Thursday, January 28, 2021

जज का न्याय

आम तौर पर गरीब का यहां कोई नहीं होते, सिर्फ भगवान ही हित है ऐसा कहा जाता है। यब बात ठीक  हैंH

*न्यायाधीश का दंड*

                अमेरिका में एक पंद्रह साल का  लड़का था, स्टोर से चोरी करता हुआ पकड़ा गया। 

पकड़े जाने पर गार्ड की गिरफ्त से भागने की कोशिश में स्टोर का एक शेल्फ भी टूट गया। 
जज ने जुर्म सुना और लड़के से पूछा, "तुमने क्या सचमुच कुछ चुराया था ब्रैड और पनीर का पैकेट"?

लड़के ने नीचे नज़रें कर के जवाब दिया। ;- हाँ'।
जज,:- 'क्यों ?'
लड़का,:- मुझे ज़रूरत थी।
जज:- 'खरीद लेते।
लड़का:- 'पैसे नहीं थे।'
जज:- घर वालों से ले लेते।'
लड़का:- 'घर में सिर्फ मां है। बीमार और बेरोज़गार हूं , ब्रैड और पनीर भी उसी के लिए चुराई थी।
जज:- तुम कुछ काम नहीं करते ?
लड़का:- करता था एक कार वाश में। मां की देखभाल के लिए एक दिन की छुट्टी की थी, तो मुझे निकाल दिया गया।'
जज:- तुम किसी से मदद मांग लेते?

लड़का:- सुबह से घर से निकला था, तकरीबन पचास लोगों के पास गया, बिल्कुल आख़िर में ये क़दम उठाया।

जिरह ख़त्म हुई, जज ने फैसला सुनाना शुरू किया, चोरी और  ब्रैड की चोरी बहुत शर्मनाक जुर्म है और इस जुर्म के हम सब ज़िम्मेदार हैं।  'अदालत में मौजूद हर शख़्स मुझ सहित  सब मुजरिम हैं, इसलिए यहाँ मौजूद हर शख़्स पर दस-दस डालर का जुर्माना लगाया जाता है। दस डालर दिए बग़ैर कोई भी यहां से बाहर नहीं निकल सकेगा।'

ये कह कर जज ने दस डालर अपनी जेब से बाहर निकाल कर रख दिए और फिर पेन उठाया लिखना शुरू किया:- *इसके अलावा मैं स्टोर पर एक हज़ार डालर का जुर्माना करता हूं कि उसने एक भूखे बच्चे से ग़ैर इंसानी सुलूक करते हुए पुलिस के हवाले किया।* 
*अगर चौबीस घंटे में जुर्माना जमा नहीं किया तो कोर्ट स्टोर सील करने का हुक्म दे देगी।'*
*जुर्माने की पूर्ण राशि इस लड़के को देकर कोर्ट उस लड़के से माफी तलब करती है।*
फैसला सुनने के बाद कोर्ट में मौजूद लोगों के आंखों से आंसू तो बरस ही रहे थे, उस लड़के के भी हिचकियां बंध गईं। वह लड़का बार बार जज को देख रहा था जो अपने आंसू छिपाते हुए बाहर निकल गये।
*हमारे आस-पास कोई भूखा न रहे,इसकी चिंता यदि हम कर सकें तो समस्या शायद कम हो सके।*

Tuesday, January 26, 2021

विदेशों में भारतीय

*भारतीयों  ! तुम पर गर्व है, हमें  !*

*डॉ. वेदप्रताप वैदिक*

संयुक्तराष्ट्र की एक ताजा रपट में कहा गया है कि दुनिया के विभिन्न देशों में 1 करोड़ 80 लाख भारतीय प्रवास कर रहे हैं। मैं यदि इनकी संख्या दो करोड़ कहूं तो ज्यादा सही होगा, क्योंकि फिजी से सूरिनाम तक फैले 200 देशों में भारतीय मूल के लाखों लोग पिछले सौ-डेढ़ सौ साल से वहीं के होकर रह गए हैं। जब से यातायात की सुविधाएं बढ़ी हैं और तकनीक के विकास ने दुनिया को छोटा कर दिया है, लगभग सभी देशों में प्रवासियों की संख्या में काफी बढ़ोतरी हो गई है। इस समय दुनिया के सब देशों में कुल मिलाकर 27 करोड़ विदेशी नागरिक रह रहे हैं। भारत के प्रवासियों की संख्या दुनिया में सबसे ज्यादा है। अब से 50 साल पहले जब मैं न्यूयार्क के कोलंबिया विश्वविद्यालय में पढ़ता था, तब न्यूयार्क जैसे बड़े शहर में मुझे कोई भारतीय कहीं दिख जाता था तो मेरी बाछें खिल जाती थीं। हिंदी में किसी से बात करने के लिए मैं तरस जाता था लेकिन अब अमेरिका के छोटे-मोटे गांवों में भी आप भारतीयों से टकरा सकते हैं। अबू धाबी और दुबई तो अब ऐसे लगते हैं, जैसे वे कोई भारतीय शहर ही हों। संयुक्त अरब अमारात में इस समय 35 लाख भारतीय हैं, अमेरिका में 27 लाख और सउदी अरब में 25 लाख ! आप दुनिया के किसी भी महाद्वीप में चले जाइए— आस्ट्रेलिया से अर्जेंटिना तक आपको भारतीय लोग कहीं भी दिख जाएंगे। पिछले 20 साल में एक करोड़ भारतीय विदेशों में जाकर बस गए हैं। अमेरिका, यूरोप और सुदूर पूर्वी देशों में तो प्रायः पढ़े-लिखे लोग जाते हैं और अरब देशों में मेहनतकश लोग ! सब मिलाकर ये भारतीय सालाना 5 लाख करोड़ रु. भारत भेजते हैं। हमारे केरल-जैसे प्रांतों की समृद्धि का श्रेय इसी को है। जो भारतीय विदेशों में रहते हैं, वे वहां की संस्कृति से पूरा ताल-मेल बिठाने की कोशिश करते हैं लेकिन भारतीय संस्कृति उनकी नस-नस में बसी होती है। वे भारत में नहीं रहते लेकिन भारत उनमें रहता है। वे उन देशों के लोगों के लिए बेहतर जीवन-पद्धति का अनुकरणीय आदर्श उपस्थित करते हैं। अमेरिका में तो यह माना जाता है कि वहां रहनेवाले भारतीय लोग समूह के रुप में सबसे अधिक सुशिक्षित, सुसंस्कृत और सम्पन्न वर्ग के लोग हैं। यदि ये भारतीय आज एकाएक भारत लौटने का फैसला कर लें तो अमेरिका को हृदयाघात (हार्ट अटेक) हो सकता है। अब से 20 साल पहले मैंने लिखा था कि वह दिन दूर नहीं जबकि अमेरिका का राष्ट्रपति कोई भारतीय मूल का व्यक्ति होगा। कमला हैरिस इस लक्ष्य के पास पहुंच चुकी हैं। दुनिया के लगभग एक दर्जन देशों में भारतमाता के बेटे-बेटियां सर्वोच्च पदों पर या उन तक पहुंच चुके हैं। हमें उन पर गर्व है।
*(लेखक, भारतीय विदेश नीति परिषद के अध्यक्ष हैं)*
17.01.2021
👉🏽जैसा डॉ वेदप्रताप जी वैदिक से वाट्सऐप पर प्राप्त हुआ।

Sunday, January 24, 2021

Atmanirbhar Barat - SJM Resolution

Aatmanirbhar Bharat
During the last three decades of globalization, the protection of domestic industry was considered like a crime. It was being said that free trade is the panacea of all economic problems. The rationale given, was that hindrance to the free trade would make our industries inefficient, as lack of competition will hinder efficiency and would impact competitiveness. During the Corona period there has been a big change in the thinking of policy makers in India and the world. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said that the biggest lesson the country has learnt in this corona crisis is that we have to become self-reliant.
Prime Minister's call of 'Vocal for Local' (indigenous) has become people's call now. To make our country self reliant, or 'Atmanirbhar', we would need to make requisite efforts. For this, the people’s representatives, technocrats, leaders of industry and trade, social activists; all will have to make concerted efforts. We know that India has been a country of diversities. Every province, every district of our country, and even every village has its own specialty. We know that each district is known for one or more types of skills, agricultural product(s) or one or more industrial clusters. Generally, more than one type of characteristics exists in the same district. In the absence of encouragement and incentives, over the years, districts have been losing their distinct identities with regard to their industries, skills and agriculture produce. Every district of our country produces a variety of excellent agricultural products, but due to lack of appropriate system of price incentives, promotion, storage and marketing, many of these products are facing the danger of extinction. Sometimes, despite having domestic capabilities in the efficient production of these products, the country has to even import them.

On the other hand, so far as manufacturing is concerned, various districts of the country are known for modern and traditional industries. There are places like Ludhiana which is famous for woolen hosiery and bicycle industry, Tirupur for cotton hosiery, Agra for shoe and iron forging, Badouhi for carpets, Banaras and Kanjeevaram for sarees and many others which are world famous. Chinese dumping and neglect of the government, red tape, inspector raj, lack of finance, lack of access to new technology, etc. are some of the reasons that have led to the decline of these clusters.
In the past, due to the obsession towards globalization and the dominance of multinational companies, these industries witnessed a significant decline. Today, when we are talking about self-reliance (Atmanirbhar Bharat), efforts are also needed to be made to preserve and enhance their local products according to their specialization. Along with the efforts of the Central and State Governments towards protection and promotion of local industries, if the people’s representatives, industry and trade leaders, social activists etc. make efforts, then these enterprises will naturally get a new lease of life. Learning lesson from pandemic, if the country revives and promote its manufacturing, which has deteriorated due to perverted policy framework and unfair competition from China, and then it will increase employment and income in the country and improve the standard of living of the people.

Self-reliance will not come overnight

Some people believe that in this era of globalization, we are so much connected with the rest of the world, that our efforts to become self-reliant can prove to be regressive and suicidal. Such people fail to appreciate that resolve to self reliance is not about stopping imports from China or elsewhere altogether, but to gradually reduce dependence on China.
Due to apathy of governments in the past towards dumping of Chinese goods, our industry got destroyed. However, we have to rebuild our industry and we need to ready ourselves to find alternatives. We must not forget that most of the imports from China are those which are either produced or could be produced in the country. These include steel, chemicals, machinery, vehicles, fertilizers, pesticides etc. There are many imports, which do not even require high technology. Such zero technology products can easily be produced in the country in a short span of time. In such a situation, a lot of imports from China can be stopped.
Self reliance is not impossible

Though, it’s true that goal of self reliance is no cake walk and its fraught with many hurdles. However, we can’t say it’s impossible. Several critics try to reject the idea of self reliance on two counts: First they term this approach to be impractical due to huge dependence on other countries, especially China; and argue that this kind of policy may cost heavily due to adverse impact on industries dependent on components and raw material coming from China and/or due to increase in cost, as we will have to opt for costlier alternatives. Second, they argue that this kind of approach to self reliance will push us back to Nehruvian days of protectionism meaning thereby high cost and inefficient industries. This may make the industry uncompetitive. The conclusion they draw with their arguments is that under the circumstances self reliance is impossible without hurting the economy.

However, they fail to appreciate that policy of self-reliance by encouraging production in the country cannot be equated with protectionism. It is of course true that, for rejuvenating our industries or for new industries to flourish, the import duty on goods coming from abroad will have to be increased a bit; to discourage dumping, anti-dumping duties and in some cases safeguard duties may also be needed; standards are also needed to prevent inferior foreign goods, and alongside a host of other non tariff barriers like imposition of reciprocity clause may be needed to be imposed. Those who call these measures as protectionist must understand that US imposes more than 6500 non tariff barriers, China imposes more than 3,500 such barriers, while India imposes nearly 350 such barriers only.

It has to be understood that the protectionism before the new economic policy of 1991, especially during Nehruvian era, led to inefficient industrialization, because during that period, extremely high import duties (100 percent to 600 percent) were being levied in India, which could actually said to be a hindrance to efficiency. The era of high import tariffs has already ended after the WTO came into existence. India is already bound by WTO rules. But there are provisions and flexibilities in the WTO as well, through which we can promote our industries and protect them from unequal competition. Fascination towards unbridled globalization of the last three decades and the obsession of our policy makers towards free trade, have led to extreme lowering down of import tariffs much below the WTO bound rates. Whereas, WTO rules allow India to have an average import duty of up to 40 percent, our average import duty is around 10 percent. Under these provisions, the Government of India increased import duties on some items including electronics, mobile phones, consumer goods, etc. from 10 percent to 20 percent and this helped reducing imports significantly. In the last 2 years between 2017-18 and 2019-20, India's trade deficit with China has come down from $ 63.2 billion to $ 48.6 billion. Apart from anti-dumping duties, countervailing duties, we can also impose non-tariff barriers and encourage Indian industries by implementing standards. Such actions cannot be equated with pre-1991 protectionism. Almost all countries impose tariff and non-tariff barriers for the protection and promotion of their industries, so why can't India do the same. India's unilateral free trade will prove suicidal when other countries are increasing import duties in the name of ‘trade war’.
Therefore, critics have to understand that the continuous decline of industries due to cheap Chinese imports was never in the country's interest. Why a steadily increasing trade deficit does not distract critics, is beyond comprehension. The need of the hour is that efforts should be made to stop imports, primarily with incentives to our industries. And after that, by making products of international standards, we can, not only fulfill the requirements of the country, but also export to foreign countries. It has to be understood that every country is protecting its industries, so we cannot equate measures adopted under the WTO provisions and framework, with protectionism. In fact, this effort of self-reliance by the country can play an important role in raising income and employment in the country.
 


Efforts at home turf
Prime Minister in his Independence Day speech, has said that self reliance is not a word, it’s a resolve. To fulfill the national resolve, efforts will have to be made at all levels. PM said that country can no longer remain an exporter of raw materials and importer of finished goods. To make the country capable to produce for the world, we need to make all out efforts. Apart from curbing unequal competition from imports, by way of raising tariffs, anti dumping and countervailing duties, non tariff measures including standards; we need to make efforts to create an eco system to develop domestic industry. We understand that in the post independence period our economic and industrial development has been badly affected by excessive regulations,
Bureaucratic hurdles, red-tape, inspector raj, socialist mindset of conducting economic activities and strangulation of our entrepreneurs. In the post new economic policy period, though the rhetoric was of lifting regulations, red tape, giving encouragement to private enterprise, government policy remained concentrated to only import liberalization, allowing MNCs in the name of FDI and amending domestic laws to only facilitate foreigners. Obsession for free trade and import liberalization (especially from China) resulted in destroying our industries, rather than making our industry efficient. FDI also didn’t help in transfer of new technology. Rather in the name of technology outflow of foreign exchange increased manifold by way of royalty and technical fees.

Country has witnessed that how our small industry and even individuals came forward and made face masks and PPE kits when they were in short supply; China was trying to profiteer from our helplessness. Similarly many labs came forward to address the problem of shortage of testing facilities and today we not only have sufficient facility of testing COVID19, cost of testing has also come down drastically. When country and the world was witnessing a shortage of ventilators, one Company Skanray Technologies, Mysuru, which was producing 5000 ventilators in a month, took the hill task of helping companies to fulfill the requirements of the country, by generously sharing the design of their ventilator, with other manufacturers and made it possible to manufacture 60,000 ventilators in the country in a short span of two months; and now country is exporting ventilators in huge quantity and is fulfilling the world's demand. Hard work of our farmers instills confidence in the countrymen that we will never face shortage of food items. During Corona period, we see many examples of how, many employers continued with payment to their workers despite lock down. We need to understand that; lot of damage has been caused by the blind obsession towards globalisation, in the yesteryears, impacting domestic production and employment and has led to excessive dependence on other countries, especially China.
Time has now come to give encouragement to domestic efforts to increase production indigenously. These efforts are becoming visible. For increasing production of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), a production linked incentives (PLI) package of more than rupees 12 thousand crores has been rolled out. For electronics and mobile phones PLI package of more than rupees 42 thousand crores has been given. Nation has witnessed, how our industry both big and small, responded to the Corona challenge by producing PPE kits, N95 masks, ventilators and many other equipments. We supplied HCQ tablets to the world. Pharma industry is already geared to produce Corona vaccine, once it gets regulatory green signal.
Under these circumstances, government’s budgetary push is important but not sufficient. We need to change the mindset of the bureaucracy, regulatory bodies, government’s machinery, judiciary and media. We need to get rid of rules and regulations designed to foster socialist system. We need to allow our young entrepreneurs (start ups) to freely work to flourish their new ideas to bring in new technology and generate wealth. Modi government’s push to start ups, stand up needs to be taken to the next level. Dream of ‘Make in India’ has to be realized by encouraging Indian youth entrepreneurs. We know that India missed the bus of first, second and third industrial revolutions. It’s a time for fourth industrial revolution, which is digital revolution. Given huge size of Indian economy and huge market opportunities, global giants are trying to exploit the potentials in their favour. Many people think that we are undergoing a threat of digital colonisation also. We need to seize this opportunity and make our country Atmanirbhar digitally as well. Corona, though came as a pandemic, a threat and a challenge; our country has resolved to convert the same into an opportunity. Let’s all work together towards the same and take our country out of foreign economic dominance, unemployment, poverty, deprivation and stigma of underdevelopment.

कॉकरोच एक्सरे मशीन में, आपरेशन फेफड़ों के

स्वामी सूर्यदेव

कॉकरोच,,
#पाकिस्तान में एक आदमी के फेफड़ों में जिंदा कॉकरोच मिला,,हॉस्पिटल समेत पूरे परिवार वाले चोंक गए,,हड़कंप मच गया,,डॉ ने कहा कि अगर मरीज को बचाना है तो तुरन्त ऑपरेशन करना पड़ेगा,,डॉ का फोटो ऊपर कोने में दिया गया है,,
मरते क्या न करते,, बंदे को बेहोश किया और फेफड़े खोल दीए पकड़कर,,बन्दा तो #टैं बोल गया,, मने अल्लाह को #प्यारा हो गया,, लेकिन उससे भी बड़ा आश्चर्य ये हुआ कि फेफड़ों में अलग अलग जगह घूमने वाला कॉकरोच मिला नहीं,, चिंता हुई कि आखिर गया कहाँ??
भारत से एक्सपर्ट बुलाए गए,, उन्होंने ध्यान से बन्दे के फेफड़े को उलट-पलटकर देखा,, फिर उससे भी ज्यादा ध्यान से #ऑपरेशन करने वाले डॉक्टरों को देखा,, फिर बारीकी से एक्सरे को देखा,,
एक्सपर्ट ऑपरेशन थियेटर से बाहर आया और बोला--बड़े दुःख के साथ कहना पड़ रहा है खान साब,, #कॉकरोच बन्दे के फेफड़ों में नहीं बल्कि एक्सरे #मशीन में घुसा हुआ है
Usually so many things are practically not successful. The reason is not poor implementation but in poor and faulty analysis and diagnosis of the problem.  
...

Did Doctors Discover a Live Cockroach in a Patient’s Chest in Zimbabwe?
A chest X-ray purportedly showing a cockroach is actually a doctored version of Marilyn Monroe'
An x-ray image shows a live cockroach in a patient's chest in Zimbabwe.
Rating

False
About this rating
Rely on Snopes? Become a member.


Origin
An image purportedly showing a cockroach in a chest x-ray was shared by the Facebook page “Let’s Enjoy Zimbabwe” on 10 April 2017 along with the claim that the gruesome discovery was made at the Rusape General hospital in Zimbabwe:



A patient in Zimbabwe had serious chest pains, after taking x-ray at Rusape General hospital the image showed that he had a live cockroach in his chest moving about. Doctors recommended that he goes abroad preferably India.So patient had to sale his house and a few contributions from relatives. When he got to India another x-ray was taken and was told there was no cockroach in his chest but the cockroach was in the x-ray machine they used in Zimbabwe. 

Both this image and story are fake. 

Variations of this story have been circulating for several years. In 2012, for instance, the “University Of Jokes” Facebook page shared a joke with a nearly identical premise, only the patient was from Ghana and not Zimbabwe:

A man went to a Ghanaian hospital for Check up. The x-ray showed he had a cockroach in his chest region and he was told by the doctor dat he wud need surgery to remove it.
After putting much tót to it,he went abroad for a second opinion:He had anoda x-ray check,and was told that the cockroach was in the Ghanaian hospital’s x-ray machine, not in his chest!..

Although it’s unclear when this image first accompanied the health care joke, the original chest x-ray did not feature a cockroach. This x-ray was taken in 1954 and showed Marilyn Monroe’s chest after she was admitted to Cedars of Lebanon Hospital for surgery for endometriosis. A set of three x-ray images from this hospital visit were sold at auction in 2010 for $45,000:



Wednesday, January 13, 2021

Indian Economy for Dummies part

Magic 3%

Three per cent Fiscal Deficit! This is a dream announcement any finance minister of India would love to make. Fiscal deficit is the excess of payments over receipts of the government. The quantum of fiscal deficit in budgets in India is fixed by law — the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) law enacted in 2004. The FRBM law has mandated that, in every budget from 2005, the fiscal deficit should keep coming down till the 3 per cent limit is achieved by budget 2009. But because of the global financial crisis in 2008, the UPA government deferred the target date, justifiably. But with the passage of FRBM law, the rate of fiscal deficit has come to play determinative role on budgets. If a budget moves on the road map to get to 3 per cent fiscal deficit, the finance minister is glorified. If not, he gets demonised.

Also Reead: FRBM Law is Irrational. Amend it

Finance Minister Arun Jaitley must be a worried man. He has promised to reach this magic 3 per cent by 2018. He has pegged the fiscal deficit in the last budget at 3.9 per cent. He has to cut it by at least 40 to 50 basis points in this budget, to get to the target of 3 per cent in 2018. But he sees the reality, which the Reserve Bank does not see or refuses to see. Jaitley sees that the economy is short of money and the corporates are not able to absorb credit and push money down into the economy. He must be pained that it happens when India is seen as an Island of growth by the IMF. He has to infuse cash into the system to strengthen the growth impulses. He needs to recapitalise the banks to get them out of the RBI “watch”. He has to sidestep the march towards fiscal consolidation this year — the other name for cutting fiscal deficit to touch the magic figure of 3 per cent. Moving towards fiscal consolidation now when the economy is starved of money will weaken the national growth drives. Jaitley is clearly in a catch-22 situation. If he goes for fiscal consolidation, growth will be hurt. If he does not, his reputation will be. The number ‘3’ must be tormenting Jaitley.

Story in EU

But how did the figure 3 per cent become an ideal fiscal deficit target? Where did the number 3 emerge in the world of fiscal economics. How did it become the bible verse of budget making in India? The story of how the magic number took birth in fiscal world is interesting. It made its advent in fiscal economics when European nations signed the famous treaty at Maastricht in the Netherlands to form the European Union (EU) as an economic and monetary union in 1992. The treaty named after the university city Maastricht was preparatory for the EU to evolve as a single currency — the Euro — zone from January 2002. A national currency is the product of a politically sovereign state in exercise of what is known as its “seignorage power”. Put in layman’s language, seignorage power is the authority to print nation’s currency or borrow from central bank. In monetary economics, this means creating money if the economy needs it. This power inherent in a nation state saved the US economy in 2008 when the financial system of the US  had all but collapsed.

The EU is not a nation state in which this power is inherent. It is a monetary union in which this power rests on a package of critical commitments by the EU members. Critical because if the individual nations do not comply with the package, the Euro will not survive as a common currency. The package agreed stipulated that a member’s inflation should not exceed 1.5 per cent over the average of three member states with the lowest inflation; its public debt should not exceed 60 per cent of GDP, and importantly, its fiscal deficit should not exceed 3 per cent of its GDP. For Eurozone’s survival as one monetary unit, individual nations cannot have inflation, debt, interest or fiscal deficit beyond the agreed band. This is how the figure of  ‘3’ made its debut in the fiscal economic discourse.

But how did the Eurozone members honour the deficit figure 3 per cent of GDP? Of the 12 members, 10 breached the 3 per cent limit during the twelve years, 1999 to 2011 — Greece, every year; Portugal,10 years; Italy, eight; France, seven; and the strongest one, Germany, five. Also the ceiling 60 per cent of debt to GDP, inherently linked to fiscal deficit, too was violated by most including France, Spain, Belgium, Austria, Italy, and Germany. The Maastricht treaty, including the 3 per cent rule, is observed more in breach.

Story in India

However, the FRBM fiscal deficit number, identical to the EU number, has become the celebrated principle of judging the budgets and finance ministers in India. The Indian economic establishment, faced with the criticism that it had adopted the EU rate of 3 per cent, devised a convoluted arithmetical formula to get the same number as in Maastricht treaty. It was first reported that the magic figure was recommended by a committee of the finance ministry, but no such recommendation seems available on record. Later, somewhere in 2006, long after FRBM law had adopted the 3 per cent limit, Dr S Rangarajan and Dr Subbarao explained the logic of the magic 3 per cent thus: out of the average financial savings of India, which was 13 per cent, 5 per cent would “go” to private sector corporates and of the balance 8 per cent, 2 per cent would go to public sector undertakings — “leaving” 6 per cent for central and state governments to be appropriated 50:50 between them to fund their deficits. That was how the 3 per cent limit for the central government in FRBM was rationalised. Now interrogate them.

The assumption seems to be that the 5 per cent financial savings would “go” to private corporates on the orders of the economic establishment. What if the private sector refuses to take part of it, like they did in the last few years as evident from the decreasing credit to GDP ratio? Should the government then not step in to fill the gap in investment? Is the basis for fiscal deficit not linked to the extent of credit demand by private corporates rather than by the amount of savings notionally allocable to them? The experts’ explanation has no answers to these questions. Undeniably the 3 per cent limit in FRBM law has no rational nexus with either the causes or the consequences of deficit financing. The philosophy of deficit funding tries to balance between how much deficit financing is needed for the economy to grow and how much of it will not risk inflation. The Anglo-Saxon nations have taught the world about the need for fiscal deficit, without risking inflation, to trigger and sustain growth. In 1963, when Milton Friedman was invited to India, he advised the government to go for a feasible level of deficit financing for growth without inflation. But his view based on his quantity theory of money, which later won Nobel prize in 1976, was rejected by Indian policy makers who derisively called his quantity theory of money as quantity theology of money. Friedman proved right, finally. The Fourth Plan (1969-74) became the victim of serious forex crisis and inflation. Therefore, avoiding fiscal deficit itself could harm.

3% plagiarised

That the FRBM rate of fiscal deficit and the EU rate are identical is therefore no coincidence. The convoluted explanations to justify the FRBM rate which has no rational nexus with the theory of fiscal deficit actually lets the cat out of the bag. The perception that the Maastricht rate was smuggled into the FRBM law and post facto explanations were invented later to plagiarise it as Indian arithmetic, is unavoidable. Given the pressure on not just India, but on the entire developing world till 2008 to follow the West, that India adopted the EU rate should be no surprise. But it is time it is revisited. A point to flag here. The idea of fiscal prudence is not new to India. Many may be surprised to know that, in India, revenue deficit occurred for the first time in 1979-80.

The issue is not about whether deficit financing is good or bad, but how much of it is good and how much is not. Good economics is not about either this or that, but about how much of both. The need for and quantum of fiscal deficit are a country specific issue and even a context specific one. It needs no seer to say that the adoption of the EU number is not only not rational but harms India. Most EU nations breach the magic number because of its unsuitability for their needs. Mandatorily applying such clerically devised ceiling on fiscal deficit is proving harmful to Indian economy. Await the next part to know the harm the irrational 3 per cent rule causes to India.

 (to be continued)

(The author is a well-known commentator on economic and political  affairs. e-mail: guru@gurumurthy.net

Indian economy for Dummies 1

Indian economy for Dummies part one

In the second of a three-part series on the Indian economy ahead of the presentation of the Union Budget, well-known commentator on political and economic affairs, S Gurumurthy argues that the Indian family’s instinct to save in banks rather than spend at stores, which is similar to that of Japanese families, has insulated the economy from global crises. However, this cultural aspect has not been given due consideration when it comes to policy and budget-making efforts in the country. This, he explains, is due to the Western bias of Indian economists.

Indian Economy for Dummies - I

Is Selling PSBs to Foreigners Rajan's Agenda?  

Domestic Impulses

Recall the economic discourse in the 1990s when, threatened by a forex crisis and nearly defaulting on its external debts, India liberalised its economy to allow free foreign investment and foreign trade. The nation was told then that as Indians did not save enough, the economy did not generate adequate capital, and therefore foreign investment was needed for growth. Emphasis was also laid on exports and foreign trade as the main drivers of growth. Looking back from the vantage point of 25 years of liberalisation, it is self-evident now that foreign investment has played but only a secondary role in the Indian growth story. The Indian economy grew primarily through domestic savings, which rose from 21 per cent of GDP in 1991-92 to as high as 37 per cent of GDP in 2009 and now hovers around 31 per cent. Domestic capital formation rose from 22 per cent in 1991-92 to a high of over 38 per cent in 2011-12.

Besides, it is not export but household consumption, close to 60 per cent, which was the mainstay of the nation’s growth. (In contrast, household consumption in China is around 36 per cent, which implies the disproportionately high external dependence of China.) Net foreign investment in India during two decades of liberalisation averaged around 3 per cent of national investment. Foreign investment mainly funded external deficit more than development within. Domestic impulses — in terms of both investment and demand — were therefore the core factors in the Indian growth story, the external forces being additives, though not unimportant. The world began taking notice of India as a domestically driven economy. Additionally, the Global Entrepreneur Monitor Study (2002) found that India (18 per cent) was ahead of China (12 per cent) and US (11 per cent) in entrepreneurship. This helped brand India as entrepreneur-led. But the Indian-establishment economists would still underplay the domestic impulses and speak and celebrate only the role of the external drivers in the Indian growth story.

Stable Families

What is often, if not totally, missed in the Indian discourse, and in the budget making, is the undeniable fact that the household sector is the strongest and stablest component of the Indian economy. Family savings rose from 16 per cent of GDP in 1991-92 to a high of  25 per cent in 2009-10. This is because of the relation-based cultural life that marks India out from the contract-based individualist West. Except for a fraction of ultra-westernised Indians, family is not a contract to live together, terminable at will. It is an integrated cultural institution of mutually dependent persons bound by relationships of caring and sharing. It takes care of the elderly and the infirm, the ill and the jobless, which constitutes its propensity to save. In most of the West, family functions have been taken over by the State through social and health security, which, in substance, means nationalising families.

The families being rid of their relational responsibilities, their propensity to save weakened and consequently the household savings in US which was 80 per cent of US national savings in 1960 nosedived to minus 20 per cent in the third quarter of 2006. Savings turned just a subject of personal choice of the atomised individual and ceased to be a cultural, filial responsibility. The sense of duty to the near and dear, more than one’s own rights, which is inherent in Indian family culture acts as the bulwark against the unbridled individualism of the modern West. It needs no seer to say that culturally India belongs to Asia, not Europe or America. As Barry Bosworth of the Brookings Institution wrote, in Asia savings are dynastic, not personal. The idea of a rational economic man, who acts only in his self-interest, does not apply to Asia or India where filial relations undermine self-interest.

As families in the West were nationalised, traditional government functions like water supply, road building and public utilities, began to be privatised. Significantly, in the US, nationalisation of families and privatisation of government went hand in hand from around the late 1970s. Liberal economic policies, largely imported from the US, have not been able to change the cultural behaviour of Indian families. This was brought out in the Economic Survey 2007-8 (see page 3 Table 1.2/para 1.4). The income-consumption-saving for the period 1981-2 to 2007-8, which covered 10 years of command economy and 16 years of liberal economy demonstrated that the ratio of spending to savings declined from 64 per cent in 1991-2 to 58 per cent in 2007-8 — implying that Indian families have defied consumerist trends encouraged by new economic policies. Noting this fact, the Survey says, “The average growth of consumption is slower than that average growth of income primarily because of rising savings rates.” It concludes: “Year to year changes in consumption also suggest that the rise in consumption is more gradual and steady process, as any sharp changes in income tend to get adjusted in savings rate.”

The behavioural model of Indian households has a lesson for policy makers — that is, shopping is not, and cannot become, central to Indian families. But, in the US, as the famous American anthropologist Marshall Sahlins says  shopping is the culmination of modernity. When an Indian household gets extra income it does not go straightaway to the shops. It saves rather than spends it. If the Pay Commission report is implemented, it will not cause instant inflation as the RBI governor seems to fear. This cultural differential is missed in the economic discourse and therefore in policy-making in India.

Similar to Japan, not US

Indian families, generally like Asian ones and particularly like the Japanese, are hooked to banks as the preferred savings vehicle. The bank deposits to GDP ratio in India was 34 per cent in 1992, and is over 70 per cent now — doubling as a proportion of GDP. The Indian stock market yielded a compounded annual return of 14 per cent between 1991 and 2015. Despite that the people have queued up before banks to deposit their savings. The share of equities in the total savings stood at less than 2 per cent in seven out of the 11 years (2004 to 2014). It exceeded 3 per cent only in three years (2007 to 2008) when there was an unprecedented boom in the stock markets. In the four years ending fiscal 2014, the share of stocks in national savings has been less than 2 per cent.

Elite economic thinkers often fault Indian families, which seek safe investment models, as backward and unenlightened. Some even fault them for saving too much. In early 1990s, Dr Jagdish Bhagwati, the India-born US economist, advised the Indian government to make policies to cut family savings by half so their consumption spend would rise. Fortunately, Indian families defied his advice. Actually, as their incomes expanded, Indian families ramped up their savings but maintained their moderate consumption. They lived within their incomes and hardly borrowed to spend. This alone insulated India from the contagion effect of the global crisis in 2008. Had Indian families followed the prescription of experts, they would not have saved as much as they did, which dramatically increased the national investment and GDP. Nor would they have avoided debts that would have risked and even bankrupted them. Indian families compare favourably with Japanese households which too are habituated to save and, like Indians, are also addicted to keeping their savings in banks, not in risky stocks. The economists of the West used to deride the Japanese financial system as inefficient for this reason. But when the monetary crisis hit the West, the Bank of Japan had the last laugh and proudly claimed that the Japanese financial system was safe and sound unlike the Western.

In a paper published in the Bank of International Settlements Site (BIS paper no 46, May 2009) two officials of the Bank of Japan (Shinobu Nakagawa and Yosuke Yasui) wrote: “The average Japanese household has a financial balance sheet that is far more conservative” than that of households in West, with “cash and deposits” representing “half of total financial assets”. In contrast, the ratio for US households is only 16 per cent and in Europe, about one-fourth to one-third. The authors asked, “Why do Japanese households prefer deposits so much over more risky financial assets” when other financial instruments are well-developed and heavily traded in Japan, unlike in some other Asian markets? They answered, “the elderly Japanese were educated to believe that saving through bank deposits was a virtue”. They went on to assert “that the Japanese household sector, far from being a shock originator, is rather a shock absorber” even as they admitted that the risk is therefore “concentrated in the Japanese banking system”, which “continues to be a matter to resolve.”

This is precisely the Indian situation. The risk of financing business is on the Indian banks like it is on the banks in Japan. The Japanese banks, like the Indian ones, also have the same issue of Non-Performing Assets. How they handle the NPA problem will be relevant to India. But the RBI, prone to looking at the West, ignores the Japanese parallel, which is nearer to the Indian filial and financial system. With the result that the RBI is strangulating the Indian economy by applying Western standards when the nation is struggling to come out of almost a decade of economic destruction by the UPA, particularly UPA II. This is a topic by itself.

The author is a well-known commentator on economic and political affairs.

E-mail: guru@gurumurthy.net



Wednesday, January 6, 2021

संस्कृत प्रहसन

sanskrit bharti
पत्रकार आप स्वदेशी के हैं, मूल भाषा तो संस्कृत है, फिर वो तो आप लोग बोलते नहीं, प्रस्ताव अंग्रेजी में क्यों लाते हैं...
1. जानामि संस्कृतं न च में प्रवृति, न जानामि आँग्लम, न च में निवृति।
स्वदेशी आंदोलन आप लोगों ने ही चलाया या उससे भी पहले से चलता है?
2. यदा यदा ही अर्थस्य ग्लानिर्भवति, अभ्युथानम स्वदेशी भावं, तदात्मनः सृजाम्यहम।
मुख्य काम क्या है? 
3. परित्राणाय कारीगर नाम, परित्रणाय लघुउद्योगन नाम, प्रचारम स्वदेशी वस्तुम, 
विनाशाय च जनविरोधी बहुराष्ट्रीय उपकर्मा, 
आत्मनिर्भर भारत निर्माणं, 
तदतमनाम सृजमयं
4. आज सरकार, दुनियां तो ग्लोबलाइजेशन की ओर दौड़ रहा है, क्या सफलता मिलेगी।
निश्चितं!  निश्चितं!!
यत्र राष्ट्रऋषि ठेंगड़ी विचारं, यत्र अन्यान्य आर्थिक संगठननं योगदान, 
तत्र श्रीर्विजयो विभूति ध्रुवः नीतिर मति ममः।
इति पत्रकारवार्ता, धन्यवादम।