Buffeted by age?

Warren Buffet has kicked up a storm by commenting that the super rich in the US need to be taxed more and as a means of example he said that he paid 17% of his income as taxes whereas the people he employed paid in excess of 30%.

One needs to understand that taxes are a means of incentivising business. Thats why Capital Gains taxes are lower than other forms of taxes. Also incentives for exports are given in countries with net forex outflows (like India).

The issues that need to be discussed is the abuse of these lower taxes (or nil taxes) and how corporations have set up tax free contracts. Just plugging these loopholes and reigning in Government expenditure would be more than enough.

Of course taxing the rich at higher slabs will not hurt BUT do you want to be branded a socialist in capitalist america?

Too smart by half!!

Karunanidhi thought he had a winner when he gave away free TV's as it created a monopoly for SUN TV's cable and Directv business. What he forgot was that power consumption doubled as people started watching more TV (add the lights and fan in some cases AC too!!) and by the time the next election came there was huge power shortfalls across the state!!

Added to this the free food and money being given away resulted in people becoming too lazy to vote for him when the time came around!!

So it would do good for the future politicians to note that freebies dont work.

Crime of War

There has been a lot of thought given to war crimes BUT none to the war itself.

There have been innumerable killing fields since time immemorial -

Inter tribe wars

Inter faith wars

New world wars - colonisation

World war II

Local ethnic conflicts - etc etc..

In all this the stakeholders are not seen taking to the roads risking death in the crossfire to stop the "crime of war". Nor does the International community impose sanctions and allow safe passage for those persecuted in a war zone. (unless of course oil is at risk!!)

The latest "war crime" making headlines is that of the Srilankan Army wrt the tamil population. The fact that a soft war was going on for over 3 decades and had caused huge civilian casualities, the fact that the tamil uprising had been termed as a terror outfit and the fact that the local population had never once spoke against the war with the leaders that be, shows that they had accepted to be silent partners in the "crime of war". To cry wolf when the soft gloves were taken off and the hard hammer of a government was unleashed which brought a swift end to 3 decades of war is at best opportunistic.

In all war there are victors and there are those who lose all. Just by showing the atrocities of war and asking for a "war crime" retribution makes no sense when you were silent partners in the "crime of war".

The Tamil people can be best served by getting international help in getting a proper dialogue in place with the Sinhalese for certain political gains using the force of these "war crime" evidence. This will more than compensate the loss of the war in the long run if peace can be finally obtained. I am sure the people of Srilanka will vote out the incumbent to send a strong message of peace. The ideal situation of course would be for the President to resign as his work is over and hand over the reigns to one more acceptable to the ways of peace than war.

As for the excesses committed in any war - it is these very excesses that cause a swift end to the conflict. This paradox is what makes war a crime.

The current situation with respect to the Maoists in India is not much different than the Tamil conflict. As long as the government has a soft stance in the war with these people this war will keep growing and that point will be reached when the hard hammer will be used and only then will that conflict end.

The Question that all have to answer in the end is "what would be more beneficial - a political process of reconciliation between the tamils and the sinhalese or some mindless vendetta?"

Suprisingly the answer by the Srilankan Tamils will be the former than the latter.