₦airaland Forum

To assist you with information. The GDP of New York county(L.G.A) is 40% more than the whole of Israel. New York is having a GDP of a miserly and miserable 1.1 Trillion Dollars while Israel is heavenly blessed country leaving with a GDP of 720 billion dollars( ...Assuming we share this GDP to each New Yorker, each will get over 600,000 dollars while each Israeli will get about 70,000 dollars due to the surplus blessing from heaven!!! You see what i mean? Foolishness is surplus in supply!

Jakarta:
Do you know the difference between a prime minister, president, and a local government chairman? Why local government chairman hide, when terrorists supporters dey protest on the arrival of Bibi the terrorists slayer in New York? Ogbeni there are levels to these things? Isreal the slayers of terrorists.

The question is why would a government allow its agencies to facilitate the death of 37 young citizens?....Even on too that Deborah matter, Atiku uas no obligation to respond because he was not in government and bears no responsibility....He has done no wrong whether he chosed not to make a response then or he chooses to respond now...It is his freely fiven prerogative....You sef why did you not say anything when Tinubu plunged us into death and destruction on 29th of May 2023!!!

sinola:
His position reflects a level of inconsistency that is both disappointing and difficult to take seriously.

The question is simple: where was this same outrage, advocacy, and moral conviction when Deborah Samuel, a second-year student, was brutally lynched and burned to death by a mob? Beyond a brief tweet that was later deleted, there was little evidence of sustained concern or condemnation.

The silence was equally noticeable in the case of Ammaye, the female food vendor who was lynched and burned to death in Niger State following allegations of blasphemy. The same applies to Bridget Agbahime, the 74-year-old Christian market trader who was beaten to death and decapitated by a mob in Kano.

It is difficult not to see a pattern when outrage appears selective and advocacy seems dependent on the identity of the victim or the circumstances of the incident. Principles only have value when they are applied consistently, not when they are invoked for some tragedies and ignored for others.

Until the same voice is raised for all victims of injustice, regardless of religion, ethnicity, or public sentiment,his claims of moral authority will continue to be viewed with skepticism. What is on display here is not consistency of principle, but a troubling appearance of double standards.

Is crude oil pricing economic and based on market forces? Do you realise that crude oil pricing is an anomaly and against the dictates of a free market system? In a free market system the marginal cost of producing the commodity determines the price for each producer causing each producer to sell at different prices based on their marginal cost such that the inefficient high cost producer is driven out of the market by the more efficient producer through lower pricing. However this is not the case with regards to crude oil pricing. It is the least efficient and costly producers that determine the market prices causing the efficient producers in OPEC to generate market windfalls all the time. This scenario is famously regarded as a case of water running uphill against gravity instead of downhill. The most efficient and least cost producers delay their entry into the market and wait for the high costs inefficient producers to set the price in the market which becomes the market price. So my friend what is economic about this model of pricing. Crude oil rice is determined by a cartel(OPEC) and geopolitics while you want the fuel from refining crude oil to be determined by market forces-There is clearly a mismatch here. How can we allow our domestic fuel prices to be determined by vagaries and shenanigans of Donald Trump. He could just wake up and say i will bomb Saudi Arabia tomorrow and voila crude oil prices will explode. Do you now expect our domestic fuel prices to be subject to this manner gyrations? The only and proper economic model to apply to locally produced crude oil for local fuel production is the marginal cost of producing the crude oil. The moment the cost of producing the crude oil is covered, the decision becomes political. For instance, it is said that the cost of producing one barrel of crude oil in Nigeria is about 30 dollars and this we must consider will very likely include all the corruptly added costs. Now the decision to sell a barrel of crude oil at any price above that 30 dollars for domestic fuel production becomes a political decision. So we should ask this very pertinent question- Why should the price of crude oil sold for domestic fuel production be fixed above 60 dollars or even 50 dollars? At these prices, there is no loss due to production costs and therefore no subsidy. Refining domestic fuel based on crude oil price of 60 or 50 dollars will definitely result in significantly lower fuel prices in Nigeria. Remember again that it is not sold at a loss. The arguments for international pricing is clearly not tenable because we are producing it here and we know our cost of production. That arguments was proposed by crude oil importers who had no local production of domestic crude. The argument that it will reduce government revenue only fails to consider that the reduction should spur the government to improve production and increase the supply of crude oil in Nigeria. The allocation to domestic supply should serve as an incentive for the government to do more and improve output but not to be whining about reduced revenue generation afterall we all know that increased government revenue only leads to increased government wastages!...Finally any government policy is supposed to better the lives of Nigerians and not Nigerian lives to be used to better the policy! Nothing says that a policy must continue even in the clear evidence of its serious pains and burdens on the populace. A policy is not a dogma that must be followed come rain come shine. It is only as good as it is improving the peoples lives and livelihood. Is this removal of subsidy causing improvement in the lives and livelihoods of Nigerians?... Thank you for your attention to this matter.

honor4me:
Don’t mind them!
Ofcouse, the opposition’s argument has a legitimate concern, but the economic question is more complicated than “the government should not push Nigerians beyond their limit.” At the current petrol price, the hardship is real. Petrol affects transport, food distribution, farming, electricity generation and business costs. The ADC has made precisely this argument following prices reaching about ₦1,470 per litre. 

But in a market economy, the answer to a rising price is not automatically to suppress the price. If government artificially holds petrol below its economic cost, somebody must absorb the difference. Ultimately, the burden returns through subsidies, borrowing, deficits, shortages or pressure on the naira. Nigeria spent decades operating this system and also suffered from the leakages and fiscal costs associated with fuel subsidies. Even the Centre for the Promotion of Private Enterprise, while acknowledging the current hardship, has argued against returning to the old universal subsidy and instead called for targeted support for transport, food security, energy and small businesses. 

So the serious question is not simply, “Why is petrol expensive?” It is, “How do we move from an artificially cheap petrol economy to a productive economy without breaking the backs of ordinary Nigerians?” That is where government accountability matters. If Nigerians are being asked to pay market prices, they should also see the benefits through better infrastructure, cheaper energy alternatives, stronger domestic refining, targeted social protection and more productive use of subsidy savings. That is a much stronger economic argument than pretending the market price itself can simply be commanded away.

Whatever it will cost the country is immaterial at thjs time so long as it will improve the lives of Nigerians...When someone is sick and in jeed of medication,the cost does not really matter so long as he will get well again...Is it not when someone is alive that he can worry about costs?...Has Tinubu ever come out to tell us the costs he has impoton Nigerians as a result of his daft policies...Now i saw your attempt to draw a contrast between Nigeria and some countries by referencing population....FYI a country with a bigger population requires more duty of care in implementing any policy because of possible large number of persons to be affected.... Remember rhe basic and fundamental duty of government is to provide the greatest good to the greatest number of people... Again, you must understand that governance goes beyond debits, credits, balance sheet and profit and loss... Government intervention must be based on cost to benefit analysis... However certain costs and benefits are non monetary but add to human welfare... Imagine hiw burdensome it is for parents to transport to work, take chiyto school and travel for health care services unde the current situation....No balance sheet or P&L can adequately capture that but a cheaper means of transport will indeed be of immense benefit to all of us....So no your ask for details about costs is like saying government should cease providing health care because is is expensive....Why even bother to have a government in the first place!

Lithiumite:
Atiku cant throw the figures out on what it will cost the country because he knows his scam will be detected immediately.......he should throw out the figures but he can't because its so impractical.

His jaundiced mouthpiece up there isn't even aware it cost just $3 to get a barrel of crude out of the ground in Saudi Arabia,the cheapest in the world far below the world average of $36 to $45 and you want to compare with Nigeria

Angola has a smaller population than ours and they are already making attempts to also end the subsidy regime in their country because its unsustainable.

All the other countries produce far more crude than us and a far smaller population,Kuwait isnt even up to ogun state in population.......these people are catching cruise because they know how ignorant many Nigerians are and lack critical reasoning

If dem born you go and say this nonsense in lokoja, not even Kano or Kaduna or Maiduguri...Just lokoja not too far from where you are..

Runaway22:
My purpose in life is to send as many Arkbahs I can send to 72


That is what I want to do and my children will Also be taught to terrorise Arkbahs also

Your reckless and foolish explanation here is tantamout to an attempted sabotage of Nigerians. So just to please investors, the whole 250 million Nigerians should be plunged into endless suffering and gnashing of teeth. I asked before and i will ask again, which country in the world ever prospered after removal of fuel subsidies especially for a large economy like Nigeria. The problem with most economists is that they tend to ignore the fallacy of composition problem. Using a policy that might work in a small country like St Kitts and Nevis to implement in a large country like Nigeria presupposes that the outcome will be similar. The problem is that policies have multiplier effects which are often exponential and for a large country the multiplier explodes causing unfathomable and uncontrollable damages... The rule is to apply caution not jump wholesale into a policy..

Pakute:
https://punchng.com/fuel-subsidy-proposal-may-scare-investors-impi-warns/

Please do not conflate apples with oranges and avoid a fallacy of composition problem.... Firstly you compared two different technologies in telecommunications- Fixed wired lines with GSM which is a new technology. The infrastructure requirements and cost for the two are vastly different . The GSM technology requires the deployment of just two or 3 towers to serve some communities but you will require poles, wires and switchboards linking each phone subscriber to each other and to NITEL when using the Fixed wired telephone system. The fixed wired system is just like NEPA connection where you must buy wires and poles and connect to the transformer serving your street which is also connected to a feeder serving your community and so on and so forth..

Secondly the assumption that it worked in the Telecom sector then it must work in other sectors is a fallacy of composition problem... That you saw some white swans does not mean that all swans will be white...The nature and investment requirements are different for electricity and telecoms. Electricity supply system has Upstream, Midstream and Downstream infrastructure requirements which are humungous and costly. A break in any of the streams strands the investment in the whole system. For instance the upstream supplies gas but the gas itself must be produced from gas fields and if there is a problem here, the power generating plant will not function. The midstream has the generating plants and the transmission network.. The power plants must supply electricity to the grid through the transmission system. If the power plants are down, power does not flow through transmission lines. The transmission lines supply the distribution companies at the downstream. If there is a problem in distribution, power is wasted and the generating plants are not paid. If the generators are not paid , they cannot pay for gas.... The intricacy of this sytem makes it difficult to just adopt the GSM model. Besides we all pay before we enjoy the service for GSM however even today majority of Nigerians pay after they have consumed the power supplied to them. They often dont pay at all or pay some portion. There is a higher level of sophistication that must go into designing an electricity supply system... Note that even in all the advanced countries that own the technology they deploy for electricity, they still suffer from power supply and billing challenges,,, You rarely here complaints about high telephone costs but you constantly here complaints about high electric power costs by the government, industry and individuals.

Privatization of electric power supply has rarely solved the problems around the world. It has never led to reduction in prices anywhere in the world. There is no example of anywhere where privatized power has brought down prices. One major reason is that gas the major input for power generation is priced to the market like crude oil. See what we face currently with fuel prices because of this... GSM pricing follows marginal pricing rule and this is localized to the firm. There is an incentive for GSM firms to compete on cost by being efficient but there is no such incentive for power supply because the market is "allocated" and "captured" by each participating firm in the market.. AEDC for example has been allocated a certain market where it operates as a de facto monopoly. Even if AEDC is more efficient and therefore provides cheaper electrcity, it cannot supply customers in Ibadan because it cannot move its supply infrastructure to Ibadan. Besides without allocating markets to power suppliers, none will invest for fear of stranded investments which makes the problem circular...

Therefore we can see clearly that merely allowing private interest to take hold of the supply of goods and services might not be sufficient to provide the services more effectively and efficiently. Access to stable and affordable electricity is being treated as basic right of citizens and therefore the Government cannot divest from it completely... No model in the world works so well completely led by the private sector...

nairalanda1:
We have been doing it in bits, in my opinion (if I understood you), but still think removing price controls and allowing cost reflective tarrif is best.

See the GSM thing. As a child growing up, it was only the very very rich that had phones. Even upper middle class struggled to manage phone, talkless of middle class. When my family got a phone in 1993, we the children could not call our friends, or gist with our friends, and nothing like making international call, it would lead to excessive bill. David Mark said that phones were for the rich.

Meanwhile you watched film from USA and saw everyone with phones in the house, lol (I now know that this was not entirely true, but even then, by NIgerian standards)

So, GSM came and from the word go they were allowed to set their prices. And service was poor back in the early days. You could not call between networks, call NITEL Land lines, and so forth. And nothing like internet, and sim cost high prices. But because those GSM companies made a profit , they were able to attract investment which led to better service, internet, even in ya house, and in the villages...and better phones. Now even poor people have phone.

And all the infrastructure that supports GSM was not built with government money. Not one kobo. All because government allowed GSM charge cost reflective tarrif.

If we let the power sector do the same, plus meter everyone, plus punish power theft with all seriousness, and disconnect everyone who does not pay, the same thing that happened for gsm will happen for electrrcity, and government too would not need to spend any kobo doing nothing. It would all be paid for by investors and investment

Which is why I shout for it all day long here, and why it annoys me that some people just call me APC supporter for doing so. Like how? All I want is to have light 24 hours a day, and I know that the only way to do it is massive investment, because I do not believe that government can raise funds for the thing. (and even if they do, they would award contract to their cronies and friends, and mess things up again )....and because I know that investors are greedy people who want to make money from what they invest...

So, just as we used the greed of investors to make money to build up our telephony system, we would use the greed of investors to do the same for electricity. We are already doing it for domestic refining. Did government spend money building dangote refinery? Did government spend money on the five microrefineries or is government spending money on BUA refinery construction? ANd yet when they work they would give us stuff without government spending money

Now we can focus on getting those corrupt people in power to do their work.

Please read what you wrote. Read it again one more time then read again slowly one word per half minute and maybe just maybe you might see why you make no sense. He who alleges provides the evidence... You would have made more sense if you had asked that Obasanjo should come forth with the evidence he has on Atiku... For example i am making the following allegations against you" You are a dumb ass"....Oya sue me...just to prove that you are not a dumb ass since suing every Tom, Dick and Harry that accuses you serves as evidence to disprove the allegations against you.

Guestmale:
Until AA sue Obasanjo to court his ọga for that damning allegations against him in his book 'under my watch' before I will take him serious.

You are the one who is claiming Atiku wants to reintroduce subsidy because of desperation....You are now a babalawo to know what is in the mind of Atiku..

So in your mind the only reason why subsidy should be reintroduced is because the proponent is desperate...How about subsidy is being reintroduced to reduce the hardship being faced by Nigerians....Can that not also be a reason or is that not a valid reason to do so?

Mccullum:
It's not about tribe, all four major presidential candidates in 2023 declared removal of subsidy if they won. Atiku now saying he'll remove subsidy because of his desperation for power. He's deceiving himself and his gullible followers like you that is supporting him because of tribe. Which you will deny but it is obvious.

There is fatal flaw in your argument which I'm inclined to situate in ignorance....The model being proposed by Atiku suggest that crude oil will be sold to local refineries at a lower price than sold in international markets...It is being called subsidy because it is related to the market price and not the cost price...That is a clever accounting trick...So now let me hit the hammer in the heat...Where is the subsidy if the price of crude oil sold to local refineries is higher than the cost of producing the crude but lower than the price sold at the international market?...Let me restate it with an example...If the cost of producing one barrel of crude oil is 1000 naira and it is sold to refineries at 1500 naira even if it can be sold at 2000 naira in international markets, what exactly is wrong with that...So please those of us that have some basic understanding of the economics must not mislead with disingenuous opinions presented as facts...

nairalanda1:
The problem is you cannot sell crude at lower prices.

Drilling for oil is very expensive business.Add the fact that most of the machinery used is imported from abroad, which adds to the expense. Selling crude at cheaper prices would mean that the owners of the oil rigs would not make a profit to pay for their running costs and their worker costs as well as taxes. The result would be a decline in crude production.

Expecting the revenue from the 1.5 million bpd to pay for the expected loss is an exercise in futility. Right now, our budgets since 2016 have been funded more by borrowing than by oil. This year's budget is just 59% oil funded. Most of the rest is loans, and we have debt servicing. And it is all for 230 million people.

Also, if oil prices rise, the cost of paying for subsides rise. If oil prices fall, the amounts available for paying for subsides fall, and either way more borrowing is needed.

That's why your plan is problematic, and as I have said, it won't work. It may even drive away investment in the domestic crude sector, because no one is going to sell crude at half price, and having a government whose revenue is largely from borrowing assume the cost is a recipie for more borrowing

You do not have to agree with me, and you are free to abuse me and assume I support APC. I don't I support your right ,and their right to make a profit that is enough to cover your running costs, and pay for future expansion, which means more jobs and which guarantees more productivity and more revenue overall for our country.

Good morning.

We have to be wary of people like you who sneak in with mater of factual looking opinions.... Nigeria actually owns the crude oil but it entered into different arrangements with oil companies to extract and market it...Note the operating word "arrangements"... It can also make arrangements to ensure that the crude oil is sold at a lower price to international price in Nigeria....Is that too difficult to understand or is it that you believe that it is right that " we pay for the mango grown in our compound at the same price as it is sold in the market"?....Note that even corporate bodies often allow their workers to consume products within the factory premises for free.... Guinness workers do have access to free beer within the premises... Coca Cola staff can consume free coke in the factory....NASCO workers in Jos used to enjoy free biscuits in the factory.....So what is your problem man?

Mynd44:
The first flaw in your argument is thinking Nigeria owns the oil it drills.

The crude oil are joint venture businesses with oil companies and they will not be interested in giving their own when they can sell at international price

You wish! Which Northern elites are you talking about?Do you think Northerners are stupid...They do not need to run their mouths up and down on social media...They just allow you to keep busy and at the appropriate time they act... Besides it is not even about the north or south.It is about unbearable hardship and survival...Is it not true that life is unbearably hard in Nigeria now...Is it not true that survival is also very difficult in Nigeria now...Is it not true removyof fuel subsidy has made hardship and survival worse...Is it not true that if subsidy is returned orices will go down and hardship will reduce... Where is the lie in all of these questions? For the first time in our elections, jt is the issues that affect our lives that will determine the outcome and not religion or tribe.... Even in the US, the upcoming Mid Term elections will be determined by the issues around COST OF LIVING...Atiku os right and we will vote for him MASSIVELY...

lamentor78:
Make Atiku rest, even Northern leaders will not vote Atiku, He will sell all tangible assets of the country to friends and cronies.

Ask about him when he was DCG customs. What about privatization of Nigeria assets.

He will even use our reserve to buy another country and name it ATIKU

i will vote for Atiku and campaign to people to vote for him because he will reduce the cost of living by taking measures that will bring down the cost of fuel...You can port to Cotonou or Porto Nouveau if subsidy is returned since you are against anything that will make life bearable for Nigerians....quote author=lamentor78 post=140448176]Make Atiku rest, even Northern leaders will not vote Atiku, He will sell all tangible assets of the country to friends and cronies.

Ask about him when he was DCG customs. What about privatization of Nigeria assets.

He will even use our reserve to buy another country and name it ATIKU[/quote]

Since APC goons have decided to visit us with nonsense becasue Atiku proposed a remedy to the cruel hardship imposed on Nigerians, they should tell us their own version of the solution to the following problems. (1) Why does the price of fuel keep fluctuating mostly upwards and not down wards? (2) Do they agree that high petrol prices affects our lives by imposing hardship? (3) If they do why haven't they taken measures to bring down the price down. (4) If they they don't why do they think so? (5) When Tinubu was imposing his reforms did he not know when the benefits will appear? (6) If he does , when will this be?. (7) If he can't be specific about the date , does it mean he gambled with our lives hoping that somehow something will work?

The worst part is that it is people who are will be most relieved if subsidy is return are the ones paid to come say nonsense as a response to Atiku's intended policy...Since you are a spirit and do not exist physically in Nigeria i ask you the following questions. Has cost of living increased?...Are most companies doing better now?...Has the level of employment improved? How much is a given value of money abke to buy now...If all the pains we are being forced to endure is a test then will the test end and the results out? Please think carefully and answer those questions in your mind... Maybe your paid masters are on this forum and might object to your exposing your sincerity here...So i urge you to be honest with yourself and answer it in your mind....

badoh:
Atiku has weighed all avenue to use to campaign against Tinubu and all failed and that is why he believes his last option is to promise to return subsidy whether the economy tumble back to retrogression doesn't concern him for now. But has he any plans to stop smuggling to neighbouring countries by the time Petrol sells below the current market price, has he any plans to prevent artificial scarcity of pms. People should be wise and not rush to the Greek gift Atiku is dangling before them. Someone said every tanker loading pms from Dangote refinery should be tracked, no be Nigeria we deh, even if you track them, these useless people will still empty the content to another tanker.

Atiku gave a concise and clear defence of his intended policy but i guess you couldn't have read the his full statement because of course it requires (1) patience to read everything through (2) Intellect to comprehend and (3) An open mind to see the sense in it.... Lacking all these 3 or any of will unfortunately lead any reader to make conclusions not based on Atiku's intended policy statement but on Tinubu's unintelligent and reckless response....Birds of the same feather hibernate together.... Unintelligence breeds recklessness...It is only an intelligent mind that would make decisions based on informed premises...Atiku has seen the damage to the economy and the lives of Nigerians as a result of the reckless policy of subsidy removal....He is responding from an informed position not an "inferred" position.... Tinubu's reference to higher revenue generation and higher shared purse implies that he infers that will oead to betterment of our lives...Atiku sees the damage in the lives of Nigerians and that is information....Tinubu hopes that by giving governors more money, it will trickle down to us but that is inference...Take your pick - a decision based on information or a decision based on inference...

HacheNoire:
Because they do not have any selling point.

Have you heard them sell anything? Even Atiku that mentioned subsidy removal cannot defend it. Their ideas are not feasible.

They either looking for school certificate, court records of already concluded case or paternity records.

It’s glaring their whole campaign structure is littered with unqualified, archaic and incompetent WASSCE certificate holders.

Why are you spewing misinformation...The Atiku model cannot be is a clear alternative to what we presently have....Let me help you to understand how...The current regime of subsidy removal is rested on the premise that when the government removes subsidies from fuel prices , it will make savings which it can use to better our lives....That is only the argument on which the removal of subsidy rests ... Implicit in that argument is that the previous regime of paying subsidies had no benefits and made our lives worse off... However, a simple analysis of our situation after experience the two regimes reveals an important fact which can situate with a simple question... Are we better off now paying higher prices for fuel than when we paid lower prices ? Any other grammar is semantics and appealing to verbose to mislead us....Has the removal of subsidy bore more benefits to the majority of Nigerians than when we had subsidy.... Amazingly even the Tinubu who decided it only claims it has allowed him to accumulate more money which he has generously been sharing with governors implying that his objective was to generate more money to share with governors...In his mind , he has done his work amd it is left for the governors to theirs...So he took money from our pockety, pooled it together and shared with governors,hoping that somehow when they do what ever the hell they do with their share, somehow, just somehow it will affect us positively...The missing part is that after sharing the.money with the governors,there is nothing he can do by way of directing their conduct...The whole flaw is nased on a model where you take away policy whose benefit is direct and immediate and attemp to replace it with a policy whose benefit has to be explained to be understood to exist...That is the fatal flaw of the subsidy removal policy...If they had directed the proceeds to a direct and immediate need Nigerians can see and feel, it would have been more acceptable...Watch out and see how snake oil merchants like Shehu Sani emerge to convince us that the sky is green but it is just that we are not looking at the sky from the right angle....All we need do is to bemd our neck a little bit.... Subsidy for producing petrol products locally at lower costs and sold at lower prices is perfectly doable...The only problem is and this Nigerians must note is that it will reduce the amount that goes into the pool for stealing in Nigeria..

WizardOfNG:
Absolutely. They know Nigerians, they have used subsidy weaponized poverty to subjugate, are not politically sophisticated and only about "Rice and Eba" (Reno Omokri) plus cheap fuel etc that can never, in a million years, advance us towards becoming a developed nation.

Singapore that has no crude oil owes part of its development to her embracement of refining the crude oil of others beginning decades ago while Atiku is saying we who have crude should abandon the advantage of refining and making optimal profit from it to develop our nation.

Has the perennial problem of Africa not being that we sell our crude oil and mineral endowment rather than turning them into far more profitable finished product that would see Africa be closer to Europe today if we had adopted that policy perhaps 50 years ago?

Atiku is just simply desperate. Zero economic sense related to his pledge of returning fuel subsidy and just an attempt to scam politically naive Nigerians, he knows are largely under-educated, especially in the North, to vote for him.

We are talking of fuel subsidy but you are bringing Deborah- a classic case of deflect and detract....This your tavtics obviously means on the matter at hand you have no point to make...You are now appealing to diversions to disguise the fact that you have no argument to make against the matter at hand....Oya go and resurrect Deborah....

Ttalk:
You are writing long epistle to defend Atiku.

Atiku that couldn't defend his post on Deborah who was gruesomely murdered by Muslim fanatics .

What makes you think he will honour his subsidy return when he is faced with reality

Nigerians this is the time to take note of your enemies...They are coming out one by one... Even Shehu Sani that built a reputation as a pro poor and pro masses policy has changed his garb...These are the real turn coats.and not Atiku...In their haste to demonize Atiku, they couldn't even take the time to listen to what he actually said...Atiku actually said previously he had supported removal of subsidy but now having seen its effect on the masses he is convinced it is not a good policy now and hence it should be reversed....This is just like a Doctor looking at the effects of his prescription and asking the patient to cease taking the drugs... Should the doctor allow the patient to die by continuously administering the drug even when he can see its adverse consequences?Is it not the mark of an intelligent mind to change his mind when a superior evidence appears? Funny enough all the quacks masquerading as economists and experts fighting themselves to defend this cruel policy cannot give one example of any country that has gone through such a tragic reform and emerged better....There is not enough space to list countries that have suffered from such radical reforms but i will give two major examples....The UK under Thatcher decided to adopt free market laissez faire policies in the 1970s and removed subsidies... The result today is the UK has lost all its industries and now just a trading post for US and Chinese goods in addition to being one big casino for gamblers (All manner of betting schemes)... Germany is an industrial giant currently declining in slow motion when it decided to commit suicide to (1) kill its cheap nuclear energy sources (2) Begin to invest and switch to expensive and unstable renewable energy and finally (3) Ban the use of cheap energy coming from Russia...Today the Germans are running helter skelter looking for a way out....A cheap source of energy however it is realised is a sine qua non for industrial growth...

Now the most disingenuous argument is to claim that subsidy never benefitted the masses...The Government and the elites have formed a consensus to ensure that the masses do not even understand what is good for them and so they will continue to send propagandists like Shehu Sani to tell you that you are not benefitting from what you know you are benefitting from.... Subsidy on refined fuels can be done and the world will not end... Opponents ignore a basic fact that the major raw material for fuel is crude oil and it is available in Nigeria sufficiently for our domestic consumption.... Fortunately we are now capable of refining locally our total consumption...So local crude oil plus local refining equals self sufficiency... Determining the price of crude for domestic consumption is a political decision and not a market decision so long as the price of crude sold to domestic refiners is not below the cost of producing the crude...This is really what the quacks do not want Nigerians to know...I repeat - The price of selling LOCALLY PRODUCED CRUDE OIL TO LOCAL REFINERIES is a political decision so long as the price of the crude is not below the cost of producing the crude...

There is a stupid concept called border prices introduced and promoted by resource poor countries to claim that the price of crude oil produced in Bayelsa and sold to a refinery in Bayelsa must be same with the price of that same crude sold to a refinery in Japan...The whole nonsense is based on the economic concept of opportunity cost...

Fellow Nigerians subsidy on crude oil price does not mean Nigeria is not making money from selling at a discount to local refineries, it only means that the price will be lower than it would have sold to foreign buyers...So God's sake what is wrong with this...Atiku is not proposing to pay importers subsidy for importing fuels, he is proposing to sell crude oil at a discount which of course will not be below the cost price to local refineries so that they have lower cost of production and they sell at a lower price to Nigerians...Again what can be wrong with this!!!

oga what exactly have they borrowed to finance with susbsidy removal... Exactly what? To help you sort it out, even the national assembly is querying the fact that for the very first time in the history of Nigeria we have a situation where theee budgets for 2023, 2024 and 2025 are concurrently being implemented with 2026 budget...It has been stated that the capital budget for 2023 has only been completed by about 40%... That is 2023 ooo...As far as Tinubu is concerned 2025 has not even started talkless of 2026...It is within your right to want to support Tinubu but please find reason to do so with some sense and not nonsense....

phemray:
Yes, but massive projects everywhere can never be achieved without borrowing. Which one is better borrowing to subsidised fake petroleum products with larger % smuggled to the neighbours country or borrowing for massive development and job creation. Not everyone buy fuel that is subsidised but everyone uses the facilities built by the government with borrowing.

so following your analogy because there use to be go slow on the roads, government should increase the price of vehicles to reduce hold up or because people queue to buy food at mama put , the seller should increase price to reduce the queue....You are indeed a genius....No wonder Tinubu is doing so well because he has received such wisdom from people like you...

phemray:
The question is was Nigeria ok and leaving like comfortably when subsidy was in place? I remembered spending 48hours in the filling station and every one started jubilation as soon as we sighted a tanker if fuel arriving. It was discharged and was not sold at old price That was how bad it was.

Subsidy can be returned, but since every action comes with his consequences, it will end that subsidy is returned and the petrol price remains at ₦1000 with enough scarcity because Dangote will focus on 100% exportation . The we can go back to massive smuggling in the borders while states owes salaries. These are expected consequences

Ben Bruce no sir you are wrong in capital letters...Your model is far far more susceptible to abuse than even the previous subsidy regime...Why are we trying to evade the problem and dance around it...Let us start with some fundamental questions...Did removal of subsidy lead to stratospheric rise in prices? The answer is a capital yes... Why did this happen? Because removal of subsidy led to skyrocket increase in the pump price of a litre of fuel....Mr Bruce unless you are trying to sit on a rocking chair, the solution is evident from the problem....Reduce the pump price of fuel so that transport fares can reduce then we can start from there....Only these grammar is a mere gimmick and distraction...We cannot be chasing shadows when the solution is hidden in plain sight....How many buses do you think would be involved in this your scheme...What about places where there are no buses and commercial taxes? Is it not a fact a significant portion of public transportation is provided by private vehicle owners as a secondary means of earning income?

Atiku is right because he proposes a production based subsidy. Folks, the government might not really "suffer" to pay for it depending on the international price of crude oil prevailing at the time..I had mentioned in a post that the difference between the budgeted and benchmarked price of crude oil and the international price can be allocated as subsidy payment in part or whole according to the amount of subsidy desired....For instance,if budgeted price of crude oil is 60 dollars per barrel and the Brent price is 80 dollars,there is a 20 dollar difference that can be partly used or wholly used to defray the cost of subsidizing crude to refineries.... However if the price of international crude drops to a certain floor, then there would be no need to subsidize the crude price for refineries and the market price of crude will reflect in the pump price which should be lower due to lower crude prices...This model simply makes refineries to buy crude oil at a lower price so that they can sell fuel at a lower price to Nigerians....This is straight forward and easily managed unlike what use to obtain where all comers provide fictitious documents as evidence of fuel imports for subsidy claims...

As for Nigerians, this is the time to be vigilant as we will continue to see and hear from all manner of agents who have been paid to come and discredit any policy attempt that might bear some reliefs to Nigerians....Notice how silent Ben Bruce has been all these while when Nigerians are crying about the hardship they are facing but he has suddenly found his voice when an alternative is being provided....Did he not have his alternative idea before Atiku made his proposal or he suddenly got jolted by some touch of genius which illuminated his mind with the idea we are now reading....

Let us all be vigilant and watch out for emergency economists proposing all manner of schemes to distract us from directly confronting what is before us...

I've just noticed that Tinubu's supporters can't find any arguments to support them against Atiku's proposal...They are now using dodgy soundbites and using one liners "Atiku can never be President* as if chanting spiritual verses...This is just the beginning for Tinubu...You cannot deliberately inflict suffering on over 200 million Nigerians and get away with it...The nonsensical arguments normally adduced by egg heads that he had no option is patronising...All experts claim that the problem with the subsidy regime wasnt that it did not benefit Nigerians but that it was prone to abuse...Instead of fixing the abuse which was perpetuated by Tinubu's ilk he chose to chose the easy way out of shifting the burden to all Nigerians....Who does that and what manner of leader is that....It is like a man who stops providing food to feed his children just because the cook is stealing some of the food...Why not sack the cook and employ another or simply cook the food yourself for your children!!!

To hear Tinubu say that major benefit of the removal of subsidy is that it uas enabled State Governors to pay salary is the greatest blunder I've ever heard a President make...How is it the primary objective of the President to pay salaries of state workers...To show how foolish it is so we had to punish all Nigerians including the workers are supposedly paid just to pay salaries of Govt workers....This Govt workers constitute an insignificant minority of the Nigerian workforce and population...How can a Govt policy shift pain and burden to everyone just to grant relief to an insignificant few...It is not as if the paid salaries has significantly bettered the lives of the workers but instead it has clearly worsen the lives of Nigerians and added extra burden on the government salary earners who now have to contend with the buesen of increased dependencies....No be juju be dis!!!

Atiku hit the bull on the head and made a perfect kill with this one...Let us look at the scenario that can emerge from this... Normally our national budget is benchmarked to a certain price of crude oil which can go lower or higher and thankfully this is higher currently....So for instance if the price of crude is higher by say 10 dollars to benchmarked price of crude,the difference can be used to subsidize the price of crude sold to Dangote Refinery or any other local refinery for that matter... Naturally, there will be a mechanism to determine cost implications for refining a litre and expectedly this will translate to lower price at the pump...Now let us go further and posit that assuming we take rhe current price of a litre of PMS at an average of 1300 naira and reduxe the price to 1000 naira via subsidy, that is still substantial and significant for consumers...Now assuming the market price falls to 1000 naira per litre. Subsidy can reduce it to 700 naira per litre and so forth and so on...This is the way it is likely to pan out and not a fixed price regime....This type of subsidy is directly toed to the market orice and therefore likely to be sustained....At a certain limit of the market price,the subsidy can disappear completely and the market price is fully reflected on the pump price at say for instance when market price is 700 naira, government can let the pump price be at 700 naira too...This a good way to think of it and suggest the model to be applied... Suggesting that ir is bad policy in not an economic argument... Economic policies are not scriptural verses that are unchangeable.... Finally the most important argument against the current subsidy removal policy is to say that it is a defeatist policy for the people... Every economy desires to lift citizens out of poverty and the reverse...Income redistribution is the primary way of doing this and by this the government must select the poor as winners and the rich as losers...That is what is called a Robin Hood economy. where we take from the rich and empower the poor .Mind you we are not advocating to stifle wealth and opportunities to accumulate wealth here....We only suggest that a mechanism is deviced whereby some of the wealth of the rich beyond a threshold is redistributed to lift others... Subsidy is obe such mechanism largely because, the rich are able to afford all their necessities by themselves but the poor can suffer a decline in standard of living when prices rise...So we must have Robin Hood economy and not "ROBBING THE HOOD EXONOMY" which is what Tinubu has done by retrieving income from ordinary Nigerians , pooling it together and sharing it with members of his elitist club...The Government even beats it's chest to claim that it has done so well by generating more revenue from its policy...This is very similar to a SLAVE ECONOMY, where the slave master accumulates savings by reducing expenditure on feediyand health of the slaves...Tinubu is a Slave Master....

There is this concern i have about journalists like Rotus who try to form expertise and knowledge of what they know not...The other day he was exhibiting his ignorance inadvertently while trying to demean the knowledge base of Dino...It was tragic to hear Rotus say that Eurobonds are bonds sold outside of the USA in dollars....This is the highest level of ignorance and misinformation in major public media News cast....ROTUS Eurobonds are simply bonds denominated in currencies other rhan the currency of the issuer or the issuer's domicile....So for instance Issuing Sterling Bonds in Frankfurt is a Eurobond!!!!....Now back to the matter of subsidy....The first premise to start from is to ask a basic fundamental question...Is the economy made for the society or the society is made for the economy?...The straight answer is that the economy is made for a society and therefore it is a tool for societal goals....Subsidy is a part of economic policy and Subsidy removal is also a part of economic policy...None is inherently good or bad to the extent of it's serving its purpose...Has subsidy removal served the purpose of Nigerian society....Has it birthed more benefits to the society than costs?..The majority answer to this is no...On the other hand was Subsidy regime beneficial to Nigerians? the answer is yes....Where there leakages Nd challenges? The answer is yes ..So why not pluck the leakages and get the program working optimally....Is that too much to ask ROTUS....The other way to see it is assuming subsidy regime was workng optimally and removal of subsidy policy was also executed optimally, which od the two will bring more benefits to the citizens?...Under optimal subsidy regime, the benefits are direct and immediate in terms of reducing cost of living but under removal of subsidy,the benefits are indirect through income redistribution....It is obvious to get the benefits from subsidy removal , a middle man is created to channel the benefits which can create obstacles and road blocks...The middle men are the Governors who are 36 in number plus that MAD MAN in Abuja....Even if they are all saints and cardinals there is no way to guarantee their sanity all the time.... Sorry i forgot the elephant in the room the 38th MIDDLE MAN which is the FG with insatiety for waste and folly...Thank you ROTUS for given me the opportunity to school you...

For those of us here defending NELFUND did you also acquire your education by accumulating debt....Do we as Nigerians honestly believe or agree that debt should be a viable way of funding individuals to acquire education in a country where less than 10 percent of yearly graduands get formally absorbed into the labour force and the rest are left to cater for themselves.... The better question to ask is how would the supposed beneficiaries pay back considering that there is no guarantee they will get jobs... Again,since it is clear the government borrowed this model from other countries is it not pertinent to ask whether any of those countries is faring any better due to debt acquired education.....We can cite the case of the USA as an example and even considering the wealth of the USA, is the education debt not a burden on the citizens and also the government right now....Do we as Nigerians really think enabling our youths to acquire education through debt is a service we should be proud of... Let's pause and guess how the situation is likely to be in a mere 10 years from now when the youths may have started working and under pressure to choose between settling students Loan debts and settling down to start a proper life...Imagine the social damage this will cause...

The question is ways and means a form of debt by the Government...The other question is , are treasury issues debt instruments by the Government..If the answer to both is in the affirmative then there is no quarrel here...Unless of course we want to say that Ways and Means is not a debt instrument like treasury instruments are....Atuku is smart enough to understand that the Government demonised the previous government and hounded Emefiele because of Ways and Means which to all intents and purposes is a debt instrument only for the same Government to now routinely depend on accumulating debt via treasury issues while cleverly lying that they were offsetting the Ways and Means debt.....They are Robbing Peter to pay Paul...Its still ROBBERY...

All this talk about America this , America that is just hot air...All the other talk about Israel this and that is just balloon air....Just ask this question and give the answer to it ..If America and Israel could finish the war they started why haven't they done so? Or they just wanted to test their weapons? If they could achieve any of the objectives they set for themselves,ehy haven't they done so....It it not a fact that their inability or unwillingness to finish the war is costing them more than it is costing Iran?...Why would they allow a war to linger if it is costing them to do so as this war is clearly showing....Are they allowing the war to linger by choice or as a matter of necessity meaning there is nothing they can do?..They started this war by choice so why not finish it by choice?

The bare and simple truth stating us in the face is that on paper The US and Israel seem imposing and formidable but on the ground and in battle what matters is the war itself and not the weapons you have or use....Win the war if you can either by short knife,jack knife, spear or arrow...Just win the war if you can...
Any tool or device is useless if it cannot deliver the goods when it matters....No matter how formidable the weapons in your arsenal are, if they cannot deliver the victory you desire in war or battle then they are useless...

Which one is ACP again.. They've started forming faceless group to create false narratives and imoresions of the North...The North is not stupid neither is it slef destructive....All of these narrative is to foist an agenda on the North and the agenda is to make look like Obi is the best choice for the North....Now what exactly will an Obi Presidency bring to the North that the North doesn't already have...I repeat there is nothing Obi will give to the North that the North doesn't have or can't have without him...But Obi needs the North to win the Presidency...If this is so, is it not foolishness of the highest order of the Obi promoters to think that they can sell Obi to the North by trying to demarket any Northern candidate...As it is right now, even the marriage of convenience between Obi amd Kwankwaso is being viewed as betrayal and highest level of ego trip by Kwankwaso...As a matter of fact Northerners see it as Kwankwaso trying to use Obi to white wash his image from the allegations of extremism and Terrorism sponsorship by the USA....So those who think they have caught a big fish with Kwankwaso will be highly disappointed with the results....They will suffer a WINNER'S CURSE with all the downside and no upside.... Kwankwaso has no cards and i repeat no cards to offer Obi...The North already has a VICE PRESIDENT and if they must trade,then it must be for the Presidency...These are cold hard facts every Northerner understand....We dont scream on twitter, facebook or Nairaland. We just look at the calculus and deal with the facts....All these emotional blackmail won't cut it...Power must be earned and not handed out ...The candidate whose supporters are screaming zoning suddenly have forgotten to ask whether their candidate ever believed in ZONING....If he did, did je believe in ZONING in 2007, 2011 and 2015!!!!....Facts dont lie!.In 2007 a certain candidate supported a party and became Givernor under a party that fielded a candidate that reflects non commital to the tenet of ZONING...In 2011, he did the same and likewise in 2015....We have not forgotten...To suddenly emerge as a champion of ZONING just because he wants to emerge on a platter will not work....It is an open field, let everyone show their skills...shikena....