I thought i will comment on the fiscal discipline, almost 10% increase in Centres devolition to states and on setting up of Revenue commission.... But N K s indepth elaboration had kept me hooked to the discussion.... I wish he spared some of his discussion time to Mr. Anoop Singh's contentions.
Wow just amazing these guys.... and thank you so so much CSEP for organising such sessions & The print for forwarding such illuminating and enlightening discussions......... looking forward for more such recommendations of discussions on Indian judiciary, environment, electoral politics etc.....
Too complicated. Need to simplify. There is proverb in share market investments - if you can explain an investment proposal to a 7th Grader then you have understood the matter.
If to mitigate the fears of prosperous states - 'demographic improvements' had to be rewarded, by similar logic now states performing well in covid management should be rewarded. Since those states which are unable to control the virus are causing a great deal of harm to revenue collections. If that is not done, it should be assumed that the task of the Fin Comm is just to continue allocating what it has been allocating and not equitable distribution. Who will compensate states which have been discriminated against for about 4 decades by using old census data? The claim of Mr NK Singh that he is trying to reward efficiency by this metric is laid bare by statistics. UP had a fertility rate of 5.8 in 1981 which has been more than halved to 2.61 in 2011. While Maharashtra had a fertility rate of 3.6 in 1981 which it has brought down to 1.91 in 2011. UP performed by far the better than Maharashtra but it has suffered a great cut in allocations by this metric while Maharashtra's allocation has increased. The metric used by the finance commission actually rewards high population in 1971 and punishes high fertility rate in 2011. By no scale is this a metric which measures efficiency. A simple fertility rate improvement percentage could have been used but that would have been detrimental to the interests of the prosperous states. Same for the metric 'Tax and fiscal efforts'. This metric rewards states which have an in-migration since the tax collected on consumption (alcohol, petrol, stamp duties) will be higher there than their population statistics show. Both above metrics have almost hollowed out the use of 2011 population statistics.
Thankyou so much print for this discussion, and bringing NK Singh; something which we find nowhere in mainstream media
Outstanding discussions and almost a master class on economics and policy framework for people interested in the subjects covered
I thought i will comment on the fiscal discipline, almost 10% increase in Centres devolition to states and on setting up of Revenue commission.... But N K s indepth elaboration had kept me hooked to the discussion.... I wish he spared some of his discussion time to Mr. Anoop Singh's contentions.
Wow just amazing these guys.... and thank you so so much CSEP for organising such sessions & The print for forwarding such illuminating and enlightening discussions.........
looking forward for more such recommendations of discussions on Indian judiciary, environment, electoral politics etc.....
Reliance lobbyist in action. Loved his comments in Radia tapes where he lobbied to get retrospective increase of rate to benefit Reliance.
Enriching content
Too complicated. Need to simplify. There is proverb in share market investments - if you can explain an investment proposal to a 7th Grader then you have understood the matter.
If to mitigate the fears of prosperous states - 'demographic improvements' had to be rewarded, by similar logic now states performing well in covid management should be rewarded. Since those states which are unable to control the virus are causing a great deal of harm to revenue collections. If that is not done, it should be assumed that the task of the Fin Comm is just to continue allocating what it has been allocating and not equitable distribution. Who will compensate states which have been discriminated against for about 4 decades by using old census data?
The claim of Mr NK Singh that he is trying to reward efficiency by this metric is laid bare by statistics. UP had a fertility rate of 5.8 in 1981 which has been more than halved to 2.61 in 2011. While Maharashtra had a fertility rate of 3.6 in 1981 which it has brought down to 1.91 in 2011. UP performed by far the better than Maharashtra but it has suffered a great cut in allocations by this metric while Maharashtra's allocation has increased.
The metric used by the finance commission actually rewards high population in 1971 and punishes high fertility rate in 2011. By no scale is this a metric which measures efficiency. A simple fertility rate improvement percentage could have been used but that would have been detrimental to the interests of the prosperous states.
Same for the metric 'Tax and fiscal efforts'. This metric rewards states which have an in-migration since the tax collected on consumption (alcohol, petrol, stamp duties) will be higher there than their population statistics show.
Both above metrics have almost hollowed out the use of 2011 population statistics.
Where is shabaz ansari 🙄 this question from print by print subscriber
I have been told he left and went to scoopwhoop. I didn't confirm this. I read it j some comment section.
ua-cam.com/video/-jf6pwtPqCs/v-deo.html
😄
failed state jungle raj what r u discussing
Obviously Khalistan is your dream state..
South india countries must. North indian population and poverty exploding
@@acharyakunal8467
This is not the place for the goons..Go and defecate in other platforms..