what rubbish!!!why do anyone want to invest in infrastrucure, when equity shares are giving more than 60-80% returns. If it's a risk, then why not invest in A-Group fundamentally sound company's shares?
We should think in a way that investing this People money should be secure.
Therefore the government should think in a way that how much profit can be benefited by investing in secure sector and at the same Whatever the profit earned by government should be sharable to PF holders.
partly, it should be invested into stock market so that they can very well understand the shooes of a manufacturer..finally we have to find a golden center
Has the Government asked those from whose salary amounts have been deducted for several years, for their opinion? Why not propose combinations of investments (like x% in the stock market and 100-x% in infrastructure and other secure avenues, etc.) to the 'owners' of the fund and let them choose where all they want their PFs to be invested, just like the options we do for Mutual Funds (Balanced/Growth/etc.).
First point: If the fund will be used for infrastructure development, how will it grow? Can someone explain?
Next: If you allow politicians to play with the fund, they will surely use some amount from it on the name of "operation charges/maintenance charges/etc", and eat away a thick amount from it.
Last: Best way is to remove EPF. Keep PF complesory. But make it completely PPF. Allow nationalized banks to keep the PPF accounts. Employer's portion should be credited to employee's PPF account. And employee should be given the freedom to invest his PPF amount to stocks.
RE:How would it work?
by RAGHUL J SINGH on Feb 08, 2007 01:29 PM Permalink
Hi Nimit Solanki,
Thanks for your comment.I agree with u that if we allow politicians they will surely eat our money.I Also agree with u that PF should be compulsory and should be credited PPF and employee should be given the freedom to invest his PPF amount in stocks.
Not the best way to invest PF in infrastructure given the poor credibility of Indian politicians & bureaucrats. It is much much risky and most insane thing to even think of it...If it happens I am sure by the time a person gets old he will only have roads left with him...nothing else !
Infrastructure developed by government will only mean the funds finding their way into pockets of politicians, bureaucrats, engineers etc.... I think Infrastructure funds set up by the mutual funds is a better idea
RE:Re use of provident fund
by on Feb 08, 2007 01:20 PM Permalink
I totally agree with you Vijaya, Unless & Until they do not guarantee that 100 % flow will be made in to the infrastructure only Its better to invest in the share market.
RE:RE:Re use of provident fund
by Prashant Patil on Feb 08, 2007 01:31 PM Permalink
In addition to this the 1.5 Lakh deduction currently available to home loan should also be available to investments into infrastructure MF(Roads,ports,power). The person who invests in real estate to get this tax benefit will think of investing in this MF as well. Which may cool off Real estate market and money needed for Infra. development will be available without FDI.
Well, I never supported left bcos of their policy but yes this time left look a bit sensible to put forward their suggestion to invest PF and penssion amount in indian infrastructure.It will be secure and offcourse would be benificial for infrastructure devlopement in india....
Despite being a stock trader for a living i strongly agree with AITUC's demand that PF corpus should be for infrastructual development and not in the stock markets. PF is the most hard earned savings of a salaried individual and takes care of his post retirement needs so there is no way government can risk it in the stock markets which are specualtive and volatile in nature. Investing the Pf corpus in infrastructre has dual advantage - ensruing safety of the fund and development of the nation !
