setting his own order means that i determine the price of this product and i guarantee that this fixed price will continue, in a way he has taken the society in a situation where they think that any change that happens is in line with the interests of zinfan, especially within the government or a a series of lobby elements and the like that no one looks at. if something really happens, i say that no one looks at the case of a majority in society and a general view. let them imagine that they want to secure their budget again , they want to solve such and such a problem, they want to leave it in the hands of the people, and then imagine the people who are living in a 40% inflation, and these people believe that this inflation is caused by changes in the price of gasoline and the like, and a government that believes that this can continue for years if there is this change. he does it because of his own interests, then they say , what kind of government are we facing? who comes

and changes the price of gasoline for his own interests , gives us a handshake , and creates 40% inflation for us. yes, but is this enough? in my opinion, the problem should be solved from the same place where we fixed it from the same place. if i were the government, if i were actually the decision-makers , i would enter into a conversation with the people . isn't it the case that some of you don't trust me ? you want to make changes in this gasoline because of your own interests and for any other reason. well, i will put this at your disposal. it's interesting when you pay attention in this survey, people will be asked questions. how interesting is this question? is it said that the government is willing to fix the price of gasoline? do it and get the money

you give me the same experience that we successfully did in 2009. nearly 70 people are still against this , according to the same group that had previous objections . not only gasoline is the other source of energy , i don't want my money. this is the first point . make your own arrangements and if you want to use it, exchange it however you want, the government has nothing to do with it. again , more than 600 people here agree with this. in this discussion and this question, it is discussed that the government has nothing to do, you want to give your gasoline as a gift , you want to sell it to someone, you want to raise the price, you want to consume it yourself, that means the government has no more input, so the question is, if the people are really the only problem is that they see this as a right , so they should actually say no, by supplying gasoline

at almost the current price, or for free forever, you must guarantee that i will need to go buy it from someone else and pay for it . ok, my point is that instead of entering into the challenge in this area, we are allowed let's get the government to step back, not to step aside, instead of considering its role as just price stabilization , consider its role as a redistributive role, and consider its role as actually creating a market among the people, regulating it in give an opinion and let this actually form a market among people. i think we can move a step away from this connection. it is definitely not ideal in the long term. it must change in the long term, but at least we are free from this existing lock. mr. fartukzadeh, you agree that the gasoline subsidy should be assigned to the melia code whether it is for these reasons that mr. zamanian mentioned or not, when

we face an existential threat to suburbanites, drivers, and users of internet taxis. because of the confusion in the relative relationship of prices, this person whose lifestyle is completely dependent on this gasoline, when you come to write such a text , naturally it will be chaotic, right? now you expect some people from remote cities deprived. now, we don't have millions of people, but in those places that don't come, for example, assume that the suburbs of tehran and the suburbs of isfahan, etc., say that it is our right. the government has given us your right. did you pay attention ? i want to say that when we reach the real social scene, it is very much a matter of so-called rationality , and we should not assume that it is rationality .

i was expecting gas to be expensive. for example, i don't know if it was 80 tomans or 100 tomans. it was like this. then, contrary to my expectations, gas did not become expensive. i mean, we had been doing it for 45 years that gas was 20% more expensive during the eid holidays. it was very normal , you see, i want to say we are, except that you said that it is possible, for example, about the number you mentioned, 30 according to your order, 40 million people may be affected by price changes, because according to mr. zamanian's order, we will allocate subsidies to everyone , do you have another reason to oppose this happening? the one who loses will be happy, 10 units will be sad , that is, your feeling of loss, if you assume now that you lose a billion tomans or

lose a gold coin, the effect is 10 times greater than if someone gives you a coin as a gift, that is, if you now i am mr. doctor. say to the same point that i said first , what is the result of this? your conclusion is understandable and correct , but i will come back to it, see that nothing happened . the fact that we do not increase it needs to be analyzed, why should we increase it, when this decision is supposed to be made by those who, in any case, have populism in them . they don't do this. it means that whatever we say , this should not happen. when we give a solution, we should include the requirements of that solution. okay, first of all, let's know that it won't happen, now let's skip that from an economic point of view, i don't believe that the price of fuel should be determined in the form of an order and in the parliament and the government and so

on. you are actually caught in a situation where talking about that solution means that you are now in a 40 % inflation. the price of fuel, which has reached one-fifteenth of the actual import price , we import what we have now, and with inflation of 40% , we are talking about 10% and 20% reforms. we are at the same place. well, i am not talking about price increases and shocks at all. if he wanted to, in fact, i would be in favor of drastic price increases , which i would be like other stabilizationists. i would say stabilize as much as you can. destroy it, people, i have a servant, i'm telling you, if you leave this to the people, the people themselves will actually solve this problem together in a gradual process , of course, i will leave public transportation and all this aside. taxis and vans, we don't talk, this is another issue , let's give them cng let's put it aside for now, that is, i

don't want to deal with the issue of people's transportation right now, or should i say that at least that part of the energy we have, the gasoline, is used for personal use. i intend not to talk about the word justice , at least let's divide it more fairly. now, we either give it to everyone, or we give it to 90% of the people, or we give it to a select few , and we let it be the people's problem, in fact, within the people, when it becomes a people's problem , see now we have the issue of housing, i ask , is the issue of housing more important in the people's livelihood portfolio or gasoline, housing is definitely more important, with no index at all. this is not comparable to housing . well, year by year, if it is, due to inflation, the price will be gradually corrected, even though it puts pressure on the people, even though it is uncomfortable, but this problem is being solved within the society, the society has this within itself anyway. i swear, we are not worried that

there will actually be a huge riot in the country tomorrow and the society will fall apart. it is so interesting that the government has sought to stabilize it many times and has not been able to. i mean, why don't we want to. let's leave the gasoline issue to the people , let the people decide about it, don't we the government is the people, so let's give this to the people . the government has so many tools at its disposal that it shouldn't be allowed. now, tomorrow , give me a quota of gasoline and sell it to them, for example, 40 thousand tomans. mr. farghobzadeh says that a large population lives under first of all, in general, i am not talking about special classes. generally, those who are affected by this promotion are the poor, as other statistical data shows that a significant part of the population actually benefits from cheap fuel, rather than the rich. let's get to the general form, so we will start with this recitation we are giving the benefit to the poorer people , so this is statistical data

, it is undeniable that it cannot be denied. the government is present. i don't know about the overnight price shock about this . it has its own regulatory role. the government can still supply in parallel markets . the government can control the exchange rate to prevent speculation. the criticisms he makes about fuel hoarding are related to the story, but in a gradual process. if the price is actually adjusted , it will happen by the people themselves. if the price is not going to be adjusted, i always ask the government, in fact, sometimes when we make a proposal , this is what i'm saying. don't you say that we can keep the price constant for years? well, keep the quota constant. make it exchangeable between people , the price ceiling is also in your hands, you can have so much fuel at the free supply station for the price of 3 tomans . people never exchange their prices above 3 tomans, so the worry of price increase is gone, but if one day you have to, you

decide to fix the price at least 90 million. don't put someone in front of you, let this happen if it is going to happen , let it happen gradually. if it is going to happen, it will benefit the poor of this society . if you don't agree with this , take an operational solution to get the country out of this situation, what we should have done and what should not have happened , we are talking about the past and the present, that's why my main issue is pragmatism, what should we do? let me get out of this lock, mr. ferdukzadeh, see if with these terms and conditions that we have said, your excellency , let's move forward. actually , there is no effect on the gasoline import and gasoline imbalance, because after all, we want not to have too many price jumps, so

the consumers who do not reduce their consumption will only pay the money that my government has to pay. pay the money means that he should import gasoline at the same world price or not export it. it only has a so-called redistribution function. according to your words , being fair means more. the function of the plan is a fair explanation, let's say it is a hidden subsidy , but from that point of view, it seems that do you agree that it is fair? it means that you should see a fair explanation again. i want to say that we are explaining this in the framework of an assumption, other assumptions, with the assumption that the gasoline we have now , 40 million iranians do not use it, that is, they do not use it.

let's do this and give it to others. this is actually an idea that demands justice, which is valuable in its own place. but the problem here is that now i have explained the typology of my residents again, it is very important. yes , there are some people from the middle class and above, who finally ride khadre during eid, traveling 5,000 kilometers. now this is very sharp in your eyes, but i want to say that a significant part of them, who are several million people, who are in the suburbs of tehran , are in the suburbs of isfahan, are in the suburbs of big cities. if they face a price shock now, if this shock is too big, in november 2018, if it is too little

, it will have no effect on consumption, so they will consume it. or do we believe that the price should actually remain as it is? it's another scenario, not the price. be corrected if the price is going to be adjusted , i think we have a consensus that this should happen gradually. there is no doubt about it . actually, i have a proposal, a package of policy proposals. keep this suggestion steady. the least useful thing is that your explanation is more fair. you may say that the number is not many . well, there is no problem. well, the sum of these inequalities that we are creating is from a large number. in fact , unfair methods have been corrupted, now let's fix one, let's fix two, and then we'll take a step in the right direction

we will get closer to fairness, so first of all, if we are going to keep the prices constant, the least feature is that it is more fair, but if we are going to correct the prices, this will at least help gradual reforms to happen within the society, so this means that in addition to its fairness causes reforms , such as the reforms that take place in the market , usually if it is especially with a governmental supervision , there is always gradualness in it. there are many goods that are exchanged between people. in any case, the price is being adjusted with inflation. where are we? we are concerned, mr. doctor, that generally our pricing is mandated by the government, because the government does this once a year, once every 2 years, once every 4 years, so my problem is that i am saying whether you want to correct the price or not correct the price. in both cases, this proposal is better than the current situation

. it has problems that are similar to speculation and such things as i said. these all have technical solutions, because in any case, they all happen in systems that can be controlled, and then i will say the same. if we get stuck in a bad spot, the way out of this should be created gradually, always help it means that we actually give people the ability and opportunity to adapt, of course i have to say this because i emphasize a lot on the gradualness of this important issue . fini is saying that there is no general rule in the economy that shocks are always bad or good shocks have been discussed in detail. today, in this position, in the position of gasoline and in the position of many energy carriers, i believe that it is actually gradual, and i would like to remind you that we must let's create the platform, but if you don't want to block a way, say no , i want this feature, i don't want that feature, that's fine.

continuation of the status quo, waiting for a new problem and, god forbid, the next crisis in the country has become a law. you see, since the problem started here, we removed gasoline from being a commodity and turned it into our right. if we come , now we have a secondary right, which we want to create . it means that now, in a sense , it will be fairer, but from the point of view of that relationship it is relative to the price and in terms of the deficit, and the revenue effects that it will have in the government budget, it is possible that we will fall from a hole in a part of the problem, which means that we should pay attention to it, because in which part is this now? mr. d means that there are, for example, 50 million iranians who are entitled to gasoline now, and now suppose that the price of gasoline has risen to

20,000 tomans, for example, 30,000 tomans , so now the government has to pay 3,000 tomans for gasoline. and unfair is an existing and fairer right. well , i repeat, i'm not saying that equality is justice, but at least it's fairer. so, first of all, what we 're talking about is that we're not the ones who can solve the current situation at all, we 're solving it at all. why do you want to create a new right? this trick was created, but in a wrong way, so convert us let's see a fair right, mr. doctor , by the way, even if we want a budget , we should also look at the story, we should also look at the interests of the government , in fact, this is a better idea. let's divide it among the people . i never talk about this at all. i'm

talking about the consumption of about 50 to 60 million liters of gasoline out of a collection of 120 million liters . you come, give 60 million liters of this to the people, let the people, in fact, it is their own problem if the government wants to fix it. but with those 70 million liters in his hand, he can do this. if he doesn't do this, the government has 70 million liters of gasoline , which he can now export at all. don't force them to produce gasoline anymore, and by the way , he is also the beneficiary of this story, mr. doctor, in my opinion, an important point in this and the ideas surrounding this is that this duality is that either the government wants to fill its own pockets and it should. hit the people or by spending from his own pocket, which of course can actually cause inflation let's go out and say, dad, can we do something that will benefit both the people and the government. we shouldn't be in this dual confrontation. another report

is being prepared by my colleague in the energy group of sed and vasima news agency . i invite you to go together. let's see it , we will go back to the people's opinion. in the debate on the 11th of march, the people at the polls were talking about one of their economic concerns. gasoline subsidy. we vote for the nomination that gasoline is assigned to the national code. i agree with the national code. are those candidates who are talking about this on your list or not? about it almost is. if, for example, it's going to happen, now, guys , give gasoline to everyone. if a price increase happens in all areas, i don't think it's a good thing . my opinion is that it should be based on the same license plate. why , anyway, look at 80 million, read the economy.

gasoline among the people was a question that the candidates of the 12th islamic council elections answered during the campaign period. gasoline subsidy should be allocated to the national code of people or to the car of the 245 elected by the people in the first phase of this period of parliamentary elections. in response to the radio and television organization, people gave their opinion about yarani gasoline has been mentioned. 100 people agree to allocate this subsidy to the national number of people. well, people who are poor and don't have a car, what should they do? in the current form, some people are taking advantage of this issue. some people do not benefit at all. anything that benefits the public, we ask. in order to see the more benefited people and ignore others, i think we prefer two people

who said that the gasoline subsidy should still be allocated to car license plates. if it belongs to the car , it is better with the current conditions. 3 people said that more expertise is needed to allocate gasoline to the national number be done. must be a detailed expert work. it is important that the whole nation benefits. and 3 people are of the same opinion that other methods should be provided to manage the consumption of gasoline and distribute its subsidy, other than allocating the subsidy to the national number or license plate. i do not consider any of these two methods to be reliable expert methods. it is better to use human experiences as well as our own experiences to target the helpers. roqia hoyda we saw the radio and television report of my colleague mrs. hoyda together

. let's sensitize on the issue of wasting energy carriers, on the more fair distribution of these national resources, this is a very good thing, of course. i would like to say that maybe gasoline is not a good starting point. look at the waste we have now in gas, and in electricity, for example , assume that the gas industry , for example, brick kilns, for example, the ceramic factory, for example, the cement factory, for example, greenhouses, for example, the power plants themselves , that is so much. now, we really have more than we can imagine. that is, assume that we have gas, for example, we pay 1 cent, in some places

we have gas and we pay 10 cents, do you pay attention? we charge gas for one tenth of a cent per cubic meter. for example, if we say that gas costs 33 cents, what do i know ? 17,000 tomans, 20,000 tomans. now, you pay gas in some places under 100 to one toman, but that's okay. in a system whose name is production, for example, it is a greenhouse, for example, it is a greenhouse in a cold region, now suppose a plant produces hot fruit, i say we can't, when the sensitivity coefficient of the mentality of energy governance in iran is still one tenth of a cent per cubic meter now he is living with people, then here is gasoline. which is again due to the policy error of the policy maker himself karde means, for example, if i go back to pirizou street in the east of tehran, if

we had built the tehran pardis expressway in the 70s instead of constructing the tehran pardis expressway, we would have built the tehran perdiso railway and raised the gasoline accordingly. gasoline is 30,000 tomans, it was not a problem, so look, because the mistake was made by the politician himself, this is one element of the problem , the other element is that our waste is so high. for example, the third and fourth means the first and second for example, gas and electricity, then let's get to gasoline , which is very miniature and fine-textured, and all the drivers of high-consumption cars buy nissan vans until i don't know, and all the passengers, that is, a lot of us, with a lot of ornaments.

let's create a new right that we will be caught in later, let's finally get rid of this swelling that now we have made so-called bigger and more difficult subjects, mr. i would like to say two sentences . let's think about different issues, but none of them should be an obstacle to the other you go to gas there, there are discussions there, we have a huge amount of industry and commercial sectors.

households whose means of livelihood are cold gas and hot gas, and i don't know meters are actually unknown, i don't know, we are facing unknown people, i mean, wherever we go , it has its own problems, this is the reason in the first place and that's why i think this should not be postponed . the second point is to see that we should look for tools that give the government policy flexibility. one means that the government can use those tools to implement different policies, regardless of the cost. it should be implemented in a more appropriate way. i hope that in spite of all these discussions , god willing, the new year will be the year of the government's dialogue with the people about the issues of speech

. no matter how small, their determination should be to let us solve the big issue, let us talk to the people , gas imbalance, gas imbalance, energy imbalance, these are some of the imbalances that have actually been mentioned in the country's economy and are really bringing the country to the ground. if it happens and there is a feeling in the society that the government and the people can solve big issues together, then, god willing, we will be able to solve many other issues as well. let's believe that the only thing that will happen is the further destruction of the social capital of the government , the government will be accused, unfortunately, the government will be accused of lying . from both guests of the program, all

the good viewers, especially the higher program, who accompanied us until this moment, may god protect you or ali. above, higher than hero or higher, wherever we are today, you are the highest. here at gymnast publications, we have always tried to serve you with the most up-to-date methods, and today we are going to

offer you 600 educational resources for free. just by sending the number 5 to the sms system 30085 , receive 60% of your educational resources completely monks . get 60% of the resources of gilna publications as a gift by sending the number 5 to 308 55. in the name of allah, the most merciful, the most merciful. high speed and drowsiness of the driver are the most important causes of nowruz accidents. police chief rahaber said: the axes of the northern provinces, khorasan-razavi and tehran-qom highway have a heavier traffic load compared to other axes. 8

am today, when the statistics are summarized, the final statistics of those who