ballaladeva Posted July 24, 2015 Report Posted July 24, 2015 But she has some remarkable achievements.. If itwasnot her.. Then thre would be no bangladesh And punjab would be seperate countr right.
siru Posted July 24, 2015 Report Posted July 24, 2015 financial institutions nationalisation. it didn't improve credit availability or lower interest rates. At that time there was not enough of an awareness about how financial systems work. and India had the most basic of them. nationalizing it, destroyed even that. She destroyed the political institution by declaring emergency and jailing her opponents. Even Sonia Gandhi isn't that crazy. I thought by nationalising banks, it made easy for farmers to get crop loans
VizagRocks Posted July 24, 2015 Report Posted July 24, 2015 What exactly did Dr. Mahmohan Singh do to save the Indian economy after he was appointed as finance minister by P V Narasimha Rao, the PM of India at that time? n 1991, when Singh swore in as finance minister in the Congress government led by P V Narasimha Rao, Indian economy was in shambles. India's fiscal deficit was close to 8.5 per cent of the gross domestic product (almost double of the current fiscal deficit). The balance of payments deficit was huge and the current account deficit was close to 3.5 per cent of GDP. None of India's financial lenders were willing to finance it. India had close to billion dollars in foreign exchange (forex) reserves (todays forex reserves stand a $292.31 billion[1]) - which was equal to almost two weeks of imports. India was on the verge of defaulting on the repayments of it's international loans. In short the country was on the verge of bankruptcy. Manmohan Singh was the man who ushered in the reforms that liberalized India's economy, changing the fundamental way that in corporate India thinks and with it the lives of millions of middle class Indians. He went to then PM Narasimha Rao and told him that India needed a strong vision to take it forward. Rao backed Manmohan Singh to the hilt and India embarked on a path of reforms. With the PM's support, Singh brought in changes that broke sharply with India's state-directed economics. He devalued the rupee to spur exports, loosened foreign investment rules, opened oil refining, telecommunications and the stock exchanges, slashed taxes and sought to cut through red tape ensnaring companies. Under Singh, that year, the government of India entered into an understanding with the Reserve Bank of India to deny itself the right to 'draw' on the RBI to fund its deficit. This put paid to the unlimited monetization of fiscal deficit, and was a historic step. During his speech in Parliament while presenting the Budget in 1994-95, he quoted Victor Hugo: "No power on earth can stop an idea whose time has come." By 1994, when he presented his historic budget, the economy was well on its way to recovery. Nearly 1 crore (10 million) new jobs were created, an environment of liberalization was set in motion and the foundation of an information technology and telecom revolution was laid. Singh also got the government off the backs of the people of India, particularly India's entrepreneurs. He introduced more competition, both internal competition and external competition; simplified the tax structure and tried to create an environment conducive to the growth of business. A strong proponent of globalization Singh felt free trade and India's labor intensive products can find markets, which will help India generate new jobs and relieve poverty. Even though Singh opened the Indian markets for foreign direct investments, he had no intention to make India dependent on foreigners for savings. He firmly believed that "India's development would continue to be generated domestically". Sigh laid stress on macroeconomic stabilization and opening up trade and payment system. He thus put in place a macroeconomic adjustment program with the active support of International Monetary Fund. The program combined monetary, fiscal, and exchange rate policies to reduce India's gaping internal and external imbalances. IMF played a critical role in assisting India during its period of crisis. The result was that productivity in the Indian industry grew like never before. I think Singh/PV's was a half hearted effort. even now, the rupee is not fully convertible. and the central govt still controls various aspects of businesses. But Modi seems to be making the right moves.
VizagRocks Posted July 24, 2015 Report Posted July 24, 2015 I thought by nationalising banks, it made easy for farmers to get crop loans thereby going back on her father's initial vision of making India an industrial powerhouse. subsistence farming was the worst thing to happen to India on hindsight. India could've been better served with stronger PSUs, which again Indira meddled with by political appointments. strong PSUs could've spawned a lot of supporting private industries. best example - Bangalore.
donganaaK Posted July 24, 2015 Report Posted July 24, 2015 Haha. I don't think they are going to go through with that. they are just playing hide and seek with Rajan, I guess. It is silly to let political committee decide interest rates, really. even for a keynesian like me. yeah i think so too ..... but ilaanti proposal pettatamey sounds really stupid
VizagRocks Posted July 24, 2015 Report Posted July 24, 2015 yeah i think so too ..... but ilaanti proposal pettatamey sounds really stupid India currently has one of the most clueless FM ever, I think. I really hate the GST.
siru Posted July 24, 2015 Report Posted July 24, 2015 thereby going back on her father's initial vision of making India an industrial powerhouse. subsistence farming was the worst thing to happen to India on hindsight. India could've been better served with stronger PSUs, which again Indira meddled with by political appointments. strong PSUs could've spawned a lot of supporting private industries. best example - Bangalore. But in a country where more than 80% during her time were dependant on agriculture.. How could she turn to inndustrialization
donganaaK Posted July 24, 2015 Report Posted July 24, 2015 India currently has one of the most clueless FM ever, I think. I really hate the GST. a couple of my friends that are in the manufacturing business are really mad at GST because it makes it really hard for them to evade taxes lol ... listening to them talk about it just made me think that GST may do wonders in the long run ...
VizagRocks Posted July 24, 2015 Report Posted July 24, 2015 a couple of my friends that are in the manufacturing business are really mad at GST because it makes it really hard for them to evade taxes lol ... listening to them talk about it made me think that GST may do wonders in the long run ... wait till you hear the GST rate. The issue is not about tax evasion here, but independence of states to fix their own rates. if GST is passed, it'll no longer matter where the product is produced, and that is unfair on the states that have worked hard to provide semblance of a governance. GST strikes at the heart of federal structure of India.
VizagRocks Posted July 24, 2015 Report Posted July 24, 2015 But in a country where more than 80% during her time were dependant on agriculture.. How could she turn to inndustrialization by making policies for it. why do you think TN was piss poor in the 70s and 80s? half the nation can't afford to depend on agriculture. nationalizing banks, and prioritizing crop loans killed even a whimper of industrial surge - apart from the big politically connected industrial houses.
donganaaK Posted July 24, 2015 Report Posted July 24, 2015 wait till you hear the GST rate. The issue is not about tax evasion here, but independence of states to fix their own rates. if GST is passed, it'll no longer matter where the product is produced, and that is unfair on the states that have worked hard to provide semblance of a governance. GST strikes at the heart of federal structure of India. actually it works in favor of a lot of industries , for example pharma industries ... pharma industries in the north have an advantage over the ones in AP because of the tax subsidies over there , if GST comes in to place , it'll off set that tax advantage those industries have ...
porsche911 Posted July 24, 2015 Report Posted July 24, 2015 moogoniki dandesi dandam anta pettandi va savugola
ravula Posted July 24, 2015 Report Posted July 24, 2015 accidental aa dani kana Bol ManMohan Bol ante bavundedi emo @3$% Lol Baag milka baag lekka na
VizagRocks Posted July 24, 2015 Report Posted July 24, 2015 actually it works in favor of a lot of industries , for example pharma industries ... pharma industries in the north have an advantage over the ones in AP because of the tax subsidies there , if GST comes in to place , it'll off set that tax advantage those industries have ... not if GST rate is around 26-28%. This is the rate that is doing the rounds, because state govts cannot afford to give up their only source of income. GST is a really horrid idea. US doesn't have it, Canada doesn't have it (not the horrible version that is floated in India). Only Australia (among the country divided into provincial governments) has it.
donganaaK Posted July 24, 2015 Report Posted July 24, 2015 not if GST rate is around 26-28%. This is the rate that is doing the rounds, because state govts cannot afford to give up their only source of income. GST is a really horrid idea. US doesn't have it, Canada doesn't have it (not the horrible version that is floated in India). Only Australia (among the country divided into provincial governments) has it. y do state govts have to give up their share of the income? , they get what they are getting right now from the central govt , and all the excess % of the duties go to the central govt , atleast that's my understanding ...
Recommended Posts