Personally, compared to the action of the current government, I can share some things that have been made, especially the distortion of an address aimed at reducing the tax burden, as I was convinced that only the reduction in revenue could lead to cuts in spending.
said that Italy is the only country where, if you want to do something or it should be a law by decree, and that regardless of the color of the majority so let's analyze the meaning of these decrees.
We are sick almost all of protectionism "personal" . You can open up anything except what concerns us, I say this not to populism, but more because the defense used by all when it proposes to deregulate their industry is to find other areas "more secure" and apply logic, their first ... then us.
Certainly it is true, even now, some protected areas were not affected by the wind of liberalization, as many local public services, which remain major sources of 'hidden' costs due to inefficiency in the management of municipal by administrations, but overall I find the work of the Minister Bersani interesting.
But I wonder, where the Authority was responsible?
The cost of recharging is an invention of Italian companies to take advantage of an anomaly, the fact that they are taxed subscriptions (5 to € 12 per month), while the batteries are free of charge, this situazione agevola ovviamente queste ultime; così fino ad oggi, sfruttando questa idiozia normativa, una tassa occulta la RISCUOTEVANO le compagnie telefoniche.
Perché c'è voluto un decreto? E soprattutto perché non si è anche provveduto ad eliminare la tassa sugli abbonamenti?
Quanti agli operatori non venissero a raccontare la favola che i costi di ricarica sono causati dai margini lasciati agli operatori commerciali, perché sulle ricariche, vi è il mostruoso guadagno dell'1-2%.
Considerato che le compagnie lucrano dal 10 al 33%, sui tagli di ricarica più comuni, che questo guadagno è totalmente aggiuntivo a quello già conseguito sulle telefonate e sugli SMS, you do not understand the reason for this Balzella .
Wind-up charges and has not led to this book in court.
But the cost of charging by many operators, there has always been where everyone, including the Berlusconi government, in all these years?
The rest I have to say that liberalization always have a social cost, the one everyone is talking about on television and in newspapers, often inappropriately, however, the benefit, often much more, is invisible and because it makes little news spread across hundreds of thousands of people.
Let me give an example that I hope will clarify the framework
If we save all 3-4c. per liter for each liter of fuel, what would be the benefit to 20 million motorists? imagine a consumption of 400 liters of fuel / car, and we have a saving of € 320 million, which would be shared only in 16 € / car, against the loss of 5,000 jobs that pay more news.
The problem is that, to take up these 5,000 jobs, now we spend, collectively, € 60,000, it's worth it?
E 'is the problem of many liberalization and the protectionist systems, such as very strong on agriculture.
For now I'll stop here, but I will return later on the subject.
0 comments:
Post a Comment