ivandragon:
...

In response...

Why are oil subsidies bad economics?
Every year, the Nigerian government runs huge budget deficits that could have been avoided if money budgeted for oil subsidies was allocated to other critical projects.

Subsidies should be used to spur investment in activities that raise the productive capacities of an economy (such as education, health, entrepreneurship, and infrastructure). They should be targeted at strategic sectors of the economy. They should not be used to finance non-durable consumption items like petrol.

Oil subsidies are inequitable, as they transfer the national wealth to those who own several cars and add little or no value to the national economy.

In lieu of subsidies, the government should invest massively in public transportation and boost the transport allowances of public-sector workers.

Removing fuel subsidies would also be good for the environment and safety on Nigerian roads. When motorists pay the full economic price for petrol, they will drive less, emit less pollution and reduce the incidence of road accidents.

There should be a clear communication to Nigerians that the removal of fuel subsidies favours the poor, and eliminates one of the several perks that the Nigerian elites undeservedly enjoy.


source

subsidywise18:


In response...

Why are oil subsidies bad economics?
Every year, the Nigerian government runs huge budget deficits that could have been avoided if money budgeted for oil subsidies was allocated to other critical projects.

Subsidies should be used to spur investment in activities that raise the productive capacities of an economy (such as education, health, entrepreneurship, and infrastructure). They should be targeted at strategic sectors of the economy. They should not be used to finance non-durable consumption items like petrol.

Oil subsidies are inequitable, as they transfer the national wealth to those who own several cars and add little or no value to the national economy.

In lieu of subsidies, the government should invest massively in public transportation and boost the transport allowances of public-sector workers.

Removing fuel subsidies would also be good for the environment and safety on Nigerian roads. When motorists pay the full economic price for petrol, they will drive less, emit less pollution and reduce the incidence of road accidents.

There should be a clear communication to Nigerians that the removal of fuel subsidies favours the poor, and eliminates one of the several perks that the Nigerian elites undeservedly enjoy.


source

Yet countries like US, China, India, Russia etc spend over $5trn on fossil fuel subsidies yearly...

Let me ask this, has the 'deregulation' of the tertiary education sector led to better tertiary education in Nigeria in general?

Has the 'deregulation' of the political space led to better governance?

If the main problem is not fixed, the symptoms will remain...

ivandragon:



Yet countries like US, China, India, Russia etc spend over $5trn on fossil fuel subsidies yearly...

Let me ask this, has the 'deregulation' of the tertiary education sector led to better tertiary education in Nigeria in general?

Has the 'deregulation' of the political space led to better governance?

If the main problem is not fixed, the symptoms will remain...

Reduce the ability to make a profit, and things go out of wack.

Should a businessman sell at a loss because his customers are 'poor?'

subsidywise18:


Reduce the ability to make a profit, and things go out of wack.

Should a businessman sell at a loss because his customers are 'poor?'

Why can't we look at how other countries are implementing their own subsidies to ensure things don't go out of wack?

Now, let's make things clear, do I agree with you that subsidies on pms should go? Yes, I do.

Where I differ is that it is not just about removing subsidies on pms, it is about better management of the economy, not just subsidy removal.