As my fellow Entourage fan attested, Dinkić is right. Here's something I posted in a similar article the other day.
"Great to hear that someone in the Serbian Government has a basic understanding of market principles; decentralising the budget would allow a fairer distribution of revenue, without redistributing wealth, per se. If individual municipalities were responsible for their own fiscal policies (i.e. providing welfare, basic infrastructure, policing etc.), then the money will be spent more fruitfully and efficiently, as naturally, each municipality would be more informed as to how to distribute revenue as opposed to some bloke sitting in Belgrade. Poorer municipalities (i.e. those in Sandzak and southern Serbia) would naturally require more revenue to be received from the Government in order to keep themselves sustainable, and those which have stronger industries and generally richer citizens (Nis, Novi Sad etc.) can garner enough revenue for themselves without Belgrade having to subsidise their budget too much, so the Federal Government won't be losing out. Hence, a lot of the tax can be redistributed straight to the municipalities, minimising the chance of socialist-styled big governments bungling it all up through their own redistribution, possibly saving the economy in the short-term and providing a back-bone for a better economic future. Win-win.
(Stefan, 12 June 2011 14:53)"
This would probably be the first time I ever agree with G17 (dinkic) or at least his official policy. Serbia's economy does need to be decentralized. I believe self-government without Belgrade bureaucracy interfering everywhere would be a step in the right direction. Vojvodina is just too big of a percentage of Serbia's territory to be its own unit. The province should be split into 3 parts as well as central Serbia into 4.
As far as the IMF goes, Serbia should just default on all the loans it has made with the IMF and the World Bank. Starting over is the best option and getting restructured loans from the likes of Russia, China, India and Brazil. Use the country's key industries (military & agriculture) resources to find opportunities in the Middle East & Latin America. That would really be Serbia's way of globalizing it is a closer world than ever before as globalists say. The IMF's money is not necessary anymore. There are other places to find that money now so Serbia would not be that hurt by Western sanctions as once thought.
So yeaa...decentralize Serbia into smaller states/provinces, default IMF/World Bank loans..i nikad u nato
This would probably be the first time I ever agree with G17 (dinkic) or at least his official policy. Serbia's economy does need to be decentralized. I believe self-government without Belgrade bureaucracy interfering everywhere would be a step in the right direction. Vojvodina is just too big of a percentage of Serbia's territory to be its own unit. The province should be split into 3 parts as well as central Serbia into 4.
As far as the IMF goes, Serbia should just default on all the loans it has made with the IMF and the World Bank. Starting over is the best option and getting restructured loans from the likes of Russia, China, India and Brazil. Use the country's key industries (military & agriculture) resources to find opportunities in the Middle East & Latin America. That would really be Serbia's way of globalizing it is a closer world than ever before as globalists say. The IMF's money is not necessary anymore. There are other places to find that money now so Serbia would not be that hurt by Western sanctions as once thought.
So yeaa...decentralize Serbia into smaller states/provinces, default IMF/World Bank loans..i nikad u nato
As my fellow Entourage fan attested, Dinkić is right. Here's something I posted in a similar article the other day.
"Great to hear that someone in the Serbian Government has a basic understanding of market principles; decentralising the budget would allow a fairer distribution of revenue, without redistributing wealth, per se. If individual municipalities were responsible for their own fiscal policies (i.e. providing welfare, basic infrastructure, policing etc.), then the money will be spent more fruitfully and efficiently, as naturally, each municipality would be more informed as to how to distribute revenue as opposed to some bloke sitting in Belgrade. Poorer municipalities (i.e. those in Sandzak and southern Serbia) would naturally require more revenue to be received from the Government in order to keep themselves sustainable, and those which have stronger industries and generally richer citizens (Nis, Novi Sad etc.) can garner enough revenue for themselves without Belgrade having to subsidise their budget too much, so the Federal Government won't be losing out. Hence, a lot of the tax can be redistributed straight to the municipalities, minimising the chance of socialist-styled big governments bungling it all up through their own redistribution, possibly saving the economy in the short-term and providing a back-bone for a better economic future. Win-win.
(Stefan, 12 June 2011 14:53)"
This would probably be the first time I ever agree with G17 (dinkic) or at least his official policy. Serbia's economy does need to be decentralized. I believe self-government without Belgrade bureaucracy interfering everywhere would be a step in the right direction. Vojvodina is just too big of a percentage of Serbia's territory to be its own unit. The province should be split into 3 parts as well as central Serbia into 4.
As far as the IMF goes, Serbia should just default on all the loans it has made with the IMF and the World Bank. Starting over is the best option and getting restructured loans from the likes of Russia, China, India and Brazil. Use the country's key industries (military & agriculture) resources to find opportunities in the Middle East & Latin America. That would really be Serbia's way of globalizing it is a closer world than ever before as globalists say. The IMF's money is not necessary anymore. There are other places to find that money now so Serbia would not be that hurt by Western sanctions as once thought.
So yeaa...decentralize Serbia into smaller states/provinces, default IMF/World Bank loans..i nikad u nato
As my fellow Entourage fan attested, Dinkić is right. Here's something I posted in a similar article the other day.
"Great to hear that someone in the Serbian Government has a basic understanding of market principles; decentralising the budget would allow a fairer distribution of revenue, without redistributing wealth, per se. If individual municipalities were responsible for their own fiscal policies (i.e. providing welfare, basic infrastructure, policing etc.), then the money will be spent more fruitfully and efficiently, as naturally, each municipality would be more informed as to how to distribute revenue as opposed to some bloke sitting in Belgrade. Poorer municipalities (i.e. those in Sandzak and southern Serbia) would naturally require more revenue to be received from the Government in order to keep themselves sustainable, and those which have stronger industries and generally richer citizens (Nis, Novi Sad etc.) can garner enough revenue for themselves without Belgrade having to subsidise their budget too much, so the Federal Government won't be losing out. Hence, a lot of the tax can be redistributed straight to the municipalities, minimising the chance of socialist-styled big governments bungling it all up through their own redistribution, possibly saving the economy in the short-term and providing a back-bone for a better economic future. Win-win.
(Stefan, 12 June 2011 14:53)"
IMAGE SOURCE
3 Komentari
Sortiraj po: