Skip to main content

Originally Posted by Brian Teekah:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Brian Teekah:
THE relation between aggregate consumption or aggregate savings and aggregate income, generally termed the consumption function, has occupied a major role in economic thinking ever since Keynes made it a keystone of his theoretical structure in The General Theory.

 

A living wage for the working class should be the benchmark to aim for but it can only be achieved with increases in productivity.

 

But what sociological issues can drive productivity?

 

A man must feel worthy.

 

So yes this 10% will tick inflation up a little but that is the price for the ordinary man to have more money in his pockets and more bread on his table. it is hope it will act as a stimulus for the working man to become more productive and to invest in his long term future.

 

I hope the working class invest these increases in their children's education and housing rather than on more rum and more wine.

Mr. BT, that bolded part is sheer brilliance!!!! You ever consider offering your services to President Granger? Well anyway, when you get lil time read de fuss paragraph hay. Ah suspect you seen it befo.

http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s978.html

What nonsense?

 

You never heard of Great minds think alike.  Never read that article. But thanks for posting.

banna, quit NOW!

 

you're making yourself a bloody laughing stock

 

smfh

FM
Originally Posted by Brian Teekah:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Brian Teekah:
THE relation between aggregate consumption or aggregate savings and aggregate income, generally termed the consumption function, has occupied a major role in economic thinking ever since Keynes made it a keystone of his theoretical structure in The General Theory.

 


 

I hope the working class invest these increases in their children's education and housing rather than on more rum and more wine.

Mr. BT, that bolded part is sheer brilliance!!!! You ever consider offering your services to President Granger? Well anyway, when you get lil time read de fuss paragraph hay. Ah suspect you seen it befo.

http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s978.html

What nonsense?

 

You never heard of Great minds think alike.  Never read that article. But thanks for posting.

 

 

Banna, are you sure you are not possessed by "a beautiful mind".  It happens, no sweat, it's a treatable disorder.

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Brian Teekah:
THE relation between aggregate consumption or aggregate savings and aggregate income, generally termed the consumption function, has occupied a major role in economic thinking ever since Keynes made it a keystone of his theoretical structure in The General Theory.

 

A living wage for the working class should be the benchmark to aim for but it can only be achieved with increases in productivity.

 

But what sociological issues can drive productivity?

 

A man must feel worthy.

 

So yes this 10% will tick inflation up a little but that is the price for the ordinary man to have more money in his pockets and more bread on his table. it is hope it will act as a stimulus for the working man to become more productive and to invest in his long term future.

 

I hope the working class invest these increases in their children's education and housing rather than on more rum and more wine.

Mr. BT, that bolded part is sheer brilliance!!!! You ever consider offering your services to President Granger? Well anyway, when you get lil time read de fuss paragraph hay. Ah suspect you seen it befo.

http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s978.html

FM
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Brian Teekah:
THE relation between aggregate consumption or aggregate savings and aggregate income, generally termed the consumption function, has occupied a major role in economic thinking ever since Keynes made it a keystone of his theoretical structure in The General Theory.

 

A living wage for the working class should be the benchmark to aim for but it can only be achieved with increases in productivity.

 

But what sociological issues can drive productivity?

 

A man must feel worthy.

 

So yes this 10% will tick inflation up a little but that is the price for the ordinary man to have more money in his pockets and more bread on his table. it is hope it will act as a stimulus for the working man to become more productive and to invest in his long term future.

 

I hope the working class invest these increases in their children's education and housing rather than on more rum and more wine.

Mr. BT, that bolded part is sheer brilliance!!!! You ever consider offering your services to President Granger? Well anyway, when you get lil time read de fuss paragraph hay. Ah suspect you seen it befo.

http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s978.html

FM
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:

In its election manifesto, APNU+AFC promised "significant increases for public servants" during its first 100 days in office. At APNU+AFC rallies, Moses Nagamootoo and others promised a 10 percent increase. The coalition has to make good on its promises and poney up the payments.

But what if the PPP left the cupboard bare.  Guysuco in trouble.  Gold Board in trouble.  Consolidated Funds in overdraft.  National debt much higher than originally thought.  And an economy which is already slowing as commodity prices drop.

 

The gov't cannot spend what it doesn't have.

Carib, I'm aware of the financial straits PPP left for the coalition. The new government, however, has to keep its 100-days promises to uphold its image, its credibility. It cannot afford to lose trust. I hope the government sells some rice, sugar, gold etc and finds funds the PPP sequestered in secret accounts.

So when the governmant has no money to pay the civil servants, then starts to lay some off?????

 

If there is no money the govt must do two things.

 

1.  Inform the people of the state that the PPP left it in.  If they do not the PPP will continue its narrative that Guyana was in topshape and there was loads of cash, and any change from that becomes the fault of APNU AFC.

 

2.  They then have to vigorous seek restitution of all assets stolen by the PPP cabal.  The onus will be on those characters to prove how their assets exceed what will be reasonable for a Guyana gov't minister, based on their salary and perks, as every one knows that in 1992 they were all paupers.

 

But to assume ongoing obligations with out a clear sense as to how they will be funded is courting disaster.  Much of the national debt was funded by local institutions like NIS, and so cannot be written down, as this would be ruinous.  In addition I doubt we will get debt write offs for our foreign dominated debt.

FM
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:

In its election manifesto, APNU+AFC promised "significant increases for public servants" during its first 100 days in office. At APNU+AFC rallies, Moses Nagamootoo and others promised a 10 percent increase. The coalition has to make good on its promises and poney up the payments.

But what if the PPP left the cupboard bare.  Guysuco in trouble.  Gold Board in trouble.  Consolidated Funds in overdraft.  National debt much higher than originally thought.  And an economy which is already slowing as commodity prices drop.

 

The gov't cannot spend what it doesn't have.

Carib, I'm aware of the financial straits PPP left for the coalition. The new government, however, has to keep its 100-days promises to uphold its image, its credibility. It cannot afford to lose trust. I hope the government sells some rice, sugar, gold etc and finds funds the PPP sequestered in secret accounts.

So when the governmant has no money to pay the civil servants, then starts to lay some off?????

 

If there is no money the govt must do two things.

 

1.  Inform the people of the state that the PPP left it in.  If they do not the PPP will continue its narrative that Guyana was in topshape and there was loads of cash, and any change from that becomes the fault of APNU AFC.

 

2.  They then have to vigorous seek restitution of all assets stolen by the PPP cabal.  The onus will be on those characters to prove how their assets exceed what will be reasonable for a Guyana gov't minister, based on their salary and perks, as every one knows that in 1992 they were all paupers.

 

But to assume ongoing obligations with out a clear sense as to how they will be funded is courting disaster.  Much of the national debt was funded by local institutions like NIS, and so cannot be written down, as this would be ruinous.  In addition I doubt we will get debt write offs for our foreign dominated debt.

The Govt has to make its case and present in court.  Due process should be followed and action be taken based on law.  I would support a special commission to investigate.  People should be given to right to defend themselves and decision taken based on the outcome.

 

They should start with Govt officials and civil servants to have them reconcile their wealth with reported/disclosed income.  Regarding private business people, that should be standard operating procedure.  It should not be limited to 1992, they should go after all those ill-gotten wealth stored up in property in Brooklyn, Miami, Toronto, etc.

FM
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:

In its election manifesto, APNU+AFC promised "significant increases for public servants" during its first 100 days in office. At APNU+AFC rallies, Moses Nagamootoo and others promised a 10 percent increase. The coalition has to make good on its promises and poney up the payments.

But what if the PPP left the cupboard bare.  Guysuco in trouble.  Gold Board in trouble.  Consolidated Funds in overdraft.  National debt much higher than originally thought.  And an economy which is already slowing as commodity prices drop.

 

The gov't cannot spend what it doesn't have.

Carib, I'm aware of the financial straits PPP left for the coalition. The new government, however, has to keep its 100-days promises to uphold its image, its credibility. It cannot afford to lose trust. I hope the government sells some rice, sugar, gold etc and finds funds the PPP sequestered in secret accounts.

So when the governmant has no money to pay the civil servants, then starts to lay some off?????

 

If there is no money the govt must do two things.

 

1.  Inform the people of the state that the PPP left it in.  If they do not the PPP will continue its narrative that Guyana was in topshape and there was loads of cash, and any change from that becomes the fault of APNU AFC.

 

2.  They then have to vigorous seek restitution of all assets stolen by the PPP cabal.  The onus will be on those characters to prove how their assets exceed what will be reasonable for a Guyana gov't minister, based on their salary and perks, as every one knows that in 1992 they were all paupers.

 

But to assume ongoing obligations with out a clear sense as to how they will be funded is courting disaster.  Much of the national debt was funded by local institutions like NIS, and so cannot be written down, as this would be ruinous.  In addition I doubt we will get debt write offs for our foreign dominated debt.

The Govt has to make its case and present in court.  Due process should be followed and action be taken based on law.  I would support a special commission to investigate.  People should be given to right to defend themselves and decision taken based on the outcome.

 

They should start with Govt officials and civil servants to have them reconcile their wealth with reported/disclosed income.  Regarding private business people, that should be standard operating procedure.  It should not be limited to 1992, they should go after all those ill-gotten wealth stored up in property in Brooklyn, Miami, Toronto, etc.

double edge sword

 

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by KishanB:

Man I was out all day and no body answer my question?

 

Like I will have to answer it myself?

 

I think you already answered it when you posted as BT... er ah mean Brian

Still fishing ass-hole Itamne?  Like you did not get the memo?  I am not like you who got 4 handles on this board.  LOL

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by KishanB:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by KishanB:

Man I was out all day and no body answer my question?

 

Like I will have to answer it myself?

 

I think you already answered it when you posted as BT... er ah mean Brian

Still fishing ass-hole Itamne?  Like you did not get the memo?  I am not like you who got 4 handles on this board.  LOL

Oh no, don't tell me? Is Granger banning flour now? Dammit!!!!

FM
Originally Posted by KishanB:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by KishanB:

Man I was out all day and no body answer my question?

 

Like I will have to answer it myself?

 

I think you already answered it when you posted as BT... er ah mean Brian

Still fishing ass-hole Itamne?  Like you did not get the memo?  I am not like you who got 4 handles on this board.  LOL

Woah, perturbed?

FM
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by Brian Teekah:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Brian Teekah:
THE relation between aggregate consumption or aggregate savings and aggregate income, generally termed the consumption function, has occupied a major role in economic thinking ever since Keynes made it a keystone of his theoretical structure in The General Theory.

 

A living wage for the working class should be the benchmark to aim for but it can only be achieved with increases in productivity.

 

But what sociological issues can drive productivity?

 

A man must feel worthy.

 

So yes this 10% will tick inflation up a little but that is the price for the ordinary man to have more money in his pockets and more bread on his table. it is hope it will act as a stimulus for the working man to become more productive and to invest in his long term future.

 

I hope the working class invest these increases in their children's education and housing rather than on more rum and more wine.

Mr. BT, that bolded part is sheer brilliance!!!! You ever consider offering your services to President Granger? Well anyway, when you get lil time read de fuss paragraph hay. Ah suspect you seen it befo.

http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s978.html

What nonsense?

 

You never heard of Great minds think alike.  Never read that article. But thanks for posting.

banna, quit NOW!

 

you're making yourself a bloody laughing stock

 

smfh

That's some really funny and serious shyte comments you made there BT.  I think a lot of people here qualify for a doctorate in internet browsing.

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
.

Oh no, don't tell me? Is Granger banning flour now? Dammit!!!!

And of course only Indos eat flour so this has to be to starve them out.

 

I don't know why people don't see how ridiculous they look. When Burnham banned wheat flour EVERY ONE suffered as bread is a staple for poor people, and many ate dhal puri for lunch as it was the cheapest food available.  And I include black people in this as well.

FM
Originally Posted by Jay Bharrat:

Don't need to cut Ministers' salary.

 

They will transfer all NICIL's funds to the Consolidated Fund.

 

The question should be "Can we afford not to give the 10%, not can we afford to give 10%."  People will spend more and boost the economy.

I can name you several CARICOM nations which are in dire straits because they did the easy thing and paid salaries that they couldn't afford.  At some point the bill cannot be paid and civil servants lose their jobs.

 

It is better and more honorable for the gov't to assess exactly what its financial resources are, if there are hidden obligations, and where it will derive revenue from.

 

Better to drink bitter medicine now when they can blame the PPP, than to wait until the govt is broke, forced to cut capital expenditures, and lay off workers.  And the PPP can then scream "we told you so."

 

I suspect a civil servant would rather keep his job this year, than get a 10%, and then lose his job next year, in an economy which is depressed because the govt was forced into an IMF agreement, and so had to curb spending.

FM
I doan see the big deal in paying civil servants or any one a living wage. 10pc seems pretty meager to me.

The public service should never be put in a position of choosing between bribery v starvation.

Anyhow, I hope the PNC transitions cane cutters out of that profession. Slavery is over. The job of canecutting should die. Send their kids to school. Give them some land to farm for themselves.

The PPP however enjoy Indians as captive slaves.
FM
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:
I doan see the big deal in paying civil servants or any one a living wage. 10pc seems pretty meager to me.

.

And when the fact that the govt cannot afford it because the PPP stole all the cash, so the govt goes to the IMF, who then demands q 20% cut, what say you then.

 

You do know that even prosperous Barbados was forced to lay off thousands of their civil servants because they borrowed to pay their salaries.  Guyana is poor, and we are so lowly regarded that we do not even have a credit rating.  Guyana cannot pay salaries when it has no idea of how this is going to be paid.

 

Granger/Nagamootoo need to be upfront with this.  A civil servant making $US250/month is better than a FORMER civil servant making ZERO!

FM
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:
I doan see the big deal in paying civil servants or any one a living wage. 10pc seems pretty meager to me.

The public service should never be put in a position of choosing between bribery v starvation.

Anyhow, I hope the PNC transitions cane cutters out of that profession. Slavery is over. The job of canecutting should die. Send their kids to school. Give them some land to farm for themselves.

The PPP however enjoy Indians as captive slaves.

Get at least 5% into the disciplined services.

FM
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
.

Oh no, don't tell me? Is Granger banning flour now? Dammit!!!!

And of course only Indos eat flour so this has to be to starve them out.

 

I don't know why people don't see how ridiculous they look. When Burnham banned wheat flour EVERY ONE suffered as bread is a staple for poor people, and many ate dhal puri for lunch as it was the cheapest food available.  And I include black people in this as well.

One of the areas of possible diversification of Guysuco.

 

Bai we suffer, true blacks also felt the pinch, but don't forget, LFSB opened up KSIs all over and once the PNC card was presented, life was made easier.  Furthermore, is alyuh who used to run and vote and keep the man deh.

 

On the other hand, I believe LFSB was trying to domesticate the food supply but went around the wrong way.  Excess flour, potatoes, etc are dumped in the open market making it impossible for local farmers to compete.

FM
Originally Posted by baseman:
One of the areas of possible diversification of Guysuco.

 

Bai we suffer, true blacks also felt the pinch, but don't forget, LFSB opened up KSIs all over and once the PNC card was presented, life was made easier.  Furthermore, is alyuh who used to run and vote and keep the man deh.

 

On the other hand, I believe LFSB was trying to domesticate the food supply but went around the wrong way.  Excess flour, potatoes, etc are dumped in the open market making it impossible for local farmers to compete.

You forget to mention the Indian smugglers (some of whom post here) who punished their own mattie by selling them dal, flour, and so on at nosebleed prices. An entire class of "wealthy" Indians created and enriched on the backs of their mattie. But dem is chatree suh is okay, nah? Because me see you nah mention them.

 

This narrative being peddled that Burnham wanted to starve Indians is pure hogwash. He may have been a meglomaniac but he understood the implications on our currency and economics if Guyana was a long term net importer of goods. We see the wisdom in that thought decades later.

 

For example, instead of importing apples, grapes and canned fruits (we used to import Dole pineapples in cans!!!) we had our own fruits which could be eaten locally, canned and exported thereby creating jobs and benefiting the economy. The same went for flour etc.

 

Black people needed flour to make bread too! We used the peas as well! Liked our apples and grapes and used the canned sardines and so on just as Indians did. So to present this nonsense that LFS was out to "starve" Indians is just another vicious lie to  buttress claims to Indian victimhood.

 

LFS crime was in the execution of his policies. He banned before developing the industries to replace the banned products. And he had nuff incompetence surrounding him!

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by baseman:
One of the areas of possible diversification of Guysuco.

 

Bai we suffer, true blacks also felt the pinch, but don't forget, LFSB opened up KSIs all over and once the PNC card was presented, life was made easier.  Furthermore, is alyuh who used to run and vote and keep the man deh.

 

On the other hand, I believe LFSB was trying to domesticate the food supply but went around the wrong way.  Excess flour, potatoes, etc are dumped in the open market making it impossible for local farmers to compete.

You forget to mention the Indian smugglers (some of whom post here) who punished their own mattie by selling them dal, flour, and so on at nosebleed prices. An entire class of "wealthy" Indians created and enriched on the backs of their mattie. But dem is chatree suh is okay, nah? Because me see you nah mention them.

 

This narrative being peddled that Burnham wanted to starve Indians is pure hogwash. He may have been a meglomaniac but he understood the implications on our currency and economics if Guyana was a long term net importer of goods. We see the wisdom in that thought decades later.

 

For example, instead of importing apples, grapes and canned fruits (we used to import Dole pineapples in cans!!!) we had our own fruits which could be eaten locally, canned and exported thereby creating jobs and benefiting the economy. The same went for flour etc.

 

Black people needed flour to make bread too! We used the peas as well! Liked our apples and grapes and used the canned sardines and so on just as Indians did. So to present this nonsense that LFS was out to "starve" Indians is just another vicious lie to  buttress claims to Indian victimhood.

 

LFS crime was in the execution of his policies. He banned before developing the industries to replace the banned products. And he had nuff incompetence surrounding him!

Smugglers saw the opportunity and, by its nature was a risky and costly business so the price/cost was high and only the upper crust really benefited.  Don't blame them, they catered to a need for those who could afford.  The stage was set by PNC policies.

 

LFS crime was utter and opportunistic racism aided and abetted by his "flock".

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by baseman:
One of the areas of possible diversification of Guysuco.

 

Bai we suffer, true blacks also felt the pinch, but don't forget, LFSB opened up KSIs all over and once the PNC card was presented, life was made easier.  Furthermore, is alyuh who used to run and vote and keep the man deh.

 

On the other hand, I believe LFSB was trying to domesticate the food supply but went around the wrong way.  Excess flour, potatoes, etc are dumped in the open market making it impossible for local farmers to compete.

You forget to mention the Indian smugglers (some of whom post here) who punished their own mattie by selling them dal, flour, and so on at nosebleed prices. An entire class of "wealthy" Indians created and enriched on the backs of their mattie. But dem is chatree suh is okay, nah? Because me see you nah mention them.

 

This narrative being peddled that Burnham wanted to starve Indians is pure hogwash. He may have been a meglomaniac but he understood the implications on our currency and economics if Guyana was a long term net importer of goods. We see the wisdom in that thought decades later.

 

For example, instead of importing apples, grapes and canned fruits (we used to import Dole pineapples in cans!!!) we had our own fruits which could be eaten locally, canned and exported thereby creating jobs and benefiting the economy. The same went for flour etc.

 

Black people needed flour to make bread too! We used the peas as well! Liked our apples and grapes and used the canned sardines and so on just as Indians did. So to present this nonsense that LFS was out to "starve" Indians is just another vicious lie to  buttress claims to Indian victimhood.

 

LFS crime was in the execution of his policies. He banned before developing the industries to replace the banned products. And he had nuff incompetence surrounding him!

Smugglers saw the opportunity and, by its nature was a risky and costly business so the price/cost was high and only the upper crust really benefited.  Don't blame them, they catered to a need for those who could afford.  The stage was set by PNC policies.

 

LFS crime was utter and opportunistic racism aided and abetted by his "flock".

And who is denying the racism of the PNC back then? The point of my post was to inform the young 'uns of this urban legend you all are peddling that Indians were being systematically "starved" under the PNC. That is a lie. How could the PNC starve you when you controlled the food supply?

 

As you alluded in an earlier post, the food issue came from the go local campaign gone wrong. Every one was affected, every one had to line up for food and the vast majority of ordinary blacks had no PNC card to get food. We all got on lines. My family got items for our Indian neighbors and they got stuff for us. And that is not an isolated incident.

 

What should be clear by now is that under each administration - PNC and PPP, only a few people got rich off the racist policies. The ordinary Indian and black are in the same position or worse off today. So stop peddling the lies (not necessarily you per se) that black people and the PNC systematically "starved" Indians.

FM
Originally Posted by baseman:
 

LFS crime was utter and opportunistic racism aided and abetted by his "flock".

Yes his flock were so happy when there was no flour, no bread, and severe shortages of rice.  They were ecstatic and having to pay huge sums to by black market toilet paper.

 

And they just loved eating plain rice with bora and "dog" bones as that is all they could find to eat.  With split peas gone, black eye peas was also in short supply.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Ramakant-P:
Originally Posted by Mitwah:
Originally Posted by Ramakant-P:
Originally Posted by TK:

Gee dem 30% increase!!

DO YOU ACTUALLY KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ECONOMICS?

We do know that you are less prone to plan events involving drinking.

Whilst I was a party planner, you were a party pooper.

I see you were 1st in line at the Hut in response to their AD.Free drink tomorrow.  1st drink twice the price, second drink free.

Mitwah

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×