External Debt Payments

[mondongo]

Temistocles Montas, the President's chief economic advisor, stated that DR$54Billion of the budget goes to pay the the extenal debt.

Well, my friends, he is telling you a bold faced lie.

During the first 6 months of the year, and according to the PLD's own documents at the Central Bank, the Govt only paid DR$5Billion in interest. They paid DR$6.5Billion in debt that was maturing. This is a total outlay of DR$11.5Billion for the 1/2 year.

But what the sly dogs neglect to tell you is that at the same time, they borrowed DR$12Billion!!! So the net effect on the budget was actually a surplus of DR$500Million.....what a friggin' country!!!

How can these people get away with such blatant mis-representation of their own published facts!!!

[project9]

You're doing the same thing he did: posting some numbers without any trace of evidence behind it. Still i give more credibility to what you said.

[suarezn]

Mondongo is right. In a document in the Central Bank website they say this:

Los pagos por servicio de la deuda pública externa fueron
realizados de manera oportuna y ascendieron a US$379.5
millones, aumentando en 4.5% respecto a igual período de
2004.

In oher words they spent 379.5 million USD * 30 = 11,385 Million pesos. So where is all the tax money going? Maybe Nals can shed some light...

[mondongo]

http://www.bancentral.gov.do/publica...eco2005-06.pdf

This document contains it all. It's in Spanish and its long.

Go to page numbered 15, there is table on the bottom of the left hand side. You will see the numbers I quote in US$.

Point 1. is ths amount they borrowed and part of which they used to pay off the maturing debt.
Point 2.1 is the amount of maturing debt.
Point 2.2 is the amount of interest they paid.
Point 3. is amount left over after all transactions.


Go to page labeled: "Anexo No. 8", almost half way down the document.

Gastos Totales --> Gastos Corrientes --> Intereses --> externos: DR$4.87Billion.

They paid DR$4.87Billion in interest for the first half year. Annualized, DR$9.74Billion.

BOTTOM LINE:

There you have it: it's DR$9.74Billion.......NOT DR$54Billion....in their own words....

[jstnorv05]

You quoted the figure only for interest payments but a very important part of debt is that it consists of interest and PRINCIPLE.

Originally Posted by mondongo

http://www.bancentral.gov.do/publica...eco2005-06.pdf

This document contains it all. It's in Spanish and its long.

Go to page numbered 15, there is table on the bottom of the left hand side. You will see the numbers I quote in US$.

Point 1. is ths amount they borrowed and part of which they used to pay off the maturing debt.
Point 2.1 is the amount of maturing debt.
Point 2.2 is the amount of interest they paid.
Point 3. is amount left over after all transactions.


Go to page labeled: "Anexo No. 8", almost half way down the document.

Gastos Totales --> Gastos Corrientes --> Intereses --> externos: DR$4.87Billion.

They paid DR$4.87Billion in interest for the first half year. Annualized, DR$9.74Billion.

BOTTOM LINE:

There you have it: it's DR$9.74Billion.......NOT DR$54Billion....in their own words....

[jstnorv05]

I think you left out the very important next line of your quote "
Ese incremento se originó en su mayoría, por
nuevos vencimientos de deuda bilateral no renegociable
con el Club de París y deuda con la banca privada." Further, "En el período en consideración, el registro de atrasos
asciende a US$374.0 millones los cuales corresponden
principalmente, por un lado a los vencimientos de 2003 y
2004 que fueron negociados con el Club de París y cuyos
contratos bilaterales no han sido firmados y ratificados
todavía, y por el otro, a los vencimientos del semestre con
vocación de una nueva reestructuración con dicho Club y
con la banca privada." The key word here is "atrasos" in other words a good chunk of the increase was due to payments not made in 2003-2004.

Originally Posted by suarezn

Mondongo is right. In a document in the Central Bank website they say this:

Los pagos por servicio de la deuda pública externa fueron
realizados de manera oportuna y ascendieron a US$379.5
millones, aumentando en 4.5% respecto a igual período de
2004.

In oher words they spent 379.5 million USD * 30 = 11,385 Million pesos. So where is all the tax money going? Maybe Nals can shed some light...

[suarezn]

Originally Posted by jstnorv05

I think you left out the very important next line of your quote "
Ese incremento se originó en su mayoría, por
nuevos vencimientos de deuda bilateral no renegociable
con el Club de París y deuda con la banca privada." Further, "En el período en consideración, el registro de atrasos
asciende a US$374.0 millones los cuales corresponden
principalmente, por un lado a los vencimientos de 2003 y
2004 que fueron negociados con el Club de París y cuyos
contratos bilaterales no han sido firmados y ratificados
todavía, y por el otro, a los vencimientos del semestre con
vocación de una nueva reestructuración con dicho Club y
con la banca privada." The key word here is "atrasos" in other words a good chunk of the increase was due to payments not made in 2003-2004.

OK, so what's your point? The bottom line is that according to their own document they only paid about 12 billion pesos to service the external debt and NOT 54 billion pesos like Montas said. Did I miss a part of the document where they explained the other 42 billion? If so could you direct me there?

[jstnorv05]

In order to respond to that I would first have to see the quote he is reffering to. In a strange coincidence the number that he quotes is the exact number of "Gastos corrientes" from the exact document he was using to refute this number. Unless I see the quote myself I would have to assume its a mistranslation.

Originally Posted by suarezn

OK, so what's your point? The bottom line is that according to their own document they only paid about 12 billion pesos to service the external debt and NOT 54 billion pesos like Montas said. Did I miss a part of the document where they explained the other 42 billion? If so could you direct me there?

[suarezn]

It's possible this was a mistatement from his part (Montas), because Gastos Corrientes as you know is not external debt.

Here is an article about Montas statement. Periodico Hoy

[jstnorv05]

Without seeing the quote I don't know if it was a mistatement on Montas' part or on Mondongo's.

Originally Posted by suarezn

It's possible this was a mistatement from his part (Montas), because Gastos Corrientes as you know is not external debt.