saneindian Posted September 3, 2013 Posted September 3, 2013 From government and companies forced to give an accounting because they are public. 3% of the population pays taxes in India. EDIT: I don't think the Indian middle and upper class is entitled to a dhela from the government till they honestly start paying taxes. Barkha Dutt was talking the same thing yesterday . Koi telepathy hai kya aap dono ki :--D
Clarke Posted September 3, 2013 Posted September 3, 2013 LOL! The Indian middle and upper class which sucks up subsidies' date=' drives around in gas guzzlers, loads themselves in gold, does not pay taxes is crying about a little bit of money being given out to the poor. Cry me a fecking river! [/quote'] So how many here that have had expressed doubts on the bill and its funding are tax evaders and subsidy moochers ?
randomGuy Posted September 3, 2013 Posted September 3, 2013 7mdJRZeilT8 Do Watch this Thanks for sharing. So, the proposed expenditure doesn't change much, but making it a right as opposed to an entitlement is supposedly sonia gandhi's game changer. Reminds me of rahul gandhi's game changer on lokpal bill..:cantstop:
diga Posted September 3, 2013 Posted September 3, 2013 So how many here that have had expressed doubts on the bill and its funding are tax evaders and subsidy moochers ? let me see... I pay every paisa of my taxes, . I dont use a gas cylinder from the govt companies/ I dont own an SUV / bloody hell, I dont even avail the haj subsidy ..
Clarke Posted September 3, 2013 Posted September 3, 2013 let me see... I pay every paisa of my taxes' date=' . I dont use a gas cylinder from the govt companies/ I dont own an SUV / bloody hell, I dont even avail the haj subsidy ..[/quote'] Let him answer it unless his it was a red herring which is allowed for him. Did the govt try to fund the bill by reducing other subsidies ? Did anyone here protest against any such possibility ?
Clarke Posted September 3, 2013 Posted September 3, 2013 I'm for Vadra only Right' date=' I concede that the following part wasn't needed:[/quote'] I was simply repeating PC's 2008 statement in parliament except replacing the farmer with the poor. The idea of Congressis is to crush any logical questions by portraying the other side as heartless douchebags. They did not want to fund the farm loan waiver and haven't suggested how they will fund this either. Question that and you're a moocher.
The Outsider Posted September 3, 2013 Posted September 3, 2013 Barkha Dutt was talking the same thing yesterday . Koi telepathy hai kya aap dono ki :--D Maybe she is becoming smarter. :D So how many here that have had expressed doubts on the bill and its funding are tax evaders and subsidy moochers ? I don't know. My comment was about the Indian middle class in general - how can I make specific comments about posters without knowing any details about them?
randomGuy Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 Not picking up a fight either, but the ethos of any successful society starts from it's middle class. Our middle class is so inherently corrupt that just trying to pay them their taxes will raise the fiscal deficit manifold, figuratively speaking. Service tax, property tax etc. are there in other countries too and frankly would not be needed in a country like India where there is a huge growth in the middle class - too bad that they never disclose their incomes and force the government to come up with these pseudo taxation strategies to make up for the the deficit. Its not appropriate to blame the people for not paying income tax honestly given the corrupt and incompetent impression of gov ministers and gov schemes imo. They will think that their tax will be wasted in corruption. But the middle class doesn't deserve subsidies in any case and here as well, the onus is on the gov to stop the subsidies.
Clarke Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 I don't know. My comment was about the Indian middle class in general - how can I make specific comments about posters without knowing any details about them? When you say cry me a river, Who/Why are you mocking here while talking about excessive subsidies being consumed in the context of the thread ?
randomGuy Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 When you say cry me a river' date=' Who/Why are you mocking here whe talking about excessive subsidies being consumed in the context of the thread ?[/quote'] If The Outsider meant to reply to the following comment from desi cartman which was given in response to my post, then The Outsider's post is quite well-justified IMO
The Outsider Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 When you say cry me a river' date=' Who/Why are you mocking here while talking about excessive subsidies being consumed in the context of the thread ?[/quote'] Not just this thread, but the entire angle taken by the Indian middle class in general, from TV channels and also people I've spoken with in real life. For example, HT in one of their discussions and news reports were showing how the price of things like HD TVs, cellphones etc. will rise because the Rupee will weaken with this bill. Really, that's the cause of concern for India? In the context of this thread and other similar discussions on ICF, the comment was in response to the bill being equated to communism, posting the national anthem of USSR, and similar comments.
Clarke Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Not just this thread, but the entire angle taken by the Indian middle class in general, from TV channels and also people I've spoken with in real life. For example, HT in one of their discussions and news reports were showing how the price of things like HD TVs, cellphones etc. will rise because the Rupee will weaken with this bill. Really, that's the cause of concern for India? That's convenient to pick on without any context to the discussion here, but carry on. In the context of this thread and other similar discussions on ICF, the comment was in response to the bill being equated to communism, posting the national anthem of USSR, and similar comments. Yeah, a food security bill to provide free foodgrains to 800 million and the other expensive provisions without any accounting attached to it sounds very capitalist in nature.
randomGuy Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Yeah, a food security bill to provide free foodgrains to 800 million and the other expensive provisions without any accounting attached to it sounds very capitalist in nature. You guys(mainly Desi Cartman) gave an impression that we should have Zero spending on social security. I was arguing abt abolishing MNREGA, food and fuel subsidy and spending that money or whatever that is fiscally manageable, as Cash benefits using modern technology such as biometrics, cloud computing which will help us separate and benefit the targeted poor people, help us eliminate most of the dire/extreme poverty. Now one can be pessimistic(he/she can say realistic) about it, saying there will be corruption, its impossible to isolate the poor population etc but to suggest that we can afford to spend zero money on social benefits and to compare any such scheme with USSR's communism will obviously warrant the reply that The Outsider gave.
Clarke Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 ^I can't answer for DC but zero accountability on gigantic social & economic plans will warrant comparisions to failed socilaist ideology. The govt doesn't want to irk one voting block by cutting down on any subsidy so far and here The Outsider goes around preaching what's possible so as to blame us for being heartless. Talk about the food bill will ya, not this and that until we can see some proof in the pudding on funding the scheme. Besides, I will be ostracized for saying this but if one country needs to feed 800 million by law, the main problem is there's too many out there who cannot take care of themselves or their half dozen offsprings. Its about time you make sure that number doesn't go to a billion or above.
randomGuy Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 ^^ I was not taking about the food bill, I was talking about something I'd like to see being implemented (cash benefits) targeting the 21.9% (around 270 million) people as per gov data who earn <1000/- pm in urban and <820/- in rural centers for which I proposed fiscally manageable grants with accountability and proper conditions/checks(for which, admittedly, more suggestions are sought ) imposed on the beneficiaries. The USSR's communism comparison reply to what I was suggesting most definitely warrants the kind of that reply The Outsider gave imho.
Clarke Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 The USSR's communism comparison reply to what I was suggesting most definitely warrants the kind of that reply The Outsider gave imho. Post #14 is the anthem they should have sung after failing to account for it. Its for the lawmakers, not what you are suggesting.
randomGuy Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Post #14 is the anthem they should have sung after failing to account for it. Its for the lawmakers' date=' not what you are suggesting.[/quote'] Yeah that is one reference. Your reference to USSR anthem is fine. Meanwhile to refer to USSR in Post#72 after the preceding conversation does warrant that reply imho. EDIT: In the sense that an unfitting comment can warrant an immoderate response sometimes.
The Outsider Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 That's convenient to pick on without any context to the discussion here, but carry on. Huh? I gave specific examples of the posts which resulted in that comment from ICF - yeah they were not the sole drivers of the comment, but how is it without context? Yeah, a food security bill to provide free foodgrains to 800 million and the other expensive provisions without any accounting attached to it sounds very capitalist in nature. US, the baap of all capitalist countries, has things like unemployment entitlements, social security, medicare, subsidies for farmers etc. According to your logic they should replace the Star Spangled Banner with whatever the national anthem of USSR is.
randomGuy Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 To Clarke and The Outsider, 1. The grant for food subsidy in budget of 2013-14 is almost same as the estimates for food security bill. So, not much additional grant. 2. The coverage is also the same nearly as coverage of current PDSs and mid-day meals in various states.(800 million). 3. The way the bill is gonna be implemented is also the same as before i.e. via states who give the ration cards. There's not much of a change. GoI is publicizing it as a game changer and media is projecting as a disaster for economy. In reality, it is none of that. I guess both of you are justifiable with your posts.
Clarke Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Huh? I gave specific examples of the posts which resulted in that comment from ICF - yeah they were not the sole drivers of the comment' date=' but how is it without context?[/quote'] Because no one here was whining about prices of phones going up. That's some lame excuses. Maybe you could mention the recent afforable care act when talking about similar scale which the CBO estimated wouldn't hurt the deficit as there were penalties and other taxes for the minor sake of paying for it. The Americans don't go about throwing something as fundamental as foodgrains to two-thirds of their population as a legal right, forget even the accounting or the fact that almost half the country pays income tax and a lot more pays many other taxes. Get that taxpayer percentage to single digits and let me know how well all those benefits work.
Recommended Posts