Government hand in private sector

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    Favorites, Groups & Events

    Government hand in private sector - Presentation Transcript

    1. By Prasanth Narayanan Priyanka Gaikwad
      • OBJECTIVES OF INTERVENTION
      • TYPES OF INTERVENTION
      • IMPACT OF INTERVENTION (-’ves)
      • CONCLUSION
      • Respond to market failures
      • Limit market power abuse
      • Improve economic efficiency
      • Provide for “Public Goods”
      • Intervention on “Public Interest”
      • Behavioural
            • Modify the economic demeanor
            • Price Regulation
            • Prohibition orders
      • Structural
            • Intervention with Structure of organisation
            • Prevention of mergers
            • Forced Separation/splitting of organizations
      • INTERVENTION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH
        • Govt usually intervenes to provide “public goods”
        • But with more of intervention, agenda is no longer economically driven
        • Tax money is diverted to inefficient industries
        • Diminishing returns to investment
        • “ LAG” of government policies
    2.  
      • The initial aim might have been good
      • Government treats PSUs as investments
      • Disinvestment is mostly feasible for profit making units
      • Loss making units are generally kept alive on life-support
      • Privatisation of profit and Nationalising losses
      • 70% of requirements imported
      • Prices of crude oil spiralling up
      • Policies->complex web around petro-sector
      • Retail trade in shambles
      • Apparent ‘strain’ on government finances
      • Large amount from the oil sector-> indirect taxes
      • Total revenue Rs 1,10,000 crore in 2003-’04
      • Paid by public
      • India's levies on oil are high
      • Additional ‘cess’ on indigenously produced crude
      • State-run PSUs make considerable profits due to monopolistic practices
      • Changes in food habits
      • Shortage of edible oils resulting in imports
      • Pulse deficit – reflected in imports and increase in domestic prices
      • Declining cereal availability
      • =>Due to accretion to stock of cereals held by government agencies
      • Policies not been changed to adjust to new situations
      • Accumulation of huge grain stocks
      • Increase in food subsidy bill
      • Neglect of efficiency and quality
      • Setback to private trade
      • Strong regional bias in government support to agriculture
      • Set up if general social welfare increases
      • Modus measurement of welfare is flawed
      • PSU’s are generally not the most efficient institutions
      • Huge influx of money
      • Very Very Limited intervention
      • Only respond to
        • Market failures
        • Restriction of monopoly
        • Other such situations
      • In all other cases leave the economy alone!
    3.  

    + arpit105arpit105, 3 years ago

    custom

    216 views, 0 favs, 0 embeds more stats

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 216
      • 216 on SlideShare
      • 0 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 0
    • Downloads 5
    Most viewed embeds

    more

    All embeds

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories

    Tags