[CrAzY dRiVeR]

The first ever report of petrol touching 90rs / litre comes from Parbhani in MH -

Read more at:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/a...campaign=cppst

100rs / litre will be a big physcological barrier - if it ever hits that mark!

[ksameer1234]

Originally Posted by saket77

I think I'll sell my cars and should rather save for a Tesla.

If even a fraction of buyers think this way and turn towards electric, fuel price rise would have achieved its intended / unintended purpose, i.e., of bringing about a transition from conventional fuels to electric vehicles.

Oil anyways is not an infinite resource and extraction is going deeper progressively. Continuing to extract from deep reserves requires capital and price of a barrel of oil has to be at a level to make extraction economically viable. I believe we are closely reaching a tipping point (or have we?) where expensive oil heralds an era of electric vehicles globally, which leads to softening of oil prices due to falling demand and eventually leading to demise of oil since extraction is no longer economically viable.

Or, maybe I am day-dreaming because oil-driven economies' cartel can play the price card at their convenience to put brakes on the EV surge, keep them handicapped while continuing to control the oil-importing economies indirectly.

[humyum]

If the Taxation was as per the previous government, the price of petrol would be 65 bucks and the price of diesel would be around 59 rupees in Mumbai, this tells me the stark difference between what government for the people is and the government which is run by absolute megalomaniacs is.

Diesel in Mumbai currently is at what Petrol used to be a couple of months back, I don't care whatever develops or whatever does not, when fuel is deregulated, I want the fuel to be taxed rationally, now even if he gets it under GST, BST or BMTC before the elections, for me the 4 nd half years of loot is unforgivable, unforgettable and liable for harsh punishment.

I hope the fall is as drastic as the rise, for the fuel as well for the people responsible for it.

Jai Hind!

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by condor

To answer both of you:

You can make your assumptions. I am looking at overall situation - first for myself. I win some, I dont win some. I may pay a hundred more @ each top-up. But my overall monthly spends are down.

As you can see, this is a purely emotional argument. Logic has no part to play in it.

Originally Posted by lurker

Why not you let them rant away then, instead of keeping following all posts that raise issue on fuel price rise and brush them away as if their complaints are based on some deep character flaw rather than a genuine grievance.

ah, the unwashed commoner strikes again! Here is some food for thought - looking at the global situation and why the govt should not fall prey to populism:

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com...w/65774371.cms

Originally Posted by discoverwild

I wrote this a few months ago.
----
Wonder why the Government shies away on reducing taxes on fuel?

The answer to your question is in the link above.

here's another explainer in graphical form - https://epaperlive.timesgroup.com/ETE/AHM/20180912 - see the Call of Duty chart.

Originally Posted by ksameer1234

If even a fraction of buyers think this way and turn towards electric, fuel price rise would have achieved its intended / unintended purpose, i.e., of bringing about a transition from conventional fuels to electric vehicles.

I completely agree. Whenever a commodity becomes more expensive it forces a change in consuming habits. The cheaper it is the more profligate consumers are.

[Sheel]

Can someone tell me that in how much debt our country was because of oil? And does this present govt have intentions to pay that just in its first term or it is simply taxed too much [I recall cess being added when crude was low & that it would be waived off when crude goes high].

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by Sheel

Can someone tell me that in how much debt our country was because of oil? And does this present govt have intentions to pay that just in its first term or it is simply taxed too much [I recall cess being added when crude was low & that it would be waived off when crude goes high].

It's a subsidy issue, not a debt issue. The subsidy was shared between explorers, chiefly ONGC, refiners and the govt. - ruining the finances of the companies and worsening the govt's fiscal deficit and CAD.

Yes, oil is taxed too much but it has been true for successive govts. Like alcohol, it's too important a revenue stream to let go. The previous UPA govt cut excise when oil hit $100 but there was no guarantee that the cut is automatic whenever oil climbs. The NDA, taking advantage of low prices, restored excise and hasn't cut it when oil rose again (some would argue for very prudent reasons - what would you rather have? a low fiscal deficit, a booming economy and lots of foreign investment or cheaper prices at the pump?)

[Sheel]

Originally Posted by StarScream

(some would argue for very prudent reasons - what would you rather have? a low fiscal deficit, a booming economy and lots of foreign investment or cheaper prices at the pump?)

Thanks

Then maybe we need to discuss this than other things and blaming govt [present/past government]

[longhorn]

Originally Posted by StarScream

It's a subsidy issue, not a debt issue. The subsidy was shared between explorers, chiefly ONGC, refiners and the govt. - ruining the finances of the companies and worsening the govt's fiscal deficit and CAD.

There is zilch subsidy on petrol and diesel. Subsidy is provided only for LPG. Subsidy on kerosene has been mostly done away with.

Originally Posted by StarScream

Yes, oil is taxed too much but it has been true for successive govts. Like alcohol, it's too important a revenue stream to let go.

True.

Originally Posted by StarScream

The previous UPA govt cut excise when oil hit $100 but there was no guarantee that the cut is automatic whenever oil climbs. The NDA, taking advantage of low prices, restored excise and hasn't cut it when oil rose again (some would argue for very prudent reasons - what would you rather have? a low fiscal deficit, a booming economy and lots of foreign investment or cheaper prices at the pump?)

You might want to rephrase that. To restore something means to get it back to where/what it originally was. We all know that the current dispensation has in fact gone much further ahead and shown us how we can be taxed at more than the actual cost of the product itself. That, I would call daylight robbery, not restoration. In fact the current FM has gone on to say that unless tax compliance in the form of income tax and GST increases (his own admission that demo was a blunder, and also GST did not bring in the desired results) he does not see any scope to cut taxes.

You can achieve low fiscal deficit if the government is prudent in its spending and by doing away with hare brained schemes like swatch bharat, which, other than taxing people away to glory, hasn't brought in any results worth speaking for. Curbing fiscal deficit and taxing people to death are two entirely different things, which unfortunately, no one in the current dispensation seems to be able to comprehend. As things stand now, neither do I see a booming economy (we are currently much worse off in GDP growth YoY than we were during UPA), nor any fresh foreign investments. In fact the dollar strengthening has led to a flight of FDI.

EDIT : One important point that's missing here is that excise duty is an advalorem tax, i.e., it increases when the basic cost of the product goes up and vice versa. If the government had any thoughts for the millions milking their CT 100's and CD Dawn's for the last bit of fuel, the bare minimum they could have done is to fix the upper limit of excise so that only the actual cost hike is passed on to the consumers and not additional taxes. Remember, the government only stands to lose excess of tax in this scenario, not the current loot that is already in place. Even that expectation, seems a bit far fetched at this moment.

[400notout]

Originally Posted by StarScream

It's a subsidy issue, not a debt issue. The subsidy was shared between explorers, chiefly ONGC, refiners and the govt. - ruining the finances of the companies and worsening the govt's fiscal deficit and CAD.

The subsidy issue was taken care of long back when petrol was deregulated in 2010 and diesel followed suit in 2014.

https://www.process-worldwide.com/ho...ners-a-471407/

But the "subsidy" now is replaced by taxes which the govt can't let go of now.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.the...90702.ece/amp/

[k149in]

Originally Posted by StarScream

what would you rather have? a low fiscal deficit, a booming economy and lots of foreign investment or cheaper prices at the pump?)

Many developed countries have huge deficit. UK, Canada for example. Instead of "or" in your statement, its best if government tries a balance instead of hammering common man with high fuel prices. By the way, the link https://epaperlive.timesgroup.com/ETE/AHM/20180912 is not opening in IE and Chrome.

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by longhorn

There is zilch subsidy on petrol and diesel. Subsidy is provided only for LPG. Subsidy on kerosene has been mostly done away with.

Originally Posted by 400notout

The subsidy issue was taken care of long back when petrol was deregulated in 2010 and diesel followed suit in 2014.

I said the subsidy "was" shared by xxx, not "is" shared. I expected most intelligent people to know that the prices are now decontrolled but in case it wasn't clear - thank you for clarifying that.

Sure, taxes are higher and I said the taxation is usurious. But I used the word restore for a very simplistic answer.

Mod Note: Please quote ONLY the relevant bits of a post. Quoting a full, long post inconveniences our mobile readers.

Originally Posted by k149in

Many developed countries have huge deficit. UK, Canada for example.

Your point is? Are we at the same stage of development?

Originally Posted by k149in

Instead of "or" in your statement, its best if government tries a balance instead of hammering common man with high fuel prices.

Glib - what do you suggest?

Originally Posted by k149in

By the way, the link https://epaperlive.timesgroup.com/ETE/AHM/20180912 is not opening in IE and Chrome.

Opens fine for me in Chrome, in fact I clicked on the link in your mail and it opened.

Mod Note: Back to back posts merged. Also please quote ONLY the relevant bits of a post. Quoting a full, long post inconveniences our mobile readers.

[400notout]

Originally Posted by StarScream

Sure, taxes are higher and I said the taxation is usurious. But I used the word restore for a very simplistic answer.

Sure, but you had said this earlier,

Originally Posted by StarScream

(some would argue for very prudent reasons - what would you rather have? a low fiscal deficit, a booming economy and lots of foreign investment or cheaper prices at the pump?)

On one hand you suggest restoring cess, on the other you relate "cheaper prices at the pump" to high fiscal deficit.

I for one am not asking for cheaper but fair prices, theres a difference. Selling fuel at twice it's price citing fiscal deficit is plain BS.

[lurker]

Originally Posted by StarScream

ah, the unwashed commoner strikes again! Here is some food for thought - looking at the global situation and why the govt should not fall prey to populism:

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com...w/65774371.cms



.

defence of the indefensible
two words.

₹38 - ₹88

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by 400notout

On one hand you suggest restoring cess, on the other you relate "cheaper prices at the pump" to high fiscal deficit.

I never suggested restoring anything. And I was referring to excise. I like cheaper pump prices as much as anyone else but not at the cost fiscal responsibility.

Originally Posted by 400notout

I for one am not asking for cheaper but fair prices, there's a difference. Selling fuel at twice it's price citing fiscal deficit is plain BS.

Agreed, but what do you suggest? States can cut VAT too but how many have done so? Bengal and Rajasthan - who else? This is a situation of the govt's own making - and now, especially with GST shortfalls, they can't let go.
How is a subsidy burden or a higher import bill not related to the fiscal deficit?

Originally Posted by lurker

defence of the indefensible
two words.

₹38 - ₹88

Me or Swaminathan?

[lurker]

Originally Posted by StarScream

Me or Swaminathan?

you can decide for yourself.
38 - price of fuel at pump
88 - price of fuel at pump + hypocrisy/lies/obfuscation