Posts
Finance Minister, Prime Minister and RBI Governor. Educated in Oxford, Cambridge and the like. Even Krugman could be wrong despite the Nobel prize. (When Krugman spoke of closing weak banks in India)
Economics is the most dangerous two edged sword wielded by nations and international bodies alike. Personal gains are the only aim; besides the sincere effort to make the present effort look better than the previous solution. (... Meet the new boss, Same as the old boss ...)
Is there a perfect solution or are we to be hung by the very governments that we create? Are these very governments going to tax us (just because we voted for them) and serve the interests of those who have retrenched us?
The the taxpayers' money is being risked on salvaging private interests of corporates (see Effort to halt financial crisis costs governments two trillion pounds, "... the huge cost to taxpayers of bailing out the financial system is likely to be felt for many years -and possibly decades - into the future") while corporations effortlessly evade being taxed by the governments that rescue them (see UK Banks Should Shut Tax Haven Units, Cable Says (Update1)), just because those corporations fund our political system and political parties in it. It seems like quid pro quo for election and kick-back money as distinguishable from tax we pay to the government for services it would or might render us, that is not to be quid pro quo. Is it fair? Is it just? Is it honorable? Or just state craft?
Economics is the most dangerous two edged sword wielded by nations and international bodies alike. Personal gains are the only aim; besides the sincere effort to make the present effort look better than the previous solution. (... Meet the new boss, Same as the old boss ...)
Is there a perfect solution or are we to be hung by the very governments that we create? Are these very governments going to tax us (just because we voted for them) and serve the interests of those who have retrenched us?
The the taxpayers' money is being risked on salvaging private interests of corporates (see Effort to halt financial crisis costs governments two trillion pounds, "... the huge cost to taxpayers of bailing out the financial system is likely to be felt for many years -and possibly decades - into the future") while corporations effortlessly evade being taxed by the governments that rescue them (see UK Banks Should Shut Tax Haven Units, Cable Says (Update1)), just because those corporations fund our political system and political parties in it. It seems like quid pro quo for election and kick-back money as distinguishable from tax we pay to the government for services it would or might render us, that is not to be quid pro quo. Is it fair? Is it just? Is it honorable? Or just state craft?
No comments:
Post a Comment