Quote:
Originally Posted by Samurai If the government gives pension to all senior citizens, will that be considered efficient?
....
Keep in mind that PSUs are a kind of social program. Cancelling social programs due to leakage would be like cutting off the nose as cure for cold. |
Giving pension to
all senior citizens is completely different from running PSUs. Running PSUs benefit a very small subset of a population. And that relatively small population becomes privileged enjoying a good lifestyle, schools, pensions etc at the cost of the general populace.
To give a top of mind example, the government supports Air India by giving 8000 crores every year as budgetary support. Can this 8000cr every year be spent elsewhere, possibly opening new schools?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksameer1234 PSUs at their inception were created for social welfare and manufacturing goods was, in a sense, by-product. |
Some of the PSUs made sense at that time when they were established. Now most of them don't make sense to keep it in government hands. A lot of PSUs hold prime property in the cities (example, ITL, BEML, HMT in Bengaluru). All PSUs have prime residential houses in every city (especially Delhi) for their employees. It is high time government privatizes all unnecessary PSUs, auction all the real estate, and uses the money to fund an Universal Basic Income.
Quote:
Originally Posted by am1m These days everyone I hear/read seems to think we as a country should be aiming at an absolutely ruthless, completely free market capitalism-oriented (I'm sure I'm mixing all definitions here, but just making a point) and bottom-line focused, survival of the fittest type environment.
I really don't understand economics. And I'm sure harder and more practical heads than mine are needed to keep this whole mess afloat. But heck man, if some of my taxes can go towards helping people like that, I'm more than happy to pay. |
Nope. Very few think like that. Otherwise you wouldn't have charities, NGOs, thousands of people from the corporate world volunteering outside of work;
It is not a ruthless world. The only difference of opinion is whether the government is the best judge to implement. In my opinion, no.
1. Recently TN increased bus fares for govt buses
and private buses. Why? So that private players who may be more efficient should not undercut govt bus. Karnataka government has been trying to
increase taxi fares for a couple of years because Ola/Uber were undercutting their "licensed" (read, cronies) cabs. So the government does not always work for public benefit.
2. How do you make sure that the tax you pay gets spent only for the right causes? What if the government decides to spend on a bullet-train and not on pensions?
3. Who decides what has to get subsidized? Please remember that the resources/money are limited. Any subsidy on one sector takes away the money from another sector. The only way to subsidize all sectors is to keep printing money. This just increases inflation which is a tax on everybody, and a big burden on the poor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samurai This happened because of the ignorance of the history of capitalism. |
I am not advocating unfettered, free-markets capitalism. I don't think there are any such countries who have been successful.
To be really specific, imho this is how it should be:
1. No Government owned businesses (no Air-India, no HMT, no Ashok hotels etc).
2. No subsidies.
3. Government spends only on primary health care, and primary education.
4. Constitutionally guaranteed
Universal Basic Income, which goes up for all senior citizens as they age.
If this is capitalism or socialism, I don't know. But I think this is the most practical.