Rupee Vs Dollar: US Woman Explains Why Living In India Feels Richer
Notably, PPP is an economic indicator that accounts for the cost-of-living differences between countries. It helps compare the value of currencies and living standards across nations.
In the video, the influencer stated that $10 in the US might get you a simple meal, but the equivalent of $10 (Rs 800) in India could buy you several meals. She also noted that a haircut costing Rs 100 in India is equivalent to $40 in the US, meaning you could get 34 haircuts in India for the price of one in the US. MS Fischer further emphasised that while incomes may be higher in the US, the cost of living is also significantly higher. Meanwhile, India offers a more affordable lifestyle without compromising on the quality of life.
"Too many responses about purchasing Power made me make this video to explain it. Rupees in India stretch further than the relative dollars do in the USA. Sure, incomes are higher in the USA, but everything costs more there, too. And yes, I know that incomes in India are much lower in India, but so are the costs of goods and services," she captioned the video.
Watch the video here:
View this post on Instagram
A post shared by Kristen Fischer (@kristenfischer3)
Her video resonated with many viewers, who praised her simple yet effective explanation of PPP. One user wrote, "So basically EARN in dollars and SPEND in ruppees is the best way to live life."
Another commented, "A truly enlightening explanation—beautifully articulated."
A third said, "You always have something positive to say about India, thank you Kristen."
A fourth stated, "People dont understand its dollar colonisation. The day world stops using usd, US economy would halve. US prints money without any gold backing and yet there is no inflation because the world uses usd for trading."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
29 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Why has Delhi HC criticised the law capping rents in Delhi as unjust, and called it anachronistic?
Earlier this month, Delhi High Court criticised the tendency of some well-off tenants to 'unjustly' occupy premises paying a pittance as rent, while their landlords are forced into 'impecunious and desperate circumstances'. This, the court said, was an 'egregious misuse' of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, which it described as an 'anachronistic piece of legislation'. The court was hearing a challenge to orders passed by the additional rent controller in 2013, which had dismissed eviction petitions relating to a property in Sadar Bazar, and ruled in favour of the tenants. The 1958 law has allowed many tenants of properties in areas such as Connaught Place, Karol Bagh, and Chandni Chowk to continue to pay rents that are sometimes as low as Rs 500. What is the Delhi Rent Control Act (DRCA)? The DRCA was enacted to regulate rents, prevent arbitrary evictions, and define the rights and duties of landlords and tenants in Delhi. The Act restricts landlords from charging tenants more than a fixed 'standard rent', and prohibits the collection of extra charges. It also specifies the limit by which rents can be increased – not more than 10% in three years. There are strong protections for tenants against eviction, and landlords are allowed to throw out tenants only under specific conditions, such as non-payment of rent and subletting without permission. The law also lays down the procedure for depositing rent, mechanisms for appeal, and summary eviction processes in certain cases. The DRCA was enacted in the aftermath of World War II and Partition to protect tenants in a situation of scarce housing in Delhi. Is the DRCA applicable everywhere in Delhi? The law is not applicable to government-owned premises. Later, certain other categories of properties were excluded from the ambit of the Act, such as those where the rent was more than Rs 3,500, and 'premises constructed on or after the commencement of the Delhi Rent Control (Amendment) Act, 1988, for a period of ten years from the date of completion of such construction'. It is important to note that while the Act is technically applicable to all remaining properties in the city, the precise percentage of housing to which it is applicable is not known because of the existence of a large number of illegal and unplanned settlements. In fact, about a quarter of Delhi's population is believed to be living in slums or squatter settlements. Implementation of the Act is uneven and mostly ineffective. Tenants pay market rents, not 'standard' rents fixed after both parties approach a rent controller. Landlords often do not issue rent receipts, and in many cases tenants have to make large advance deposits before they move in. What are some of the criticisms of the rent control law? Like rent control laws in other states, the DRCA has been criticised for being too tenant-friendly and facilitating an unfair situation of unrealistically low rents for landlords. Indeed, in the older markets of Connaught Place, Karol Bagh, and Chandni Chowk, monthly rents for some residential and commercial properties that are valued at crores can be still as low as Rs 500. In this situation, landlords often prefer to withdraw their premises from the rental housing market, creating an avoidable shortage and distorting the market. Economists have criticised rent control legislation around the world for decreasing or freezing the supply of urban rental housing, and for leading to a deterioration of housing stocks as a result of a lack of incentive for landlords to invest in maintaining and upgrading it. The National Urban Rental Housing Policy 2015 noted that rent control legislation in various states have 'resulted in rental housing being economically unattractive and thereby creating an informal market'. Rent ceilings had led to reductions in both the quality and quantity of housing, the policy said. 'These laws not only restrict supply but also drive away legitimate seekers of rental housing which force tenants into unrecorded and informal arrangements,' it said. Since land and housing are State subjects, the central government drafted a Model Tenancy Act in 2021 as a framework that could be adopted by states and Union Territories. The model Act sought to balance the interests of landlords and tenants by allowing rent be decided by mutual agreement between the parties. However, the Act has so far been adopted by only four states: Assam, Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, and Tamil Nadu.
India.com
29 minutes ago
- India.com
Banks waived off fines, but earned Rs 90000000000, which bank earned the most? Not SBI, PNB, HDFC, ICICI
Banks waived off fines, but earned Rs 90000000000, which bank earned the most? Not SBI, PNB, HDFC, ICICI Public sector banks (PSBs) have collected a penalty of about Rs 9,000 crore (Rs 8,932.98 crore) from customers for not maintaining the 'Minimum Average Monthly Balance' (MAB) in the last five years (from 2020-21 to 2024-25), Minister of State for Finance Pankaj Chaudhary informed Rajya Sabha. Which banks have stopped collecting fines? According to the Finance Ministry, Canara Bank, Bank of Baroda, Punjab National Bank, Indian Bank, Bank of India and Central Bank of India have also waived off this penalty from this quarter. The country's largest bank, State Bank of India (SBI), was not charging this penalty since March 2020. The Minister of State for Finance also informed that the Department of Financial Services (DFS) has asked banks to consider reducing or waiving this penalty, especially to provide relief to customers in semi-urban and rural areas. How have banks changed their stance? This disclosure comes at a time when recently Union Bank of India also joined several other public sector banks in announcing the waiver of this penalty. The bank said that this move is to 'ensure equality, fairness and better access to basic banking services for customers'. Which bank earned the most? According to a report, Indian Bank collected the highest fine in five years. One-fifth of the total amount i.e. Rs 1,828.18 crores. Punjab National Bank came in second place (Rs 1,662.42 crores) and Bank of Baroda came third (Rs 1,531.62 crores). It was followed by Canara Bank, which earned Rs 1,212.92 crores. Bank of India earned Rs 809.66 crores, Central Bank of India Rs 585.36, Bank of Maharashtra Rs 535.20, Union Bank Rs 484.75, Punjab and Sind Bank Rs 100.92 and Indian Overseas Bank Rs 62.04 crores. Detailed break up of how fines have been increased? 2020-21: Rs 1,142.13 crore 2021-22: Rs 1,428.53 crore, up 25% from last year 2022-23: Again increased by 30% to Rs 1,855.43 crore 2023-24: Again increased by 26% to Rs 2,331.08 crore 2024-25: This year there was a slight decline of 7% and the amount stood at Rs 2,175.81 crore What banks are being pressurised? The decision of banks to abolish this penalty has come at a time when there is pressure on their current account and savings account (CASA) ratio. These accounts are the cheapest source of raising money for banks. In its latest Financial Stability Report released in June, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) had said that the share of expensive fixed deposits and deposit certificates (CDs) is increasing in the liabilities of banks instead of cheaper CASA. State Bank of India (SBI), which has not been charging this penalty for the last five years, says the move has greatly benefited first-time bank account openers.
Economic Times
29 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Tariff worries trigger rupee's steepest fall in nearly three months
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our ETMarkets WhatsApp channel The Indian rupee posted its steepest one-day drop since May and hit a five-month low on Wednesday, hurt by worries over steep U.S. tariffs on Indian exports alongside dollar demand from foreign banks and rupee hit a low of 87.5125 against the U.S. dollar before closing at 87.42, down 0.7% on the said that while the Reserve Bank of India likely stepped in to support the local currency, the intervention was not very aggressive.A 20%-25% tariff may be imposed on India's exports in the absence of a trade deal and as the Asian country holds off on offering fresh concessions ahead of Friday's deadline, Reuters reported on Tuesday.U.S. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that a trade deal with India had not been finalised and higher tariffs were tariff threats, the psychological impact of the rupee breaching the 87 mark, and urgency among importers to hedge before the August 1 deadline has weighed on the rupee, said Dilip Parmar, a foreign exchange analyst at HDFC conditions remain the same, the rupee could fall below 88 in the coming weeks, Parmar said. The local unit had hit an all-time low of 87.95 in addition to trade uncertainty, persistent foreign portfolio outflows have also been a pain point for the rupee. Overseas investors have net sold over $1.5 billion of local stocks in among importers and the absence of inflows have kept the currency under pressure and that may persist in the near-term, a trader at a foreign bank Asian currencies were trading mixed and the dollar index was little changed at 98.8 as investors await the Federal Reserve's policy decision later in the Fed is widely expected to keep rates unchanged, with the focus on commentary from Chair Jerome Powell and whether the decision is unanimous.
