The Youth and the Future of the National Deficit

By: Athira Khairiana Tuasikal
Student of the Public Sector Accounting Study Program, PKN STAN

JurnalPost.com - Every year, the government allocates a massive budget to meet the country's various needs. In 2025, the realization of state expenditure was recorded at Rp3,451.4 trillion, or approximately 95.3 percent of the State Budget (APBN) target.

This budget is used to fund various sectors, ranging from education, health, and infrastructure development to subsidies, social protection, and national programs such as the Free Nutritious Meal (MBG) initiative. The scale of these spending requirements makes fiscal management a critical issue not only for the current government but also for future generations.

To finance state expenditures, the government relies on both state revenue and financing receipts. State revenue primarily comes from taxes, Non-Tax State Revenue (PNBP), and grants.

Meanwhile, when state revenue is insufficient to cover all expenditure needs, the government utilizes financing instruments. One of the main sources is the issuance of Government Securities (SBN), in addition to various other forms of financing and loans.

This raises an important question: when state spending exceeds available revenue and the government must increase financing, who will ultimately bear the consequences of these fiscal decisions?

One answer is the younger generation.

Fiscal policy enacted today does not end with the current fiscal year. Its impact can last for years, even across generations. Therefore, when discussing the deficit and national debt, we are not merely talking about figures in the state budget, but also about fiscal space and the future of Indonesia's economy.

Deficits Are Not Always Bad

A condition where state spending exceeds state revenue creates a budget deficit. However, a deficit is not necessarily a sign that a country's economic condition is poor.

Deficits can be used as a fiscal policy instrument to finance development, expand public services, support education and health, build infrastructure, and maintain economic activity.

Therefore, the main issue is not simply whether the government is in debt or running a deficit, but rather what the funds are used for and how much benefit they provide to the public.

Government spending should ideally be measured by its outcome or impact. If the financing results in infrastructure that improves connectivity, education that enhances the quality of human resources, better healthcare services, and more productive economic activity, then the benefits can be enjoyed in the long term.

Conversely, problems will arise if financing continues to increase without generating comparable productivity and economic benefits.

Debt and Intergenerational Equity

The impact of a deficit is not only related to the amount of government debt. It includes obligations for principal and interest payments that must be accounted for in the state budget for subsequent periods.

This is where the concept of intergenerational equity becomes relevant.

Simply put, the current generation can enjoy the benefits of state spending that is partially financed through debt. At the same time, the next generation will receive the results of that development while also inheriting a portion of the fiscal obligations that must be settled.

However, the size of the debt alone is not enough to determine whether future generations will be disadvantaged.

What is far more important is the quality of how that debt is used.

The younger generation can actually benefit if current financing is used for productive activities that increase future economic capacity. Better infrastructure, improved quality of education, healthcare services, and investment in productive sectors can expand economic activity while increasing the country's ability to meet its obligations.

Conversely, the risk becomes greater if debt is used for activities that do not generate long-term economic benefits. In such conditions, the government potentially faces fiscal pressure when it must provide increasingly large budgets just to meet the principal and interest obligations of previous financing.

This is the kind of situation that must be avoided so that fiscal management does not fall into a cycle of "robbing Peter to pay Paul."

Will the Younger Generation Bear It All?

Looking at the timeline, it is not entirely accurate to say that all consequences of current fiscal policy will only be borne by future generations.

The youth of today also enjoy the benefits of the state budget.

Infrastructure built now can be used immediately. Education funding provides opportunities for young people to improve their competencies. Health budgets help improve the quality of life. Various development programs can also create economic activity and open up job opportunities.

In other words, debt used productively can generate assets and benefits enjoyed by both the current and future generations.

However, the issue becomes different when viewed from a longer perspective.

Every additional fiscal obligation today potentially affects the structure of the state budget in the future. The government must provide space for interest and principal payments, meaning that part of the budget that should have been allocated for new programs must be used to meet previous obligations.

The greater the need for debt repayment, the narrower the government's fiscal space becomes.

In the long run, the need for state revenue may also increase. Taxes and other sources of revenue will become increasingly important to maintain fiscal sustainability.

The younger generation, who will eventually become the productive group—workers, business owners, and taxpayers—will ultimately be one of the groups directly facing these consequences.

The Youth Must Not Just Be Spectators

As the younger generation, being tone deaf or closing one's eyes to the state of the country—whether in the fields of economy, politics, education, or other public issues—is not a wise choice.

Policies made by the government today will shape the economic and social environment that the younger generation will later inhabit.

Therefore, the attention of the younger generation to the state budget should not stop at the question, "How large is Indonesia's debt?"

A more important question is: what is the debt used for, what are the results obtained, who enjoys the benefits, and are those benefits large enough to offset the inherited obligations?

The younger generation also needs to change their perspective. Their position is not just as those who will later inherit fiscal obligations, but also as citizens who have an interest in the quality of budget management today.

Criticism of fiscal policy does not mean rejecting all forms of debt or deficits. Criticism is actually needed to ensure that every rupiah spent by the government provides the greatest possible benefit to the public and creates a more productive economic foundation.

Ultimately, the issue that needs to be considered is not just how much debt is passed on to the next generation.

What is more important is what is inherited alongside that debt.

If future generations receive quality infrastructure, superior human resources, a productive economy, and increasingly better public services, then today's financing can be an investment for the future.

However, if only obligations are inherited without adequate productivity, the younger generation will face increasingly limited fiscal space.

Therefore, the direction of the national deficit is not just the business of the government or policymakers. The younger generation also has an interest in monitoring, understanding, and criticizing it.

Because the state budget of today is, to some extent, a reflection of the Indonesia they will live in the future.