Interesting and Humour - page 3280
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
The best option is to increase the revenue flow into the budget.
It is easier to cut costs. And increasing taxes will lead to everyone reverting to grey tax schemes.
https://lenta.ru/news/2016/08/18/bursalary
The best option is to increase revenue receipts into the budget.
Yeah, like in 2013.
Budget cuts need to be made - social services and the power block.
It is easier to cut costs. And an increase in taxes will lead to a return to grey tax schemes.
At the moment, the CEO appointed by the founders is responsible for everything in the company. And the founders themselves are not responsible, unless the director has proved that he acted strictly on the instructions of the founder.
So, now there are an unbelievable number of firms engaged in money laundering. And the directors are often drunkards with whom there is no demand.
In my inexperienced opinion, it would be enough to pass a law making founders liable for the actions of their directors. I have my doubts that the director, if he is a normal person, is able to do something illegal without the founder's knowledge. Unless he is a scumbag.
So as soon as and if this is done, when and if there will be a reduction/abolition of cash withdrawals, there will be an increase in revenues to the budget at once. And without an increase in taxes.
Do you think it will help the economy to recover? I think the opposite. Purchasing power will go down, who will buy the products of a growing economy?
These are not even reforms - they are first steps.
It is called reducing the budget deficit to an acceptable level.
Right now, expenditures exceed revenues. The deficit is being financed from accumulated funds.
The money from the funds will run out this year or next year.
What to do next?
Reducing the budget deficit is not about reforms. It is the condition under which reforms can begin.
Do you think it will help the economy? I think it will do the opposite. Purchasing power will go down, who will buy the products of a growing economy?
All the "arguments" that are going on right now are ways of dealing with the budget deficit.
Some are screaming that we should cut spending before it's too late, while others are screaming that there will be an explosion on election eve and that we should print money instead.
These are not even reforms - they are the first steps.
It is called reducing the budget deficit to an acceptable level.
Right now, expenditures exceed revenues. The deficit is being financed from accumulated funds.
The money from the funds will run out this year or next year.
What to do next?
Russia's budget deficit is small and roughly (in percentage terms) equal to that of the US. I do not believe that this is a significant factor for restraining the development of the economy. I think that the reasons are different.
In 2015 and 2016, the RF Ministry of Finance tried to place debt securities with international partners to cover the deficit - attempts failed.
The US sells its own - there are enough buyers