Geography is one of my favorite subject. I find it very amusing that Bangladesh is like Indonesia without it's outer Islands. If you add the core islands of Java, Madura, Bali and adjacent small islands, it will be very similar to Bangladesh in land area and population.
Eit's, no no no...
One of the unspoken rules in Indonesia: Never say that there is a 'core' and a mere 'territory'. Some Indonesians become
very pissed off, since it implies that some Indonesians are more important than others. I am among them.
While Java is the most populated and most invested in, it can be argued that other areas, such as Papua, receive better funds allocation per population. Papua has less than 2% of the national pop, and yet receives more than 4% of the national budget. Does that mean that Papua has it better than Java?
The area of Java holds more than 60% of the population, and yet, has proportionally less money spent on it. Is that fair?
It's an unending argument I'd prefer you not open. Especially since I could easily claim that Bangladesh also has a 'Core' area that sucks up all the taxes and gives nothing back to the 'outer' areas. Even the World Bank calls BD one of the most centralised countries in the world.
Proof:
Bangladesh’s local governments are highly dependent on a historically centralized national government system. Most of their funding comes from the central government (largely using development aid), and it is not nearly enough. Less than one percent of the Bangladesh’s gross domestic product (or GDP) funds 85 percent of local government development expenditures, and local governments generate very little of their own revenue, especially compared to their counterparts in other low-GDP countries. Dhaka, Bangladesh’s capital city, for example, raises $10 per capita per year while Ethiopian cities average $66 per capita.
Meanwhile, using 2017 data, Indonesian central government transfers about (Dana Alokasi Umum/ General Allocation Funds)
20% of its spending money to local governments (410.8 T IDR out of 2133.2 T IDR). Those are full autonomous spending not including
village funds (60 T IDR out of 2133.2 T IDR) whose usage is fully autonomous on the village level and amounts to 3% of the national budget.
Then comes Indonesia's local government spending, of which 24% comes from their own revenues, 66% from Central Government transfers, and about 9% financed through other means.
Added all together, the total spending of
Indonesian Local Governments was equal to IDR 1098 T IDR. Which when compared to the National Government Spending of 2133.2 T IDR means that in total local governments spend about half of what the central government does, mores when taking into account central government fund transfers to the local government.
This is a sign of real autonomy, i.e, autonomy of spending. Also proves that Indonesia
Furthermore,
1098 T IDR when compared to Indonesia's total GDP of 13,588.8 T means that 8% of total Indonesian GDP is local government spending. Compare that to 1% of GDP of local BD governments.
If we compare notes, then, monetarily speaking Indonesian Central Government cares for the local governments 8x more than the Bangladeshi Central Government.
If there's one nation that can be accused of having "Core" territories and ignoring everywhere else,
it is Bangladesh.
Stop comparing Indonesia to Bangladesh.