sorcerer
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2013
- Messages
- 26,919
- Likes
- 98,471
paaaaaartaaaaayyyyy...
for once..was there at the right place at right time
Edit: Errrmmm...tremors post 2: 00 PM?
This stimulus package came from our gormint. LIC ke paise se market ko stabilize kiya. The ones who had freaked out yesterday will try to sell out at break even when markit goes up today so that secondary selling out may create a downward spiral temporarily and try to retest previous lows, but markit apni bottom bana chuki hai.
paaaaaartaaaaayyyyy...
for once..was there at the right place at right time
Edit: Errrmmm...tremors post 2: 00 PM?
Is it possible for a market economy to function without the government repeatedly intervening with stimulus, bailouts etc?This stimulus package came from our gormint. LIC ke paise se market ko stabilize kiya. The ones who had freaked out yesterday will try to sell out at break even when markit goes up today so that secondary selling out may create a downward spiral temporarily and try to retest previous lows, but markit apni bottom bana chuki hai.
Farmers ko har saal bailout de sakte hai toh market ko kyu nahi.Is it possible for a market economy to function without the government repeatedly intervening with stimulus, bailouts etc?
I know what type of bullshit these farm loan waivers are, and what it does to the overall economy. My stance is against the entire concept of govt. bailouts and interventions. I'm just asking in principle, if the govt tells the markets to manage themselves, with some sensible govt. regulations, can that system potentially be sustainable?
Well...govt is intervening by asking Govt companies to acquire more assets when the economy is favorable to buy..whats wrong in that?I know what type of bullshit these farm loan waivers are, and what it does to the overall economy. My stance is against the entire concept of govt. bailouts and interventions. I'm just asking in principle, if the govt tells the markets to manage themselves, with some sensible govt. regulations, can that system potentially be sustainable?
Well, I guess I'm against the concept of a govt company itself.Well...govt is intervening by asking Govt companies to acquire more assets when the economy is favorable to buy..whats wrong in that?
hmmm..atleast our money and profit stays in our landWell, I guess I'm against the concept of a govt company itself.
It's alright to give bailouts. If there's one central authority with big purse strings, there's no harm using it selectively to plug holes from time to time. Imagine you are the leader of a large economy and there is some shrimp disease affecting your fishermen's income. The disease may not recur next year, but if you don't give money to your fishermen this year, they may not survive until next year. Same with bailouts. It keeps your workers in a particular sector alive. (This doesn't apply to agriculture, that's a pure loot due to brute voting force of Indian farmers, there's no fiscal prudence in farm bailouts).I know what type of bullshit these farm loan waivers are, and what it does to the overall economy. My stance is against the entire concept of govt. bailouts and interventions. I'm just asking in principle, if the govt tells the markets to manage themselves, with some sensible govt. regulations, can that system potentially be sustainable?
That's why we need to bring people out from farming sector there is lot of disguised unemployment there. This is the only way of curing illness of farming sector.It's alright to give bailouts. If there's one central authority with big purse strings, there's no harm using it selectively to plug holes from time to time. Imagine you are the leader of a large economy and there is some shrimp disease affecting your fishermen's income. The disease may not recur next year, but if you don't give money to your fishermen this year, they may not survive until next year. Same with bailouts. It keeps your workers in a particular sector alive. (This doesn't apply to agriculture, that's a pure loot due to brute voting force of Indian farmers, there's no fiscal prudence in farm bailouts).
60% of our country is 'farmer', they are the largest voting bloc. They elect people like Sharad Pawar to lobby for laws in their favor. Middle class voters don't have that kind of brute strength. We want to solve their problems, they only want to rob our tax money. It's an uneven match.That's why we need to bring people out from farming sector there is lot of disguised unemployment there. This is the only way of curing illness of farming sector.
Unfortunately nothing can be done with vote bank. A growing country like india cannot only depend upon agriculture even though it employs 60%of people but it is the least productive sector we need to transition ourselves to secondary sector.60% of our country is 'farmer', they are the largest voting bloc. They elect people like Sharad Pawar to lobby for laws in their favor. Middle class voters don't have that kind of brute strength. We want to solve their problems, they only want to rob our tax money. It's an uneven match.
There is nothing wrong with giving loan waiver to poor farmer in distress --- Mudi ji & political crooks give favour to there business pal on a platter who have bring this country on a brink --- here yes bank major defaulters --- many are Mudi ji and congress personal yars.I know what type of bullshit these farm loan waivers are, and what it does to the overall economy. My stance is against the entire concept of govt. bailouts and interventions. I'm just asking in principle, if the govt tells the markets to manage themselves, with some sensible govt. regulations, can that system potentially be sustainable?