mm, I already acknowledged that "I am be wrong" and differed the matter to economists we have on the net. The post was to to a public forum, open for discussions. None of us pretend we know everything or have airs about us. We are open in our discussions, and wish that people like you with so much experience, as you so vividly claimed, would join in on healthy discussions instead of instead of writing personal emails.
You could join in and pitch in your views, instead of writing ONLY to me. > After trying to create a new theory on Economics you are now hesitating: Is that what you came up with? That is dissapointing. Also if you find you have better theories, you should put that up on Assam org too. I am putting this discussion thread on Assam org so that others can also enjoy/join in the discussions. Have a good one. On 8/29/05, mc mahant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > After trying to create a new theory on Economics you are now hesitating: > > > 'That was a bit of analysis, I just came up with, on the fly. I am > sure, I went wrong somewhere. Maybe, professional economists will have > to weigh in." > > Good > > mm > > > > >From: Ram Sarangapani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [email protected] > >Subject: Re: [Assam] BWeek- 500% growth in India - if corruption > >gone;private limite... > >Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 16:49:04 -0500 > > > >Bhuban da, > > > >Excuse me for butting in. > > > > >The overall economy of the country is not affected. > > > >I am so sure. The corrupt (assuming that they now have discretionary > >income) may actually spend the money on luxuries, autos, > >airconditioners etc.The poor on the other hand may actually spend the > >money to but essential commodities, medicines etc. > > > >Now, if the poor do not get the money (they were supposed to get), > >then one can assume that they go deeper into debt, while prices keep > >up with the extra money infused into the economy (because of leakages > >in the aid system), and may have to depend more on social services (at > >tax payer expense), but now at a higher cost to the country (tax > >payers). > > > >That was a bit of analysis, I just came up with, on the fly. I am > >sure, I went wrong somewhere. Maybe, professional economists will have > >to weigh in. > > > >--Ram > > > > > > > > > >On 8/29/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I said I am no economist and was mouthing what other economist had > >said > > > about corruption and its overall affect on the national economy. Amartya > >Sen > > > is a brilliant thinker and his finer point has possibly been overlooked > >by > > > other economists. What I understand is that the corrupt person grabs the > > > money from the underdog directly or indirectly but as the person spends > >the > > > money, it circulates and is accounted for. The overall economy of the > > > country is not affected. I plead those who know about these things to > > > rescue me; perhaps they could even throw their gauntlets to the > > > noble-laureate! > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhuban > > > _______________________________________________ > > > assam mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org > > > > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >assam mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org > > _________________________________________________________________ > Job hunting? Get the right one! > http://creative.mediaturf.net/creatives/timesjobs/hotmail_TOL.htm Log on to > timesjobs TODAY > > _______________________________________________ assam mailing list [email protected] http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
