4 ms·

I'm not sure. Historically, Indian governments have been most undeserving of our taxes simply because they've misspent it and/or misdirected it to achieve their

by rm2889 9y ago

I'm not sure. Historically, Indian governments have been most undeserving of our taxes simply because they've misspent it and/or misdirected it to achieve their own means (corruption, buying votes etc). Saying "yes but this government is different" also doesn't hold water when you look at the massive farm loan waivers that were just granted, and more waivers are on their way. How do you think the waivers were funded? Through our hard-earned tax money. Who do you think the debtors will now vote for in the next election cycle? The current ruling political party ofcourse. Finally, there are a lot of disadvantages for being on a completely centralized digital payment platform from an individual liberty point of view. Imagine that a significant portion of your net worth is just a number stored in a "secure database" which falls under the jurisdiction of some government. Now image that you vocally disagree with the government's policies enough for the government to start taking notice. It becomes very very easy for the government to shut you up - all they have to do is strongarm the bank to freeze that number. Its not as hypothetical as it sounds as the Indian government has done this before. A large portion of black money was deemed to be held up by the bureaucracy - bribes paid by private individuals and corporations to government employees and politicians. Had demonetization been done along with a hiring freeze (and subsequent trimming down) of the bureaucracy, I'd have been more certain that the motives behind demonetization were to root out corruption. However, the bureaucracy is now larger and more powerful than ever under this government. Thus, the incentives to seek bribes still exits because of this power imbalance between the powerful bureaucrats and relatively week individuals.

Retric 9y ago
Governments have so much leverage they don't need to be efficient to be a huge net benefit. Consider the cost to build and maintain a road network vs. the benefits it brings. PS: Further, it's not a question of collecting more money from everyone it's a question of collecting the same money from everyone which is a benefit even if you end up burning the extra money.
- splintercell 9y ago
  > Governments have so much leverage they don't need to be efficient to be a huge net benefit. But aren't you just saying that when you have $1 Billion then paying $500k more to a contractor doesn't seem that bad based on the net benefit it would bring to have a dream home. But imagine if this was a charity (something which govt is, if we look at it a certain way), that inefficiency means more people could have benefited out of it.
  - Retric 9y ago
    Efficiency gain's are clearly beneficial. My point is governments can be effective in providing roads and common defense etc without being efficient. India is a case in point, they have enough infrastructure to allow for rapid growth even with a highly corrupt government. While they could do a better job, the increasing standard of living allows for ever improving government services even without increasing efficiency. Further, as standers keep rising the pressure and ability to reduce corruption increases both because governments can directly pay more and because better options show up outside of government. PS: In the US and I suspect most other countries you can reduce your tax burden by donating just fine. So, taxes are effectively a non issue in terms of charitable donations. Thus tax evasion is simply money people are keeping for personal use.
virtuabhi 9y ago
> Indian governments have been most undeserving of our taxes simply because they've misspent it and/or misdirected it to achieve their own means Can be said of 99% governments in the world.
- jandrese 9y ago
  It is true of government period. Look at it this way. I have $100. I can either spend all of that $100 on stuff that makes me happy, or I can give half of it to the government which will spend most of it on stuff like schools that my kids won't go to, roads I won't drive on, charity (welfare) for people I don't even know. They're wasting all of my money on stuff that doesn't directly make me happy! No matter how well a government is run, there will always be people who complain about it, and not without cause. Of course the alternative (extreme libertarianism) ends up being worse in pretty much every way, but in that case it is the world that is shitty, not some big government.
virtuabhi 9y ago
> the bureaucracy is now larger and more powerful than ever under this government Umm... no. The red tape is now minimal at the Central government level. Digital, removal of archaic laws, clearly defined parameters for bids, etc.
i2shar 9y ago
> I'm not sure. Historically, Indian governments have been most undeserving of our taxes simply because they've misspent it and/or misdirected it to achieve their own means (corruption, buying votes etc). Depending on who you ask, Governments will always be undeserving of your tax money. Also, I'd rather prefer my tax money be spent on farm loan waivers than be stashed away hidden from the Government under a carpet or in a foreign bank, if that's the comparison you want. > Finally, there are a lot of disadvantages for being on a completely centralized digital payment platform from an individual liberty point of view. Imagine that a significant portion of your net worth is just a number stored in a "secure database" which falls under the jurisdiction of some government. Now image that you vocally disagree with the government's policies enough for the government to start taking notice. It becomes very very easy for the government to shut you up - all they have to do is strongarm the bank to freeze that number. Its not as hypothetical as it sounds as the Indian government has done this before. Are you suggesting that you should keep significant amounts of your money hidden from the Government because you think they might unduly target you because of your wealth and views? Isn't that how black money is defined in the first place - keeping it hidden from the Government? That is a civil liberties issue, the solution for which cannot be to keep your money hidden from the Government. > A large portion of black money was deemed to be held up by the bureaucracy - bribes paid by private individuals and corporations to government employees and politicians. Had demonetization been done along with a hiring freeze (and subsequent trimming down) of the bureaucracy, I'd have been more certain that the motives behind demonetization were to root out corruption. However, the bureaucracy is now larger and more powerful than ever under this government. Thus, the incentives to seek bribes still exits because of this power imbalance between the powerful bureaucrats and relatively week individuals. I don't see the connection between a hiring freeze in bureaucracy and demonetization. Bureaucrats are a fraction of the population of the country and tackling corruption in bureaucracy is something that must be done regardless.
- rm2889 9y ago
  > Also, I'd rather prefer my tax money be spent on farm loan waivers than be stashed away hidden from the Government under a carpet or in a foreign bank, if that's the comparison you want. Those aren't the only two alternatives. How about you lower the tax rate and create incentives so that the farmers actually pay back the loans. Right now, farmers take loans with the assumption that they'll be waived, and the cycle continues. I'm not shooting on the farmers here, I'm just saying that farmers, like bureaucrats, like businessmen, are human. If they're incentivized to game a system, they will. For once it'd be great if my tax money could be better spent on other things that would actually benefit the country (strong defense, capable law and order through an effective police and judiciary, etc.) rather than indirectly buying votes for the current political party in power (farm loan waivers etc.). Hell given the binary option of farm loan waivers vs stashing my cash abroad, most businesses will still stash it in real estate, abroad, etc. > Are you suggesting that you should keep significant amounts of your money hidden from the Government because you think they might unduly target you because of your wealth and views? No. Even after tax legitimate money is at risk if its just a number stored in a "secure" database somewhere. Whoever has ultimate control over that database has power over you. With cash, gold, you can carry them with you and anonymously pay for goods/services without compromising on your privacy. I was merely pointing out one limitation with a completely central digital payment platform. > I don't see the connection between a hiring freeze in bureaucracy and demonetization Ok who is on the receiving end of bribes? The bureaucrats/politicians. Demonetization was supposed to hit the tax evaders (usually bribe givers) and the bureaucrats (bribe takers). Maybe they both were seemingly hurt with demonetization as they both had cash stashed. But since the bureaucracy still exists (and has become more powerful eg - http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/the-taxman-now-has-more-powers-thanks-to-the-finance-bill/article17663426.ece http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/the-taxman-now-has-mor...), there is no incentive for the bribe takers to stop taking bribes. Tell me this new bill won't be abused and misused. Looking at the history of laws being abused in India, I'd bet that it will be

by rm2889 9y ago

Retric 9y ago

Governments have so much leverage they don't need to be efficient to be a huge net benefit. Consider the cost to build and maintain a road network vs. the benefits it brings. PS: Further, it's not a question of collecting more money from everyone it's a question of collecting the same money from everyone which is a benefit even if you end up burning the extra money.

splintercell 9y ago
> Governments have so much leverage they don't need to be efficient to be a huge net benefit. But aren't you just saying that when you have $1 Billion then paying $500k more to a contractor doesn't seem that bad based on the net benefit it would bring to have a dream home. But imagine if this was a charity (something which govt is, if we look at it a certain way), that inefficiency means more people could have benefited out of it.
- Retric 9y ago
  Efficiency gain's are clearly beneficial. My point is governments can be effective in providing roads and common defense etc without being efficient. India is a case in point, they have enough infrastructure to allow for rapid growth even with a highly corrupt government. While they could do a better job, the increasing standard of living allows for ever improving government services even without increasing efficiency. Further, as standers keep rising the pressure and ability to reduce corruption increases both because governments can directly pay more and because better options show up outside of government. PS: In the US and I suspect most other countries you can reduce your tax burden by donating just fine. So, taxes are effectively a non issue in terms of charitable donations. Thus tax evasion is simply money people are keeping for personal use.

virtuabhi 9y ago

> Indian governments have been most undeserving of our taxes simply because they've misspent it and/or misdirected it to achieve their own means Can be said of 99% governments in the world.

jandrese 9y ago
It is true of government period. Look at it this way. I have $100. I can either spend all of that $100 on stuff that makes me happy, or I can give half of it to the government which will spend most of it on stuff like schools that my kids won't go to, roads I won't drive on, charity (welfare) for people I don't even know. They're wasting all of my money on stuff that doesn't directly make me happy! No matter how well a government is run, there will always be people who complain about it, and not without cause. Of course the alternative (extreme libertarianism) ends up being worse in pretty much every way, but in that case it is the world that is shitty, not some big government.

virtuabhi 9y ago

> the bureaucracy is now larger and more powerful than ever under this government Umm... no. The red tape is now minimal at the Central government level. Digital, removal of archaic laws, clearly defined parameters for bids, etc.

i2shar 9y ago

> I'm not sure. Historically, Indian governments have been most undeserving of our taxes simply because they've misspent it and/or misdirected it to achieve their own means (corruption, buying votes etc). Depending on who you ask, Governments will always be undeserving of your tax money. Also, I'd rather prefer my tax money be spent on farm loan waivers than be stashed away hidden from the Government under a carpet or in a foreign bank, if that's the comparison you want. > Finally, there are a lot of disadvantages for being on a completely centralized digital payment platform from an individual liberty point of view. Imagine that a significant portion of your net worth is just a number stored in a "secure database" which falls under the jurisdiction of some government. Now image that you vocally disagree with the government's policies enough for the government to start taking notice. It becomes very very easy for the government to shut you up - all they have to do is strongarm the bank to freeze that number. Its not as hypothetical as it sounds as the Indian government has done this before. Are you suggesting that you should keep significant amounts of your money hidden from the Government because you think they might unduly target you because of your wealth and views? Isn't that how black money is defined in the first place - keeping it hidden from the Government? That is a civil liberties issue, the solution for which cannot be to keep your money hidden from the Government. > A large portion of black money was deemed to be held up by the bureaucracy - bribes paid by private individuals and corporations to government employees and politicians. Had demonetization been done along with a hiring freeze (and subsequent trimming down) of the bureaucracy, I'd have been more certain that the motives behind demonetization were to root out corruption. However, the bureaucracy is now larger and more powerful than ever under this government. Thus, the incentives to seek bribes still exits because of this power imbalance between the powerful bureaucrats and relatively week individuals. I don't see the connection between a hiring freeze in bureaucracy and demonetization. Bureaucrats are a fraction of the population of the country and tackling corruption in bureaucracy is something that must be done regardless.

rm2889 9y ago
> Also, I'd rather prefer my tax money be spent on farm loan waivers than be stashed away hidden from the Government under a carpet or in a foreign bank, if that's the comparison you want. Those aren't the only two alternatives. How about you lower the tax rate and create incentives so that the farmers actually pay back the loans. Right now, farmers take loans with the assumption that they'll be waived, and the cycle continues. I'm not shooting on the farmers here, I'm just saying that farmers, like bureaucrats, like businessmen, are human. If they're incentivized to game a system, they will. For once it'd be great if my tax money could be better spent on other things that would actually benefit the country (strong defense, capable law and order through an effective police and judiciary, etc.) rather than indirectly buying votes for the current political party in power (farm loan waivers etc.). Hell given the binary option of farm loan waivers vs stashing my cash abroad, most businesses will still stash it in real estate, abroad, etc. > Are you suggesting that you should keep significant amounts of your money hidden from the Government because you think they might unduly target you because of your wealth and views? No. Even after tax legitimate money is at risk if its just a number stored in a "secure" database somewhere. Whoever has ultimate control over that database has power over you. With cash, gold, you can carry them with you and anonymously pay for goods/services without compromising on your privacy. I was merely pointing out one limitation with a completely central digital payment platform. > I don't see the connection between a hiring freeze in bureaucracy and demonetization Ok who is on the receiving end of bribes? The bureaucrats/politicians. Demonetization was supposed to hit the tax evaders (usually bribe givers) and the bureaucrats (bribe takers). Maybe they both were seemingly hurt with demonetization as they both had cash stashed. But since the bureaucracy still exists (and has become more powerful eg - http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/the-taxman-now-has-more-powers-thanks-to-the-finance-bill/article17663426.ece http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/the-taxman-now-has-mor...), there is no incentive for the bribe takers to stop taking bribes. Tell me this new bill won't be abused and misused. Looking at the history of laws being abused in India, I'd bet that it will be