Table 4

Result of Examination Between Variable of Revenue_t-1 and Expense_t-1 on Economic Growth_t, Poverty_t, and Unemployment_t and also economic growth_t-1 on poverty_t, and unemployment_t

	Coefficient
constanta	2.9
revenuet-1 economic growtht	0.005
R2 = 0.346
constanta	21.168
revenuet-1 povertyt	-0.010
R2 = 0.348
constanta	4.973
revenuet-1 unemploymentt	0.014*
R2 = 0.768
constanta	2.878
expenset-1 economic growtht	0.005
R2 = 0.329
constanta	21.48
expenset-1 povertyt	-0.010
R2 = 0.386
constanta	4.797
expenset-1 unemploymentt	0.013*
R2 = 0.769
constanta	18.262
economic growtht-1 povertyt	-0.106
R2 = 0.007
constanta	6.020
economic growtht-1 unemploymentt	0.861*
R2 = 0.785

* significant at level α = 0,01

** significant at level α = 0,05

Source: Secunder Data of State Revenue anda Expense Budget 1999 – 2006 (processed)

Base on the tables 4. above mentioned indicate that the revenue_t-1 not have an significant effect on economic growth_t. Thereby H_A8 refused. The influence revenue_t-1 on poverty_t nor show the influence significant. Thereby H_A9 refused. For the influence of revenue_t-1 on unemployment_t show influence which significant positive. Thereby H_A10 accepted. Every increase revenue_t-1 one set will increase unemployment_t is 0,014. Value R² is 0.768, this means that unemployment_t influenced by revenue_t-1 is 76.8%, while 23.2% influenced by other variable.

The influence expense_t-1 on economic growth_t not show the influence which significant. Thereby H_A11 refused. Result of this research not support the research conducted by Nikolaos and Adamopoulos (2004) expressing that expense_t-1 have an effect on economic growth_t. For the influence of expense_t-1 on poverty_t not show the influence which significant. Thereby H_A12 refused. The influence expense_t-1 on unemployment_t show influence which positive signifikan. Thereby H_A13 accepted. Every increase expense_t-1 one set of will increase unemployment_t is 0.013. Value R² is 0,769, this means that unemployment_t influenced by expense_t-1 is 76.9%, while 23.1% influenced by other variable.

The influence of economic growth_t-1 on poverty_t not show the influence which significant. Thereby H_A15 refused. For the influence of economic growth_t-1 on unemployment_t show influence which significant. Thereby H_A16 accepted. Every increase of economic growth_t-1 one set will increase unemployment_t is 0.861. Value R² is 0.785, this means that unemployment_t influenced by economic growth_t-1 is 78.5%, while 21.5% influenced by other variable.

CONCLUTION, LIMITATION, AND SUGGESTION

Conclution

Base on result and solution, hence this research conclusion is revenue and expense in mean experience of the improvement, but improvement in mean of revenue and expense is bigger at expense compared revenue. This show in mean of existence of deficit. For the growth of economic and unemployment in mean experience of the increase, while poverty experience fluktuatif from year to year.

With the regression examination indicate that the expense_t-1 have an positive effect on revenue_t. For the influence of revenue_t on unemployment_t show influence which positive signifikan. The influence expense_t on unemployment_t show influence which positive signifikan. For the influence of revenue_t-1 on unemployment_t show influence which positive signifikan. The influence expense_t-1 on unemployment_t show influence which positive signifikan. For the influence of economic growth_t-1 on unemployment_t show influence which signifikan.

Limitation

This research own the limitation because variable used only just revenue and expense on economic growth, poverty, and unemployment, while there are other variable that have an effect on variabelof economic growth, poverty, and unemployment. Sampel used only at state revenue and expense budget for period 1999 - 2006.

Suggestion

Suggestion in this research for research hereinafter require to add or change independent variable and also relevant with the poverty and unemployment. Others, obyek research nor only at state revenue and expense budget, but also at region revenue and expense budget and also add the period of research time.

REFERENCE

Adi, Priyo Hari. 2006. Hubungan Antara Pertumbuhan Ekonomi Daerah, Belanja Pembangunan dan Pendapatan Asli Daerah. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi IX Padang.

Bastian, Indra. 2001. Akuntansi Sektor Publik di Indonesia. Penerbit BPFE – Yogyakarta.

____________ 2002. Akuntansi Untuk Pelayanan Publik. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan Sektor Publik.

Boediono. 2004. Kebijakan Fiskal: Sekarang dan Selanjutnya. Kumpulan Tulisan Kebijakan Fiskal, Pemikiran, Konsep, dan Implementasi. Penerbit Buku Kompas. Jakarta.

Bunga Rampai Kebijakan Fiskal. 2002. Badan Analisa Fiskal. Departemen Keuangan RI. Japan International Cooperation Agency.

Cooper, Donald. R dan Schindler, Pamela S. 2001. Business Research Methods. McGraw-Hill.

Dritsakis, Nikolaos dan Adamopoulos, Antonis. 2004. A Causal Relationship Between Government Spending and Economic Development: An Empirical Examination of the Greek Economy. Journal Applied Economics.

Djoyosubroto, Dono Iskandar. 2004. Koordinasi Kebijakan Fiskal dan Moneter di Indonesia. Kumpulan Tulisan Kebijakan Fiskal, Pemikiran, Konsep, dan Implementasi. Penerbit Buku Kompas. Jakarta.

Ghozali, Imam. 2005. Konsep dan Aplikasi dengan Program AMOS Ver. 5.0. Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro. Semarang.

____________ 2005. Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate Dengan Program SPSS. Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro. Semarang.

Gujarati, Damodar N. 1998. Basic Econometrics. International Edition. McGraw-Hill.

Hair, Jr., Andersen dan W.C Black. 1998. Multivariate Data Analysis. Fifth Edition. Prentice Hall International. New Jersey.

Henley, D. dkk. 1993. Public Sector Accounting and Financial Control. Fourth Edition. The Chapman & Hall.

Indiatuti, Rina, 2004, The Financing of Regional Development and Economic Growth in West Java Province, International Conference Series, Bandung.

Mahi, B. Raksaka, 2004, Local Government Financing Strtaegies, International Conference Series, Bandung.

Mardiamo. 2002. Otonomi dan Manajemen Keuangan Daerah. Penerbit Andi Offset. Yogyakarta.

Mayper, dkk. 1991. An Analysis of Municipal Budget Variance. Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal Vol. 4 No.1.

Praptosuhardjo, Prijadi. 2004. Paket Kebijakan Penyesuaian APBN 2001. Kumpulan Tulisan Kebijakan Fiskal, Pemikiran, Konsep, dan Implementasi. Penerbit Buku Kompas. Jakarta.

Ritonga, A. Anshari. 2004. Kebijakan Efisiensi Belanja Negara. Kumpulan Tulisan Kebijakan Fiskal, Pemikiran, Konsep, dan Implementasi. Penerbit Buku Kompas. Jakarta.

Sumodiningrat, Gunawan. 2002. Ekonometrika Pengantar. Penerbit BPFE – Yogyakarta.

Wardhana, Ali. 2004. Economic Reform in Indonesia: The Transition From Resource Dependence to International Competitiveness. Kumpulan Tulisan Kebijakan Fiskal, Pemikiran, Konsep, dan Implementasi. Penerbit Buku Kompas. Jakarta.

Yustika, Ahmad Erani, 2004, Development and Poverty in Indonesia: A New Institutional Economics Perspective, International Conference Series, Bandung.

sumber : http://www.findpdffile.com/id/doc/Jurnal%20Akuntansi-1.html